Developed Countries

Executive Summary Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias The Fed is pacing a globally synchronized monetary-policy tightening cycle as the war in Ukraine escalates, following Russia’s mobilization of 300k reserve forces. Despite central-bank tightening, the intensification of the war increases the odds of higher inflation.  This will keep the USD well bid. Russia’s threat to cut oil supplies to states observing the G7 price cap will test US and EU resolve as winter sets in.  Retaliatory output cuts by Russia could send Brent crude oil prices above $200/bbl. The Biden administration remains fearful its G7 price cap and EU sanctions on Russian oil exports will spike prices.  The US will make 10mm barrels of crude from its SPR available in November as a palliative.  Our base case Brent forecast is slightly lower, averaging $105/bbl this year from $110/bbl, due to weaker realized prices.  On the back of this, we expect 4Q22 Brent to average $106/bbl, and for 2023 to average $118/bbl, up slightly vs. last month.  WTI will trade $3-$5/bbl lower. Bottom Line: The economic war pitting the EU and its allies against Russia could escalate and widen as more Russian troops pour into Ukraine.  This raises the odds of expanded conflict outside Ukraine, and higher war-driven inflation.  Our baseline forecast for 2023 remains intact, with a strong bias to the upside.  We remain long the COMT and XOP ETFs to retain exposure to commodities. Feