Currencies

The markets were deluged by a lot of information in late October. Several central banks made surprise moves towards tightening (the Bank of Canada, for example, ended asset purchases, and the Reserve Bank of Australia effectively abandoned its yield-curve control). Inflation continued to surprise on the upside (headline CPI in the US is now 5.4% year-on-year). But, at the same time, there were signs of faltering growth with, for example, US real GDP growth in Q3 coming in at only 2.0% quarter-on-quarter annualized, compared to 6.7% in Q2. This caused a flattening of the yield curve in many countries, as markets priced in faster monetary tightening but lower long-term growth (Chart 1). Nonetheless, equities shrugged off the barrage of news, with the S&P500 ending the month at a new high. All this highlights what we discussed in our latest Quarterly: That the second year of a bull market is often tricky, resulting in lower (but still positive) returns from equities and higher volatility. For risk assets to continue to outperform, our view of a Goldilocks environment needs to be “just right”: The economy must not be too hot or too cold. We think it will be – and so stay overweight equities versus bonds. But investors should be aware of the risks on either side. How too hot? Inflation is broadening out (at least in the US, UK, Australia and Canada, though not in the euro zone and Japan) and is no longer limited to items which saw unusually strong demand during the pandemic but where supply is constrained (Chart 2). Chart 1What Is The Message Of Flattening Yield Curves? Chart 2Inflation Is Broadening Out In The US There is a risk that this turns into a wage-price spiral as employees, amid a tight labor market, push for higher wages to offset rising prices. We find that wages tend to follow prices with a lag of 6-12 months (Chart 3). The Atlanta Fed Wage Tracker (good for gauging underlying wage pressures since it looks only at employees who have been in a job for 12 months or more) is already at 3.5% and looks set to rise further. On the back of these inflationary moves, the market has significantly pulled forward the date of central bank tightening. Futures now imply that the Fed will raise rates in both July and December next year (Chart 4) and that other major developed central banks will also raise multiple times over the next 14 months (Table 1). Breakeven inflation rates have also risen substantially (Chart 5). Chart 3Wages Tend To Rise After Prices Rise Chart 4Will The Fed Really Hike This Soon?   Table 1Futures Implied Path Of Rate Hikes Chart 5Breakevens Suggest Higher Inflation     We think these moves are a little excessive. There are several reasons why inflation might cool next year. Companies are rushing to increase capacity to unblock supply bottlenecks. For example, semiconductor production has already begun to increase, bringing down DRAM prices over the past few months (Chart 6). Another big contributor to broad-based inflation has been a 126% increase in container shipping costs since the start of the year (Chart 7). But currently the number of container ships on order is at a 10-year high; these new ships will be delivered over the next two years. Such deflationary forces should pull down core inflation next year (though we stick to our longstanding view that for multiple structural reasons – demographics, the end of globalization, central bank dovishness, the transition away from fossil fuels – inflation will trend up over the next five years). Chart 6DRAM Prices Falling As Production Ramps Up Chart 7All Those Ships On Order Should Bring Down Shipping Costs The Fed, therefore, will not be in a rush to raise rates. It does not see the labor market as anywhere close to “maximum employment” – it has not defined what it means by this, but we would see it as a 3.8% unemployment rate (the median FOMC dot for the equilibrium unemployment rate) and the prime-age participation rate back to its 2019 level (Chart 8). We continue to expect the first rate hike only in December next year. The Fed will feel the need to override its employment criterion only if long-term inflation expectations become unanchored – but the 5-year 5-year forward breakeven rate is only at 2.3%, within the Fed’s effective CPI target range of 2.3-2.5% (Chart 5). We remain comfortable with our view of only a moderate rise in long-term rates, with the US 10-year Treasury yield at 1.7% by end-2021, and reaching 2-2.25% at the time of the first Fed rate hike. It is also worth emphasizing that even a fairly sharp rise in long-term rates has historically almost always coincided with strong equity performance (Chart 9 and Table 2). This has again been evident in the past 12 months: When rates rose between August 2020 and March 2021, and then from July 2021, equities performed strongly. Chart 8We Are Not Back To "Maximum Employment" Chart 9Rising Rates Are Usually Accompanied By A Rising Stock Market   Table 2Episodes Of Rising Long-Term Rates Since 1990 But could the economy get too cold? We would discount the weak US GDP reading: It was mostly due to production shortages, especially in autos, which pushed down consumption on durable goods by 26% QoQ annualized, and by some softness in spending on services due to the delta Covid variant, the impact of which is now fading. US growth should continue to be supported by a combination of the $2.5 trillion of excess household savings, strong capex as companies boost their production capacity, and a further 5% of GDP in fiscal stimulus that should be passed by Congress by year-end. Similar conditions apply in other developed economies. Chart 10Real Estate Is A Big Part Of Chinese GDP We see three principal risks to this positive outlook: A new strain of Covid-19 that proves resistant to current vaccines – unlikely but not impossible. Our geopolitical strategists worry about Iran, which may have a nuclear bomb ready by December, prompting Israel to bomb the country. Iran would likely react by hampering oil supplies, even blocking the Strait of Hormuz, through which 25% of global oil flows. Chinese growth has been slowing and the impact from the problems at Evergrande is still unclear. Real estate is a major part of the Chinese economy, with residential investment comprising 10% of GDP (Chart 10) and, broadly defined to include construction and building materials, real estate overall perhaps as much as one-third. Our China strategists don’t expect the government to launch a major stimulus which would bail out the industry, since it is happy with the way that property-related lending has been shrinking in recent years (Chart 11). We expect the slowdown in Chinese credit growth to bottom out over the coming few months, but economic activity may have further to slow (Chart 12), and there is a risk that the authorities are unable to control the fallout from the property market. Chart 11Chinese Authorities Are Happy To See Slowing Property Lending Chart 12When Will Credit Growth Bottom?       Fixed Income: Given the macro environment described above, we remain underweight bonds and short duration. If we assume 1) a Fed liftoff in December 2022, 2) 100 basis points of rate hikes over the following year, and 3) a terminal Fed Funds Rate of 2.08% (the median forecast from the New York Fed’s Survey of Market Participants), 10-year US Treasurys will return -0.2% over the next 12 months, and 2-year Treasurys +0.3%.1 TIPs have overshot fair value and, although we remain neutral since they a tail-risk hedge against high inflation over the next five years, we would especially avoid 2-year TIPS which look very overvalued. We see some pockets of selective value in lower-quality high-yield bonds, specifically US Ba- and Caa-rated issues, which are still trading at breakeven spreads around the 35th historical percentile, whereas higher-rated bonds look very expensive (Chart 13). For US tax-paying investors, municipal bonds look particularly attractive at the moment, with general-obligation (GO) munis trading at a duration-matched yield higher than Treasurys even before tax considerations (Chart 14). Our US bond strategists have recently gone maximum overweight. Chart 14Muni Bonds Are A Steal     Equities: We retain our longstanding preference for US equities over other Developed Markets. US equities have outperformed this year, irrespective of whether rates were rising or falling, or how US growth was surprising relative to the rest of the world, emphasizing the much stronger fundamentals of the US market (Chart 15).  Analysts’ forecasts for the next few quarters look quite cautious, and so earnings surprises can push US stock prices up further (Chart 16). We reiterate the neutral on China but underweight on Emerging Markets ex-China that we initiated in our latest Quarterly. Our sector overweights are a mixture of cyclicals (Industrials), rising-interest-rate plays (Financials), and defensives (Heath Care). Chart 15US Equites Outperformed This Year Whatever Happened Chart 16Analysts Are Pessimistic About The Next Couple Of Quarters   Currencies: We continue to expect the US dollar to be stuck in its trading range and so stay neutral. Recent moves in prospective relative monetary policy bring us to change two of our currency recommendations. We close our underweight on the Australian dollar. The recent rise in Australian inflation (with both trimmed mean and 10-year breakevens now above 2% – Chart 17) has brought forward the timing of the first rate hike and should push up relative real rates (Chart 18). We lower our recommendation on the Japanese yen from overweight to neutral. The Bank of Japan will not raise rates any time soon, even when other central banks are tightening. This will push real-rate differentials against the yen (Chart 18, panel 2). Chart 17Australian Inflation Is Picking Up Chart 18Real Rates Moving In Favor Of The AUD And Against The JPY Chart 19Chinese-Related Metals' Prices Are Falling Commodities: We remain cautious on those industrial metals which are most sensitive to slowing Chinese growth and its weakening property market. The fall in iron ore prices since July is now being followed by aluminum. However, metals which are increasingly driven by investment in alternative energy, notably copper, are likely to hold up better (Chart 19). We are underweight the equity Materials sector and neutral on the commodities asset class. The Brent crude oil price has broadly reached our energy strategists’ forecasts of $80/bbl on average in 2022 and $81 in 2023 (Chart 20). Although the forward curve is lower than this, with December-22 Brent at only $75/bbl, it is a misapprehension to characterize this as the market forecasting that the oil price will fall. Backwardation (where futures prices are lower than spot) is the usual state of affairs for structural reasons (for example, producers hedging production forward). The market typically moves to contango only when the oil price has fallen sharply and reserves are high (Chart 21). We remain neutral on the equities Energy sector.   Chart 20Brent Has Reached Our 2022 And 2023 Forecast Level Chart 21Lower Oil Futures Don't Mean Oil Price Is Forecast To Fall Garry Evans, Senior Vice President Global Asset Allocation garry@bcaresearch.com GAA Asset Allocation  

Special Report

In this report we examine the risk of stagflation by comparing the current environment to that of the late-1960s and 1970s. Today, investors cannot rule out the possibility of a stagflationary outcome, for four reasons: long-term household inflation expectations have risen significantly over the past year; fiscal policy has been expansionary; monetary policy will remain expansionary at the Fed’s projected terminal Fed funds rate; and component shortages and price increases linked to energy market and supply chain disruptions may persist or worsen over the coming year. However, the strong demand-pull inflationary dynamics that existed in the late-1960s were mostly absent in the lead-up to the pandemic, supply-chain issues are in part due to strong goods demand and supply disruptions that will eventually dissipate, and economic agents do not expect severe price pressures to persist beyond the pandemic. On balance, this points to a stagflationary outcome over the coming 6-24 months as a risk, but not a likely event. Investors should use the Misery Index, which is the sum of the unemployment rate and headline PCE inflation, as a real-time stagflation indicator. The Misery Index underscores that the US economy is unlikely to experience true stagflation unless the unemployment rate rises. A portfolio of the US dollar, the Swiss Franc, and industrial commodities may serve as a useful hedge for investors who are concerned about absolute return prospects in a world in which long-maturity bond yields are rising and risks of stagflationary dynamics are present. Chart II-1The Misery Index Reflects The Risk Of Stagflation Over the past several weeks, concerns about a possible return to 1970s-style stagflation have re-emerged significantly in the minds of many investors. These investors have pointed toward similarities between the current environment and that of the 1970s, including shortages limiting output, a snarled global trade and logistical system, and rising energy prices. Chart II-1 highlights that the US “Misery Index” – the sum of the unemployment rate and headline PCE inflation – rose again over the past several months to high single-digit territory, after having fallen dramatically from April 2020 to February of this year. Panel 2 of Chart II-1 highlights that last year's rise in the Misery Index was driven almost entirely by the unemployment rate, whereas the current level is due to a combination of a modestly elevated unemployment rate and a pronounced acceleration in inflation. The headline PCE deflator has risen above 4%, a level that has not been reached since 1991 during the First Gulf War. In this report, we examine the risk of stagflation by comparing the current environment to that of the late 1960s and 1970s. We conclude that while investors cannot rule out the possibility of a stagflationary outcome, there are important differences that point toward a stagflation outcome over the coming 6-24 months as a risk, not a likely event. We conclude by highlighting assets that may produce absolute returns in a world in which long-maturity bond yields are rising and risks of stagflationary dynamics are present. Revisiting The 1960s And 70s Chart II-2The 1960s Laid The Groundwork For Elevated Inflation The first step in judging the risk of a return to 1970s-style stagflation is to review, in a detailed way, what caused those conditions. Investors are well aware of the role that two separate energy price shocks played in raising prices and damaging output during this period, but they are less cognizant of the impact that a persistent period of above-trend output and significant labor market tightness had in setting up the conditions for sharply higher inflation. This focus of investors on energy prices partially reflects the fact that the Misery Index increased most visibly in the 1970s and that policymakers in the 1960s may not have realized how extensively economic output was running above its potential. With the benefit of hindsight, Chart II-2 illustrates the extent to which inflationary pressures built up in the 1960s, well before the first oil price shock in 1973. The chart shows that the unemployment rate was below NAIRU – the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment – for 70% of the time during the 1960s, and that inflation had already responded to this in the latter half of the decade. Annual headline PCE inflation was running just shy of 5% at the onset of the 1970 recession; it fell to 3% in the aftermath of the recession, but had already begun to reaccelerate in the first half of 1973. Following the 1973/1974 recession, inflation did decelerate significantly, falling from 11-12% to 5% in headline terms, and from 10% to 6% in core terms. But the pace of price appreciation did not fall below 5-6% in the second half of the 1970s, despite a significant and sustained rise in the unemployment rate above its natural rate. The 1975 to 1978 period is especially important for investors to understand, because it is arguably the clearest period of true stagflation in the 1970s. The fact that the Misery Index rose sharply during two major oil price shocks is not particularly surprising in and of itself, given the direct impact of energy prices on headline consumer prices; it is the fact that the index remained so elevated between these shocks, the result of persistently high inflation in the face of significant labor market slack, that is most relevant to investors. There are two reasons that both inflation and unemployment remained high during this period. First, labor market slack was sizeable during these years because the US economy was more energy-intensive in the 1970s than it is today. Chart II-3 highlights that goods-producing employment lagged overall employment growth from late 1973 to late 1977, underscoring that the rise in oil prices significantly impacted jobs growth in energy-intensive industries. Second, it is clear that the combination of demand-pull inflation in the late 1960s and the predominantly cost-push inflation of the 1970s led to expectations of persistent inflation among households and firms. The original Phillips Curve, as formulated by New Zealand economist William Phillips in the late 1950s, described a negative relationship between the unemployment rate and the pace of wage growth. Given the close correlation between wage and overall price growth at the time, the Phillips Curve was soon extended and generalized to describe an inverse relationship between labor market slack and overall price inflation. But the experience of the 1970s highlighted that inflation expectations are also an important determinant of inflation, a realization that gave birth to the expectations-augmented (i.e. “modern-day”) Phillips Curve (more on this below). The Stagflation Era Versus Today Table II-1 presents a stagflation “threat matrix,” representing the Bank Credit Analyst service’s assessment of the various factors that could potentially contribute to a stagflationary environment today, relative to what occurred in the 1960s and 1970s. While we acknowledge that there are some similarities today to what occurred five decades ago, the most threatening factors have been present for a shorter period of time and appear to have a smaller magnitude than what occurred during the stagflationary era. In addition, key factors, such as the visibility available to policymakers and investors about household inflation expectations and the potential output of the economy, would appear to reduce significantly the risk of a stagflationary outcome today. We discuss each of the factors presented in Table II-1 below: Fiscal & Monetary Policy Chart II-4Government Spending Last Cycle Looked Nothing Like The 1960s The persistently tight labor market that contributed to the inflationary buildup in the 1960s occurred as a result of easy fiscal and monetary policy. Chart II-4 highlights that the contribution to real GDP growth from government expenditure and investment was very elevated in the 1960s. Chart II-5 shows that a positive output gap in the late 1960s and the first half of the 1970s is well explained by the fact that 10-year US government bond yields were persistently below nominal GDP growth. The relationship between the stance of monetary policy and the output gap only meaningfully diverged in the latter half of the 1970s, during the true stagflationary era that we noted above. Chart II-5Easy Monetary Policy Juiced Aggregate Demand In The 60s And Early 70s Chart II-6Monetary Policy Today Is Extremely Easy Today, it is clear that the stance of fiscal policy has recently been extraordinarily easy, and 10-year US government bond yields have remained well below nominal GDP growth for the better part of the last decade. Relative to estimates of potential nominal GDP growth, 10-year Treasury yields are the lowest they have been since the 1970s (Chart II-6). Ostensibly, this supports concerns that policy might contribute to a stagflationary outcome. These concerns were raised by Larry Summers in March, when he described the Biden administration’s fiscal policy as the “least responsible” that the US has experienced in four decades and warned of the potential inflationary consequences of overheating the economy.1 But there are two important counterpoints to these concerns. First, easy fiscal policy this cycle has followed a period during the last economic cycle in which government spending contributed to the most sustained drag on economic activity since the 1950s. Unlike the 1960s, the unemployment rate has been below NAIRU for only a third of the time over the past decade. In addition, Chart II-7 highlights that fiscal thrust will turn to fiscal drag next year, underscoring the temporary nature of the massive burst in fiscal spending that has occurred in response to the pandemic. Under normal circumstances, the fiscal drag implied by Chart II-7 would substantially raise the risks of a recession next year, but we have noted in previous reports that a significant amount of excess savings remain to support spending and employment. The net impact of these two factors results in a reasonable expectation that the US economy will return to maximum employment next year, but this is a far cry from the 1960s when the unemployment rate was below its natural rate for 70% of the decade. Based on conventional measures, US monetary policy has been easy for a decade, but easy monetary policy did not begin to contribute positively to a rise in household sector credit growth last cycle until 2014/2015. This underscores that the natural rate of interest (“R-star”) did fall during the early phase of the last economic expansion. However, we argued in an April report that R-star was likely rising in the latter half of the last expansion,2 and we believe that the terminal Fed funds rate is likely higher than what the Fed is currently projecting, barring any additional negative policy shocks. Thus, while we do not believe that the duration of easy monetary policy over the past decade has laid the groundwork for a major rise in prices, it is now clearly positively contributing to aggregate demand and does risk a future overshoot in prices if long maturity bond yields remain well below the pace of economic growth for a sustained period of time. The Impact Of Shortages Chart II-8Gasoline Shortages Plagued The US Economy In The 1970s Gasoline shortages occurred during the oil shocks of the 1970s and are a key similarity that some investors point toward when comparing the situation today with the stagflationary era. Chart II-8 highlights that the annual growth in real personal consumption expenditures on energy goods and services fell into negative territory on six occasions in the 1970s, although it was most pronounced during the two oil price shocks and their resulting recessions. Today, the impact of shortages appears to be broader than what occurred in the 1970s, but less impactful and not likely to be as long-lasting. Chart II-9 highlights that the OPEC oil embargo of 1973 raised the global oil bill by 2.4% of global GDP and permanently raised the price of oil. The global oil bill will only be fractionally above its pre-pandemic level in 2022, with oil prices at $80/bbl, and, while it is true that US gasoline prices have risen significantly, they are not higher than they were from 2011-2014 (Chart II-10). Chart II-9$80/bbl Oil Is Not Onerous Chart II-10US Gasoline Prices Are High, But They Have Been Higher It is certainly true that global shipping costs have skyrocketed and that this is contributing to the increase in US consumer prices. We estimate, however, that this increase in shipping costs as a share of GDP is no more than a quarter of the impact of the 1973 increase in oil prices, without the attendant negative effects on US goods-producing employment that occurred in the 1970s. If anything, surging shipping costs create an incentive to re-shore manufacturing production, which would contribute positively to US goods-producing employment. We also do not expect the rise in shipping costs to be meaningfully permanent, i.e., shipping costs may ultimately settle at a higher level than they were in late-2019, but at a much lower level than what prevails today. Chart II-11A Tight Labor Market Is Causing Wage Growth To Pick Up Semiconductor and labor shortages would appear to represent a more salient threat of stagflation in the US, as the domestic production of motor vehicles cannot occur without key inputs and a tight labor market is already contributing to an acceleration in wage growth (Chart II-11). As we noted in Section 1 of our report, auto production significantly impacted growth in the third quarter. However, Chart II-12 highlights that, for now, the breadth of impact of these shortages appears to be limited: the production component of the ISM manufacturing index remains in expansionary territory, industrial production of durable manufacturing excluding motor vehicles and parts has not broken down, and both housing starts and building permits remain above pre-pandemic levels despite this year’s downtrend in permits. Chart II-12Shortages Do Not Yet Seem To Be Broad-Based A physical shortage of components is a less relevant factor for the services side of the economy, which appears to have re-accelerated meaningfully in October. The services sector is more considerably impacted by shortages in the labor market, which seem to be linked to a still-low labor force participation rate. We noted in our September report that the decline in the participation rate has significantly overshot what would be implied by the ongoing pace of retirements. Chart II-13 highlights that this has occurred not just because of a significant retirement effect, but also because of the shadow labor force (people who want a job but are not currently looking for work) and family responsibilities. We expect that the recent expiry of expanded unemployment insurance benefits, a steady rise in the immunity of the US population, an abating Delta wave of COVID-19, and a likely upcoming reduction in school/classroom closures once the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is approved for school-age children will likely ease the labor shortage issue over the coming several months. Output Gap Uncertainty It remains a debate among economists why policymakers maintained such easy monetary policy in the 1960s and 1970s, but Chart II-14 highlights that uncertainty about the size of the output gap may have contributed to too-low interest rates. The chart shows the unemployment rate compared with today's estimate of NAIRU, alongside a simple proxy for policymakers’ real time estimate of the natural rate of employment: the cumulative average unemployment rate in the post-war environment. To the extent that policymakers used past averages of the unemployment rate as their guide for NAIRU, Chart II-14 highlights how they may have underestimated the degree to which output was running above its potential level in the 1960s, and would not have even concluded that output was above potential in the early 1970s. Chart II-14Policymakers Overestimated Labor Market Slack In The 60s And 70s Chart II-15Policymakers Know That NAIRU Is Likely At Or Below 4% Today, the environment is quite different, because the acceleration in wage growth at the tail end of the last expansion gives policymakers and investors a good estimate of where NAIRU is. Chart II-15 highlights that wage growth accelerated in 2018/2019 in response to a sub-4% unemployment rate, which is consistent with both the Fed’s NAIRU estimate of 3.5-4.5% and Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida’s expressed view that a 3.8% unemployment rate likely constitutes maximum employment (barring any issues with the breadth and inclusivity of the labor market recovery). It is possible that the pandemic has structurally lowered potential output, which could mean that policymakers may no longer rely on the wage growth / unemployment relationship that existed in the latter phase of the last expansion. However, we do not find any credible arguments that would support the notion of a structurally lower level of potential output: the pandemic is likely to end at some point in the not-too-distant future, the negative impact of working-from-home policies on office properties and employment in central business districts is not sizeable,3 and productivity may have permanently increased in some industries because of the likely stickiness of a hybrid work culture. The Behavior Of Inflation Expectations Chart II-16Rising Long-Term Expectations Have Merely Normalized (For Now) One parallel to the argument that policymakers may have underestimated the degree of labor market tightness in the 1960s and early 1970s is the fact that they did not yet understand that inflation expectations are an important determinant of actual inflation, nor were they able to monitor them even if they did. Most credible surveys of inflation expectations began in the 1980s, and policymakers in the 1960s and 1970s were guided by the original Phillips Curve that solely related inflation to unemployment. Today, policymakers have the experience of the stagflationary episode to serve as a warning not to allow inflation expectations to get out of control, and both policymakers and investors have reliable measures of inflation expectations for households and market-participants. Chart II-16 highlights that households expect significant inflation over the coming year, but also expect prices over the longer term to rise at a pace that is almost exactly in line with their average from 2000-2014. The Rudd Controversy: (Adaptive) Inflation Expectations Do Matter One potential criticism of the idea that inflation expectations are signaling a low risk of higher future inflation has emerged through arguments made by Jeremy Rudd, a Federal Reserve economist. In a recent paper, Rudd questioned the view that households’ and firms’ expectations of future inflation are a key determinant of actual inflation; he suggested instead that relatively stable inflation since the mid-1990s might reflect a situation in which inflation simply does not enter workers’ employment decisions and expectations are irrelevant. Rudd’s paper was primarily addressed to policymakers who view inflation dynamics in a highly quantitative light. A full response to the paper would be mostly academic and thus not especially relevant to investors; however, we would like to highlight three points related to the Rudd piece that we feel are important.4 First, we disagree with Rudd’s argument that the trend in inflation has not responded to changes in economic conditions since the mid-1990s. Chart II-17 highlights that while the magnitude of the relationship has shifted, the trend in inflation relative to a measure of long-term expectations based on prior actual inflation has mimicked that of the output gap. The fact that inflation was (ironically) too high during the early phase of the last economic cycle provides some support for Rudd’s inflation responsiveness view, although we would still point toward the Fed’s strong record of maintaining low and stable inflation, its active communication with the public in the years following the global financial crisis, and the fact that a recovery began and the output gap began to (slowly) close as the best explanation for the avoidance of deflation during that period. Second, we agree with Rudd’s point that regime shifts in inflation’s responsiveness to economic conditions can occur, and that adaptive measures of inflation expectations, and even surveys of inflation, may not capture such a shift in real time. Chart II-18 shows that the 2014-2016 period was a good example of this, when adaptive expectations as well as household survey measures of long-term inflation expectations both lagged the actual decline in inflation that was caused by a collapse in the price of oil. Chart II-17The Trend In Inflation Continues To Respond To Economic Conditions Chart II-18Surveyed Inflation Expectations Can Lag, But This Time They Led But Chart II-18 also shows that long-term household survey measures of inflation led the rise in actual inflation (and thus our adaptive expectations measure) last year, underscoring that these measures are likely more reliable indicators today of whether a major regime shift is occurring. As noted above, long-term expectations have risen significantly relative to what prevailed prior to the pandemic, but this has merely raised expectations from extraordinarily depressed levels back to the average that prevailed prior to (and immediately after) the global financial crisis. Therefore, household expectations are not yet at dangerous levels. Chart II-19Unit Labor Costs Modestly Lead Inflation, But Are Far From Extreme Third, one of the core observations in Rudd’s paper is that unit labor cost (ULC) growth leads the trend in inflation, which he argued was evidence against the idea that expectations of future inflation are a key determinant of actual inflation. Chart II-19 highlights that Rudd is correct that ULC growth modestly leads inflation (especially core inflation), but we disagree with his conclusion that it argues against the importance of expectations. As we noted in Section 2 of our January 2021 Bank Credit Analyst,5 one crucial aspect of the expectations-augmented, or “modern-day” Phillips Curve is that, if inflation expectations are largely formed based on the experience of past inflation, then inflation is ultimately determined by three dimensions of the output gap: whether it is rising or falling, whether it is above or below zero, and how long it has been above or below zero. Our view is that ULC growth is fundamentally linked to slack in the labor market, which is directly incorporated in output gap measures. As we noted above, investors currently have a good estimate of the magnitude of the output/employment gap, meaning that it is possible to track the inflationary consequences of prevailing aggregate demand. As a final point about ULC growth, Chart II-19 highlights that while the five-year CAGR of unit labor costs is currently running at its strongest pace since the global financial crisis, investors should note that it remains well below the levels that prevailed in the late-1960s when persistently above-potential output laid the groundwork for a massive inflationary overshoot. Conclusions And Investment Strategy Our review of the 1960s and 1970s highlights that stagflation is a phenomenon in which supply-side shocks raise prices of key inputs to production, which lowers output and raises unemployment. Energy price shocks in the 1970s occurred after a long period of policy-driven above-trend growth in the 1960s, meaning that both demand-pull and cost-push inflation contributed to stagflation in the 1970s. Today, investors cannot rule out the possibility of a stagflationary outcome, for four reasons: long-term household inflation expectations have risen significantly over the past year; fiscal policy has been very expansionary; monetary policy will remain expansionary at the Fed’s projected terminal Fed funds rate; and component shortages and price increases linked to energy market and supply chain disruptions may persist or worsen over the coming year. Chart II-20It Is Not Stagflation If The Unemployment Rate Continues To Fall However, the strong demand-pull inflationary dynamics that existed in the late-1960s were mostly absent in the lead-up to the pandemic, supply-chain issues are in part the result of strong goods demand and disruptions that are clearly linked to the pandemic (and thus will eventually dissipate), and long-term inflation expectations are behaving differently than short-term expectations, signaling that economic agents do not expect severe price pressures to persist beyond the pandemic. Policymakers also have more visibility about the magnitude of economic / labor market slack than they did during the stagflationary era and better tools to track inflation expectations. On balance, this points to a stagflationary outcome over the coming 6-24 months as a risk, but not as a likely event. Using the Misery Index as real-time stagflation indicator, investors should note that the US economy is not likely experiencing true stagflation unless the unemployment rate rises. Chart II-20 highlights that there is no evidence yet of a contraction in goods-producing or service-producing jobs. Even if goods-producing employment slows meaningfully over the coming few months as a result of component shortages, the unemployment rate is still likely to fall if services spending normalizes, as it would imply that the gap in services-producing employment, which is currently 20% of the level of pre-pandemic goods-producing employment, will continue to close. Investors have been focused on the issue of stagflation because its occurrence would imply a sharply negative correlation between stock prices and bond yields. This is not our base case view, but we have highlighted that months with negative returns from both stocks and long-maturity bonds tend to be associated with periods of monetary policy tightening (or in anticipation of such periods). As we discussed in Section 1 of our report, we do expect the Fed to raise interest rates next year. We do not see a rise in bond yields to levels implied by the Fed’s interest rates projections as being seriously threatening to economic activity, corporate earnings growth, or equity multiples. But the adjustment to higher long-maturity bond yields may unnerve equity investors for a time, implying temporary periods of a negative stock price / bond yield correlation. Table II-2 highlights that, since 1980, commodities, the US dollar, and the Swiss franc have typically earned positive returns during non-recessionary months in which stock and long-maturity bond returns are negative. While the dollar is not likely to perform well in a stagflationary scenario, Chart II-21 highlights that CHF-USD and industrial commodities performed quite well in the late-1970s. As such, a portfolio of these three assets might serve as a useful hedge for investors who are concerned about absolute return prospects in a world in which long-maturity bond yields are rising and risks of stagflationary dynamics are present. Chart II-21The Swiss Franc and Raw Industrials Did Well During The Stagflationary Era Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Footnotes 1  “Summers Sees ‘Least Responsible’ Fiscal Policy in 40 Years,” Bloomberg News, March 20, 2021. 2 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst “R-star, And The Structural Risk To Stocks,” dated March 31, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst “Work From Home “Stickiness” And The Outlook For Monetary Policy,” dated June 24, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 4 Rudd, Jeremy B. (2021). “Why Do We Think That Inflation Expectations Matter for Inflation? (And Should We?),” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2021-062. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. 5  Please see The Bank Credit Analyst “The Modern-Day Phillips Curve, Future Inflation, And What To Do About It,” dated December 18, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com

In lieu of next week’s report, I will be presenting the quarterly Counterpoint webcast titled ‘Where Is The Groupthink Wrong? (Part 2)’. I do hope you can join. Highlights If a continued surge in the oil price – or other commodity or goods prices – started driving up the 30-year T-bond yield, the markets and the economy would feel the pain. We reiterate that the pain point at which the Fed would be forced to volte-face is only around 30 bps away on the 30-year T-bond, equal to a yield of around 2.4-2.5 percent. That would be a great buying opportunity for bonds. Given the proximity of this pain point, it is too late to short bonds, or for equity investors to rotate into value and cyclical equity sectors. That tactical opportunity has almost played out. On a 6-month and longer horizon, equity investors should prefer long-duration defensive sectors such as healthcare. Chinese long-duration bond yields are on a structural downtrend. Fractal analysis: The Korean won is oversold. Feature Many people have noticed the suspicious proximity of oil price surges to subsequent economic downturns – most recently, the 1999-2000 trebling of crude and the subsequent 2000-01 downturn, and the 2007-2008 trebling of crude and the subsequent 2008-09 global recession. Begging the question, should we be concerned about the trebling of the crude oil price since March 2020? Of course, we know that the root cause of both the 2000-01 downturn and the 2008-09 recession was not the oil price surge that preceded them. As their names make crystal clear, the 2001-01 downturn was the dot com bust and the 2008-09 recession was the global financial crisis. And yet, and yet… while the oil price surge was not the culprit, it was certainly the accessory to both murders, by driving up the bond yield and tipping an already fragile market and economy over the brink. Today, could oil become the accessory to another murder? (Chart I-1) Chart I-1AOil Was The Accessory To The Murder In 2008... Chart I-1B...Could It Become The Accessory To Another Murder?   Oil Is The Accessory To Many Murders Turn the clock back to the 1970s, and it might seem more straightforward that the recession of 1974 was the direct result of the oil shock that preceded it. Yet even in this case, we can argue that oil was the accessory, rather than the true culprit of that murder. It is correct that the specific timing, magnitude, and nature of OPEC supply cutbacks were closely related to geopolitical events – especially the US support for Israel in the Arab-Israeli war of October 1973. Yet as neat and popular as this explanation is, it ignores a bigger economic story: the collapse in August 1971 of the Bretton Woods ‘pseudo gold standard’, which severed the fixed link between the US dollar and quantities of commodities. To maintain the real value of oil, the OPEC countries were raising the price of crude oil well before October 1973. Meaning that while geopolitical events may have influenced the precise timing and magnitude of price hikes, OPEC countries were just ‘staying even’ with the collapsing real value of the US dollar, in which oil was priced. Seen in this light, the true culprit of the recession was the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, and the oil price surge through 1973-74 was just the accessory to the murder (Chart I-2). Chart I-2In 1973-74, OPEC Was Just 'Staying Even' With A Collapsing Real Value Of The Dollar A quarter of a century later in 1999, the oil price again trebled within a short time span – and by the turn of the millennium, the ensuing inflationary fears had pushed up the 10-year T-bond yield from 4.5 percent to almost 7 percent (Chart I-3). With stocks already looking expensive versus bonds, it was this increase in the bond yield – rather than a decline in the equity earnings yield – that inflated the equity bubble to its bursting point in early 2000 (Chart I-4). Chart I-3In 1999, As Oil Surged, So Did The Bond Yield... Chart I-4...Making Expensive Equities Even More Expensive To repeat, for the broader equity market, the last stage of the bubble was not so much that stocks became more expensive in absolute terms (the earnings yield was just moving sideways). Rather, stock valuations worsened markedly relative to sharply higher bond yields. Seen in this light, the oil price surge through 1999 was once again the accessory to the murder. Eight years later in 2007-08, the oil price once again trebled with Brent crude reaching an all-time high of $146 per barrel in July 2008. Again, the inflationary fears forced the 10-year T-bond yield to increase, from 3.25 percent to 4.25 percent during the early summer of 2008 (Chart I-5) – even though the Federal Reserve was slashing the Fed funds rate in the face of an escalating financial crisis (Chart I-6). Chart I-5In 2008, As Oil Surged, So Did The Bond Yield... Chart I-6...Even Though The Fed Was Slashing Rates In The Face Of A Financial Crisis Suffice to say, driving up bond yields in the summer of 2008 – in the face of the Fed’s aggressive rate cuts and a global financial system teetering on the brink – was not the smartest thing that the bond market could do. On the other hand, neither could it override its Pavlovian fears of the oil price trebling. Seen in this light, the oil price surge through 2007-08 was once again the accessory to the murder. Inflationary Fears May Once Again Lead To Murder Fast forward to today, and the danger of the recent trebling of the oil price comes not from the oil price per se. Instead, just as in 2000 and 2008, the danger comes from its potential to drive up bond yields, which can tip more systemically important economic and financial fragilities over the brink. One such fragility is the extreme sensitivity of highly-valued growth stocks to the 30-year T-bond yield, as explained in The Fed’s ‘Pain Point’ Is Only 30 Basis Points Away. On this note, one encouragement is that while shorter duration yields have risen sharply through October, the much more important 30-year T-bond yield has just gone sideways. A much bigger systemic fragility lies in the $300 trillion global real estate market, as explained in The Real Risk Is Real Estate (Part 2). Specifically, the global real estate market has undergone an unprecedented ten-year boom in which prices have doubled in every corner of the world. Over the same period, rents have risen by just 30 percent, which has depressed the global rental yield to an all-time low of 2.5 percent. Structurally depressed rental yields are justified by structurally depressed 30-year bond yields. Therefore, any sustained rise in 30-year bond yields risks undermining the foundations of the $300 trillion global real estate market (Chart I-7). Chart I-7Structurally Depressed Rental Yields Are Justified By Structurally Depressed 30-Year Bond Yields Nowhere is this truer than in China, where prime real estate yields in the major cities are at a paltry 1 percent. In this context, the recent woes of real estate developer Evergrande are just the ‘canary in the coalmine’ warning of an extremely fragile Chinese real estate sector. This will put downward pressure on China’s long-duration bond yields. As my colleague, BCA China strategist, Jing Sima, points out, “Chinese long-duration bond yields are on a structural downtrend…yields are likely to move structurally to a lower bound.” But it is not just in China. Real estate is at record high valuations everywhere and contingent on no major rise in long-duration bond yields. In the US, there is a tight relationship between the (inverted) 30-year bond yield and mortgage applications for home purchase (Chart I-8), and a tight relationship between mortgage applications for home purchase and building permits (Chart I-9). Thereby, higher bond yields threaten not only real estate prices. They also threaten the act of building itself, an important swing factor in economic activity. Chart I-8The Bond Yield Drives Mortgage Applications... Chart I-9...And Mortgage Applications Drive Building Permits To repeat, focus on the 30-year T-bond yield – as this is the most significant driver for both growth stock valuations, and for real estate valuations and activity. To repeat also, the 30-year T-bond yield has been generally well-behaved over the past few months. But if a continued surge in the oil price – or other commodity or goods prices – started driving up the 30-year T-bond yield, the markets and the economy would feel pain. And at some point, this pain would force the Fed to volte-face. We reiterate that this pain point is only around 30 bps away, equal to a yield on 30-year T-bond of around 2.4-2.5 percent – a level that would be a great buying opportunity for bonds. Given the proximity of this pain point, it is too late to short bonds or for equity investors to rotate into value and cyclical equity sectors. That tactical opportunity has almost played out. On a 6-month and longer horizon, equity investors should prefer long-duration defensive sectors such as healthcare. The Korean Won Is Oversold Finally, in this week’s fractal analysis, we note that the Korean won is oversold – specifically versus the Chinese yuan on the 130-day fractal structure of that cross (Chart I-10). Chart I-10The Korean Won Is Oversold Given that previous instances of such fragility have reliably indicated trend changes, this week’s recommended trade is long KRW/CNY, setting the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 2 percent.   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades   Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- 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  

Dear client, In addition to this week’s brief report, we presented at our annual BCA conference on the challenges to the US dollar’s reserve status. If you missed the session, please contact your account representative for a replay. Kind regards, Chester   Highlights The gold/silver ratio is relapsing anew. This has historically been a bearish omen for the dollar. Many petrocurrencies have lagged the rise in oil prices, and offer a very attractive carry. Go long a basket of oil producers (NOK, RUB, MXN and COP) versus the euro. Currency volatility is too low, and is bound to rise. Stay long CHF/NZD on this basis. Remain tactically long EUR/GBP as a play on slight policy convergence between the UK and the euro area. Feature Chart I-1Being Short The Dollar Has Hurt This Year Investing in currencies is tough. One of the reasons is that the currency market is the melting pot of a confluence of catalysts. These range from relative growth dynamics, policy divergences, sector biases that dictate portfolio flows and politics, among many other factors. Our bias has always been that acting on perfect information is a highly improbable feat because we are not insiders. As such, in April 2020, we designed a rules-based model to see if, over time, currencies could be traded purely based on publicly available information. Our results, grounded on the fundamental basis that has defined the BCA approach, was a positive surprise (Chart I-1). Armed with this conviction, this week’s bulletin is focused on a few themes we have held and trading opportunities around these. In a nutshell, a positive bias on any currency can be calibrated on a good macro catalyst, a valuation cushion, and going against the consensus. An Inflation Hedge On A Reflationary Boom It is becoming more evident that inflation might prove stickier than most policymakers expect. This is bad news for real interest rates. Negative real rates have been historically positive for gold and other precious metals. Within this sphere, our preference has been silver. First, silver is a reflationary metal and tends to do well when global growth is strong and the dollar is falling (Chart I-2). Since the onset of the COVID-19 crisis, silver has had a near-perfect negative correlation with the dollar (Chart I-3).   Chart I-2Gold, Silver, And the Dollar Chart I-3Silver Is A Good Reflation Play There are also an economic and valuation cases to be made for silver. Economically, silver is a byproduct of both copper and zinc mining, which have had supply-side disruptions. Meanwhile, a boom in goods demand has boosted the demand for silver, which mainly goes into electronics production. The combination is leading to a deficit in the silver demand/supply balance (Chart I-4). On the valuation side, the fair value for the gold/silver ratio is near 50, which has been the mean since the 18th century (Chart I-5) Chart I-4Silver Has A Supply Deficit Chart I-5Gold Is Expensive Relative To Silver   Fundamentally, both silver and gold are precious metals. Just like gold, silver benefits from low interest rates, plentiful liquidity, and the incentive for currency wars and fiat money debasement. However, the gold/silver ratio tends to peak when the environment migrates from reflationary to inflationary (Chart I-6). As such, silver is a good inflationary hedge amidst a reflationary boom. This brings us to the sweet spot for silver. Even if global growth remains tepid over the next few months, a lot of the bad news is already reflected in silver prices, especially vis-à-vis gold. Relative speculative positioning hit a low of -25% as a percent of open interest. Relative sentiment on gold is 10% higher relative to silver. This is bullish from a contrarian perspective (Chart I-7). Chart I-6Silver Does Well With Rising Inflation Chart I-7Silver Has Been Shunned Relative To Gold Higher Currency Volatility Currency volatility is likely to rise in the coming months. Options markets offer many opportunities to trade this theme, but being long CHF/NZD is an attractive bet as well (Chart I-8). The kiwi is backed by a very hawkish central bank that will likely dial back its rhetoric amid much uncertainty about the growth outlook. Meanwhile, the kiwi is expensive according to most of our models. As such, we expect the kiwi to rise vis-à-vis the greenback over a cyclical horizon, but we feel it is at risk on a tactical basis. Chart I-8CHF/NZD Tracks Dollar Volatility The RBNZ has decided to introduce house price considerations into its mandate. While this is politically palatable, it is economically unviable as rising real estate prices are a global phenomenon. The risk is that a hawkish RBNZ tilts the economy over, especially if the current environment is stagflationary. As such, we are short the NZD at the crosses. Our long AUD/NZD position is based on policy convergence between Australia and New Zealand and our long CHF/NZD is based on rising currency volatility. We were stopped out of our long CHF/NZD position and are reinitiating the trade today. A Play On Higher Oil Prices Oil prices are likely to stay elevated in the coming months. But even if they relapse, a bet on being long oil producers versus consumers could still prove profitable. Petrocurrencies have lagged the performance of oil tremendously (Chart I-9). This is especially the case when looking at oil-producing countries versus oil-consuming ones. RUB, COP, and MXN are trading well below their implied levels relative to the USD, EUR, and RMB. Chart I-9Petrocurrencies Will Catch Up With Oil Price A lot of oil players are seeing a rebound in their economies, as their populations get vaccinated. Russia, Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia all have lower new COVID-19 incidences, compared to earlier this year and versus the US (Chart I-10). As a result, economic activity is rebounding in these countries relative to the US (Chart I-11). Our bias is that the dollar will resume its cyclical bear market in the coming months. This will push up many petrocurrencies, as the path of the dollar usually dictates the performance of many developed and emerging market currencies (Chart I-12). Chart I-10A Drop In Infections Outside The US... Chart I-11...Leading To A Recovery In Growth       Chart I-12Petrocurrencies Track The Dollar The big risk is a slowdown in China, which will have a meaningful impact on oil demand. The Chinese credit impulse correlates quite well with commodity and oil currencies, and therefore, should the impulse slow further, this will meaningfully impact import demand (Chart I-13). Our bias is that there is little downside to the credit impulse in China, while the imperative to stimulate the economy could be rising. So far, the authorities have been able to ringfire the crisis with no meaningful capital outflows (Chart I-14). Chart I-13China Slowdown A Risk... Chart I-14...But No Systemic Risk Yet   On the sentiment and valuation fronts, the case for petrocurrencies is more compelling. Starting with valuation, all of our models show many petrocurrencies as deeply undervalued. On a real effective exchange rate basis, the MXN, COP, and BRL are trading well below historical averages (Chart I-15). On the sentiment front, it is true that many petrocurrencies have lagged the increase in oil prices amid domestic demand concerns. This is bound to change as populations get vaccinated and their economies reopen. More importantly, many petrocurrencies sport very attractive real rates (Chart I-16). If our bias on a dollar decline proves correct, then the carry will be an added bonus. As such, we recommend going long a basket of RUB, COP, and MXN against the euro Chart I-15Most Petrocurrencies Are Cheap Chart I-16Petrocurrencies Have An Attractive Carry   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Currencies U.S. Dollar Chart II-1USD Technicals 1 Chart II-2USD Technicals 2 The US economy remains relatively robust: Retail sales came in at 1.8% month-on-month in September, well above consensus of an 0.8% increase. Sentiment in the US is drifting lower, according to the Michigan survey. The current conditions component of the index slipped from 80.1 to 77.9 in October. The sentiment component also fell from 72.8 to 71.4. Portfolio flows into the US remained strong with net TIC inflows of $US 126bn. Both housing starts and building permits rose in September. Ditto for existing home sales, that increased from 5.88mn to 6.29mn. The US dollar DXY index fell this week. The general tone to markets has been risk on, which has led to less demand for the safe-haven dollar. Meanwhile, according to CFTC data, speculators are very long the dollar which is bearish from a contrarian perspective.   Report Links: Arbitrating Between Dollar Bulls And Bears - March 19, 2021 The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Are Rising Bond Yields Bullish For The Dollar? - February 19, 2021 The Euro Chart II-3EUR Technicals 1 Chart II-4EUR Technicals 2 Euro area data was mixed this week: New car registrations fell by 23% year-on-year in September. The trade balance came in at €11.1bn, a robust number but below expectations of a €14.2bn surplus. Consumer confidence keeps deteriorating in the euro area amidst the energy crisis. The euro was up 0.2% this week. EUR/USD has had a wild ride in recent weeks, having breached below 1.16. That said, the tides are turning in favor of the euro. Speculators are short the currency, and interest rate expectations for the euro area are bombed out relative to other developed markets. This provides room for positive surprises.  Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 The Euro Dance: One Step Back, Two Steps Forward - April 2, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 The Japanese Yen Chart II-5JPY Technicals 1 Chart II-6JPY Technicals 2 Recent Japanese data has been mixed: Condominium sales fell be 6.7% year-on-year in September. Trade remains robust. Exports rose by 15% year-on-year, while imports surged by 38.6% year-on-year. Supermarket sales increased 3.2% year-on-year in September. The yen rose 20bps this week. We were bullish the yen around 109, and even more bullish at current levels. The two things that have thrown this view offside are 1) an abrupt rise in US yields, that has attracted Treasury bids from Japanese investors and 2) profit taking by foreign investors who did catch the Japan outperformance in August. On the other side of the coin, the yen is now one of the most shorted G10 currencies, and Japanese data has been so poor relative to the rest of the G10 that some measure of catchup is due. Report Links: The Case For Japan - June 11, 2021 The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 British Pound Chart II-7GBP Technicals 1 Chart II-8GBP Technicals 2 The key data release out of the UK this week was the inflation report: Headline CPI came in at 3.1% year-on-year in September, in line with expectations. Core CPI came in at 2.9% year-on-year in September, in line with expectations. RPI an PPI came in at 4.9% and 11.4% respectively. The pound rose by 0.3% this week. The UK is dealing with and energy and inflation crisis, similar to the rest of the world. This is bringing forward expectations of a rate hike by the BoE, which we believe would be the wrong approach should inflation subside. We are bullish sterling on a cyclical horizon, but are also long EUR/GBP tactically as a play on a policy convergence between the BoE and the ECB. Report Links: Why Are UK Interest Rates Still So Low? - March 10, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Thoughts On The British Pound - December 18, 2020 Australian Dollar Chart II-9AUD Technicals 1 Chart II-10AUD Technicals 2 The was scant data out of Australia this week: The services PMI rebounded strongly in September, from 45.5 to 52. The manufacturing PMI remained robust, rising from 56.8 to 57.3 in October. As a result, the composite PMI improved from 46 to 52.2. The AUD rose 0.6% this week. The AUD is sitting on a coiled spring and ripe for a rebound. First, the energy crisis is bullish for Australia as it is one of the largest coal and natural gas exporters. Second the AUD is cheap, especially on a terms of trade basis. At the crosses, we are long AUD/NZD as a play on these trends. Report Links: The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Australia: Regime Change For Bond Yields & The Currency? - January 20, 2021 New Zealand Dollar Chart II-11NZD Technicals 1 Chart II-12NZD Technicals 2 The was scant data out of New Zealand this week: CPI exploded higher, rising 4.9% in the third quarter. Credit card spending was down 12.9% year-on-year in September. The NZD rose by 1.2% week. The inflation report out of New Zealand unsettled markets, pushing up bond yields significantly and propping the currency. Given the RBNZ has a mandate to consider house prices in policy settings, this has led to bets of more aggressive policy tightening in New Zealand. We continue to believe the NZD will fare well cyclically, but hawkish expectations from the RBNZ are already priced. This provides room for disappointment. We are long AUD/NZD on this basis. Report Links: How High Can The Kiwi Rise? - April 30, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 Canadian Dollar Chart II-13CAD Technicals 1 Chart II-14CAD Technicals 2 Data out of Canada this week has been robust: The CPI report was buoyant. Headline came in a 4.4%, core-trim came in at 3.4%, core-median was 2.8% and core-common was 1.8% year-on-year. Foreigners continue to favor Canadian securities. Inflows for August rose to C$26.3bn, well above a prior print of C$14.2bn. The Business outlook survey from the Bank of Canada was robust in the third quarter, but thew future sales outlook did fall from 47 to 9, a sharp deterioration. The CAD was flat this week. On a cyclical basis, the CAD is backed by robust oil prices, and orthodox central bank that will raise rates to curb high inflation and real estate speculation, and an economy that remains on a recovery path. As such, our bias is that the path of least resistance for the CAD is up. Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 Will The Canadian Recovery Lead Or Lag The Global Cycle? - February 12, 2021 The Outlook For The Canadian Dollar - October 9, 2020 Swiss Franc Chart II-15CHF Technicals 1 Chart II-16CHF Technicals 2 The Swiss economy is on the mend: Total sight deposits were flat at CHF 714bn in the week ended October 15. Exports rose 0.4% month-on-month in September, while imports fell 0.8% month-on-month. The money supply rose 3.2% in September, in line with the August print. CHF rose by 0.5% this week. CHF remains a good hedged against rising currency volatility, which we believe will materialize on a cyclical horizon. That said, the swiss franc will lag the euro and other European currencies, if our view of a pickup in growth next year proves correct. Report Links: An Update On The Swiss Franc - April 9, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 Norwegian Krone Chart II-17NOK Technicals 1 Chart II-18NOK Technicals 2 There was scant data out of Norway this week: The trade balance improved from NOK 42.6bn to NOK 53.7bn in September. The NOK was up 0.7% this week. High oil prices are a boost for the NOK, especially with the opening of the energy pipeline with the UK. We also favor the NOK on valuation grounds. Stay short EUR/NOK and USD/NOK. Report Links: The Norwegian Method - June 4, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 Swedish Krona Chart II-19SEK Technicals 1 Chart II-20SEK Technicals 2 There was scant data out of Sweden this week: The unemployment rate fell from 8.5% to 8.2% in September. The SEK rose 15 bps this week. We are short both EUR/SEK and USD/SEK as reflation plays. The SEK will rise very quickly should the Chinese credit impulse bottom, a likely event in our view. Meanwhile, the central bank will end QE this year and could bring forward expectations of a rate hike. Report Links: Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 More On Competitive Devaluations, The CAD And The SEK - May 1, 2020 Sweden Beyond The Pandemic: Poised To Re-leverage - March 19, 2020 Trades & Forecasts Strategic View Cyclical Holdings (6-18 months) Tactical Holdings (0-6 months) Limit Orders Forecast Summary

Dear Client, There will be no weekly report next week. Instead, we will host our quarterly webcast on Tuesday, October 26 for the US and EMEA regions and Wednesday, October 27 for the Asia Pacific region. We will resume our regular publishing schedule on Monday, November 1. In the meantime, we look forward to seeing many of you at our BCA Research Investment Conference this week. Best regards, Mathieu Savary   Highlights This year’s decline in EUR/USD has rendered this pair sufficiently inexpensive and oversold to account for the near-term risks we highlighted in March. Nonetheless, some risks remain—among them, the continued credit slowdown in China, diverging monetary policy trends, and the energy crisis hurting Europe. However, long-term fundamentals continue to support the euro’s 12- to 18-month outlook. Moreover, Chinese credit growth may soon stabilize and markets already largely factor in the policy divergence between the Fed and the ECB. As a result, we buy the euro today with a preliminary target at 1.25 and a stop loss at 1.1175. The Bank of England will lift rates this December, but the market already prices in a hawkish BoE. GBP/USD has upside, even if the euro should outpace the pound in the coming months. Look to upgrade UK small-cap stocks. Italian equities do not appear particularly appealing on a cyclical horizon, neither in absolute nor relative terms. Investors should favor Spanish stocks over Italian ones for the next 12-to-18 months. Feature EUR/USD recently flirted with 1.15. Did this move create a buying opportunity? Last March, we warned that the euro would correct to the 1.12 to 1.15 zone because short-term models flagged it as expensive, speculators carried a substantial net-long exposure, and Chinese credit growth was set to slow meaningfully. These forces have now mostly played out; thus, the euro’s near-term outlook is becoming more positive. Despite this more constructive view, EUR/USD still carries ample downside risks, especially if Chinese authorities remain reluctant to reflate their economy. Moreover, the energy crisis facing Europe clouds the euro. We are nonetheless buyers of EUR/USD, with a target at 1.25. Investors should set a wide stop in at 1.1175. Cheap And Oversold The internal dynamics of the euro indicate that the bulk of the sell-off is behind us. First, the euro is now cheap on a tactical basis. Back in March, our short-term fair value model for EUR/USD flagged at 7% overvaluation based on real rate differentials, on the slope of the German yield curve relative to that of the US, and on the copper-to-lumber prices ratio. Today, this same measure shows a 5% undervaluation. BCA’s Foreign Exchange Strategy Intermediate Term Timing Model (ITTM) flags an even clearer buy signal.  The ITTM framework combines interest rate parity models, with risk aversion and considerations for the currency’s trend. Currently, this model is at -8% or nearly minus one standard error. Historically, such a depressed reading points to generous returns in the subsequent 12 months (Chart 1). Second, the euro is oversold. BCA’s Intermediate Term Technical Indicator has hit 7, which is consistent with past rebounds in EUR/USD (Chart 2). While some of these rallies have been extremely short-lived, the technical indicator’s message is stronger when it is matched by a buy signal from the ITTM. Chart 1Strong Buy Signal From Short-Term Valuations Chart 2EUR/USD is Oversold Chart 3Stale Euro Longs Have Been Purged Third, speculators do not carry a large net long position in the euro anymore. This variable suggests that the worst of the selling pressure is behind us, but it has yet to send a strong buy signal on its own (Chart 3). Bottom Line: The euro is sufficiently inexpensive that our Intermediate-term timing model flags a strong buy signal. Moreover, our technical indicators paint an oversold picture consistent with a reversal. Nonetheless, speculators may not be long EUR/USD anymore, but they are not aggressively selling it either. Thus, macro dynamics remain important to the future trend of this currency. Macro Fog Remains The macro environment is not yet conducive to a euro rally, especially when Chinese credit growth remains weak. However, considering the euro’s valuation and technical picture, small changes in the macro environment could be enough to catalyze a jump in EUR/USD. A key problem for the euro is that the dollar remains well bid. The yen and the dollar are the two momentum currencies within the G-10 (Chart 4). This property of the dollar is a large handicap for the euro, because it remains the most liquid vehicle to bet on the USD. Thus, as long as the dollar’s momentum is strong, the euro will find it difficult to rally. Relative economic growth is another headwind for EUR/USD. European activity is weakening versus that of the US. Since 2019, the relative manufacturing PMIs between the Euro Area and the US track EUR/USD, and they currently confirm the euro’s weakness (Chart 5). Moreover, European economic surprises are significantly weaker than US ones, which adds to the euro’s malaise (Chart 5, bottom panel). Chart 4The Dollar Is A Momentum Currency Chart 5Deteriorating European Growth Hurts EUR/USD The near-term outlook does not signal a resolution of this issue until the first half of 2022. The declines in the expectation and current situation components of both the ZEW and Sentix surveys herald an additional deceleration in manufacturing activity (Chart 6). The Eurozone’s growth problems reflect China’s slowing credit flows. Europe economic activity is still extremely sensitive to the evolution of the global industrial cycle (Chart 7, top panel), much more so than the US GDP is. China’s business cycle is an essential determinant of the robustness of the global manufacturing sector. Consequently, when measures of China’s marginal propensity to consume decelerate, such as the gap between M1 and M2 growth, European PMIs and industrial production underperform those of the US (Chart 7, second and bottom panels). Chart 6A Bit More Time Before Europe's Slowdown Ends Chart 7China's Travails Hurt Europe     The fourth quarter of 2021 is likely to represent the tail end of the Chinese headwind on EUR/USD. The Chinese credit impulse remains weak, but signs of a floor are beginning to appear. For example, the decline in Chinese commercial banks excess reserve growth warned us of the coming decline in the credit impulse. Today, excess reserves have begun to stabilize, which points to an upcoming imporvement in credit flows (Chart 8). Additionally, the Evergrande problems continue to weigh on Europe in the near-term because of the deceleration in Chinese construction activity;  however, the crisis will also intensify the pressure on Beijing to revive credit growth in order to avoid a systemic collapse. Chart 8Will China's Credit Impulse Bottom Soon? Monetary policy differentials also remain euro bearish. The US Federal Reserve will announce the start of its tapering program on November 3. The FOMC is set to hike rates by the end of 2022. Meanwhile, the ECB is unphased by the increase in European inflation, which remains mostly a reflection of energy prices and base effects. Thus, Europe will lag behind the US when it comes to monetary policy tightening. Nonetheless, investors already understand this dichotomy very well. The US OIS curve anticipates four hikes in 2023. Meanwhile, the EONIA curve shows a first 25-bps hike only by September 2023. Thus, the euro will suffer more from policy differentials if the Fed generates hawkish surprises relative to this pricing. The energy crisis shaking Europe is the last major headwind currently affecting the euro. Historically, EUR/USD and the ratio of European to US natural gas prices track each other (Chart 9). This relationship reflects relative growth dynamics. A stronger Eurozone economy relative to the US pushes up the value of the euro and European natural gas, which is a commodity with heavy industrial usage.  However, since this summer, the spike in European natural gas prices has coincided with a decline in the euro. This divergence highlights the negative effect on European activity of the current energy shock, which raises fears of stagflation. The cross-Atlantic bond market dynamics confirm the notion that the energy shock increases the perceived stagflation risk in the Eurozone. German yields have risen relative to US ones because of a pick-up in inflation expectations, not real rates (Chart 10). The lack of traction for relative real rates is appropriate because market participants believe that the ECB wants to ignore the spike in energy prices. An environment of rising relative inflation expectations but stable relative real rates is very negative for any currency, including the euro. However, European inflation expectations should decrease relative to those of the US once European natural gas prices normalize, which we expect to take place in the coming months (Chart 10, bottom panel). This process will be very positive for the euro. Chart 9The European Energy Crisis Harms The Euro Chart 10Pricing In European Stagflation? Bottom Line: While euro pricing and technicals suggest EUR/USD will bottom soon, the economic environment is murkier. The dollar is a momentum currency, and its current strength feeds the euro’s weakness. China’s credit flows continue to decelerate, which hurts the euro; however, credit flows may stabilize in early 2022. The Fed is a tailwind for the dollar, but markets already price in this reality. Finally, the energy crisis hurts European growth and thus EUR/USD; nonetheless, the spike in natural gas prices will soon give way to a period of decline, which will lessen the pain for the euro. What To Do? When we balance the positives and negative for the euro, we are becoming more comfortable with buying EUR/USD outright, even if it is still a risky bet. To begin with, the big fundamental forces point to a firmer euro on an 18- to 24-month basis: BCA’s Foreign Exchange strategists see greater cyclical downside for the USD and believe the current rebound is a pronounced countertrend move within a multi-year dollar bear market. The euro will naturally benefit over the coming years from a weak greenback. EUR/USD is still inexpensive on long-term valuation metrics. Based on BCA’s purchasing power parity model, this pair trades 17% below its fair value. Moreover, the PPP estimate keeps rising in favor of the euro, a result of the Eurozone’s lower inflation compared to the US (Chart 11). The relative balance of payments favors the euro. The European economy generates a current account surplus of 3% of GDP compared to a current account deficit of 3.1% for the US. The US current account deficit is unlikely to narrow, even if the federal government’s budget hole declines because the private sector’s savings rate is falling even faster. Moreover, US real two-year rates remain well below those of its trading partners. Investors underweight Eurozone assets aggressively. For the past ten years, capital has consistently flowed out of the Euro Area relative to the US (Chart 12). European growth should converge toward the US next year, especially if Chinese credit activity stabilizes. Therefore, 2022 should witness a period of inflows into the Eurozone. Chart 11EUR/USD Significant Long-Term Discount Chart 12Investors Underweight Eurozone Assets We argued that the valuation and technical backdrop shows the Euro is becoming increasingly supportive and our timing model is clearly arguing against selling EUR/USD. However, the biggest technical risk is the momentum sensitivity of the dollar, which means that the euro’s weakness could last somewhat longer. Nevertheless, BCA’s Dollar Capitulation Index now warns of a pullback in the USD, especially as speculators are very long DXY futures (Chart 13). The biggest downside risk remains China’s credit trend. If it takes more time than we anticipate for Beijing to put an end to the credit impulse slowdown, the euro will experience greater downside pressure. Moreover, the longer it takes Beijing to reflate, the greater the chance of an uncontrolled selloff in the CNY, which would drag down the euro (Chart 14). Chart 13Is The Dollar Technically Vulnerable? Chart 14China Remains The Euro's Main Risk Despite this level of near-term uncertainty, we recommend investors buy the euro, with a target at 1.25, and a stop loss at 1.1175. Bottom Line: Conditions are falling in place for the countertrend decline in the euro to end soon. As a result, the euro should converge back toward the upward path driven by fundamentals. The greatest near-term risk remains the path of Chinese credit trends. We recommend investors buy the euro with a preliminary target at EUR1.25 and a stop loss at 1.1175.   Country Focus: A Well Discounted BoE Hike The Bank of England will begin to increase interest rates at its December meeting. The BoE’s communication has been clear that it does not see a need to wait between the end of its tapering program in December and the beginning of its hiking campaign. Recent comments by senior MPC members, including new Chief Economist Huw Pill, also suggest a rate hike is looming. Chart 15The BoE's Inflation Problem We see little reason to doubt the willingness of the MPC to start lifting the Bank Rate. UK Core CPI stands at 3.1% or 110 basis points above the BoE’s inflation target. Moreover, both market-based and survey-based long-term inflation expectations are well above 3.5%, which increases the risk of a dangerous dis-anchoring of UK inflation (Chart 15). UK economic activity remains inflationary. Wages are strong, climbing 7.2% in August. This number probably exaggerates the underlying wage growth due to compositional effects, but job creation remains robust and the unemployment rate fell to 5.2%. The BoE was concerned that the end of the furlough scheme last month would cause a jump in unemployment, but their fears have dwindled, because job vacancies stand at a record high and capex intentions are solid (Chart 16). The housing market continues to be a tailwind to growth. House prices are up 10% annually, which lifts household net worth considerably (Chart 17). The pace of transactions in the real estate market will slow this spring because the stamp duty holiday will end; however, low mortgage rates and expectations of further housing gains may fuel greater appreciation. This creates long-term financial stability risks for the UK because household leverage will rise. This worries the BoE. Chart 16The UK's Labor Market Strength Will Continue Chart 17Rising Household Net Worth Market participants already expect a hawkish BoE. A rate hike is priced in for December and the SONIA curve embeds almost two more increases in 2022. The 4.3% underperformance of the UK government bond index over the global benchmark in seven weeks also underscores the rapid adjustment in investors’ perceptions of the UK policy path. BCA’s Global Fixed-Income strategists have underweighted UK government bonds for two months, and they maintain a negative view over the coming quarters.  Nonetheless, the risk of a short-lived countertrend rebound in UK bonds’ relative performance is significant. However, it would be a temporary position squaring, while hedge funds and CTAs take profits. BCA’s Foreign Exchange strategists expect GBP/USD to rebound. Cable is oversold and trades at a 12% discount to BCA’s PPP fair-value estimate. GBP/USD is also hurt by fears that the BoE hikes will damage the UK economy. From a contrarian perspective, this creates a positive entry point to buy cable, especially because the pound should benefit from the anticipated dollar weakness and the euro’s upcoming rally. However, BCA’s FX strategists also foresee some decline in the pound versus the euro, because GBP is a low beta play on EUR/USD. Hence, the trade-weighted pound could remain flat to slightly down in the coming months. We stay neutral on UK small-cap stocks relative to large-cap equities, but we are putting them on an upgrade alert. Small-cap stocks benefit from the strength in the domestic economy; however, they are also extremely expensive compared to large-cap ones (Chart 18). The arbiter of performance will be profits. The forward EPS of small-caps have lagged behind those of large-caps by 9% since the COVID recession, after underperforming since 2016 (Chart 19). Small-caps’ relative profits are currently trying to stabilize, but the durability of this trend will be tested if the trade-weighted pound remains flat in the coming months. Thus, the EPS of small-cap shares must regain more ground before moving more aggressively in this market. Chart 18UK Small Cap Are Pricey Chart 19Follow The Profits Bottom Line: On the back of a strong UK economy and significant inflationary forces, the BoE will start elevating interest rates this December. The market already prices in this outcome. Nonetheless, UK bonds should continue to underperform the global benchmark, and cable has upside, even if the near-term outlook favors the EUR over the GBP. We are putting UK small-cap stocks on a buy alert. They are expensive, but a turnaround in profits would solve this problem. Market Focus: A Quick Take On Italian Equities The Italian equity market remains Europe’s problem child. The Italian MSCI index has underperformed the rest of the Euro Area by 40% since 2010. This underperformance holds even after adjusting for sectoral differences, although it becomes less dramatic (Chart 20, top panel). Despite this underperformance, Italian equities have managed to outperform their Spanish counterparts by 27% since 2010, but this outperformance dissipates once sectoral difference are accounted for (Chart 20, bottom panel). The RoE of Italian non-financial listed equities is equivalent to the rest of the Eurozone, but it only reflects elevated financial leverage, as is the case in Spain (Chart 21). Italy’s RoA is poor, because Italy’s excess capital stocks hurts its return on capital. As a result, Italian equities continue to face a structural handicap. Chart 20A Problem Child Chart 21Italy's Return On Asset Is Poor The good run in Italian equities in absolute terms faces headwinds. Italian stocks are very sensitive to the global business cycle; however, they often respond with a delay and in an exaggerated fashion to decelerations in the global PMI (Chart 22, top panel). Moreover, since 2010, widening European high-yield corporate bond spreads have preceded falling Italian stock prices. Thus, the recent slide in the global PMI and the widening in European high-yield OAS create a period of vulnerability for Italian equities. Finally, Italian share prices have overshot the path implied by US yields (Chart 22, bottom panel). Nonetheless, Italian stocks may be sniffing out further increases in global yields. The cleanest way to play these vulnerabilities in the Italian is via a short bet against Spain. A steeper global yield curve will help both markets due to their heavy exposure to financials. However, we still favor Spanish financials, which benefit from higher RoEs than their Italian counterparts (Chart 23) and lower NPLs. As a result, the forward EPS of Spanish financials should begin to outperform those of Italian financials. Chart 22Some Risks To Italian Stocks Chart 23Spanish Banks Are Better Placed To Benefit From Rising Global Yields   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com Jeremie Peloso, Associate Editor JeremieP@bcaresearch.com Tactical Recommendations Cyclical Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Trades Currency Performance Fixed Income Performance Equity Performance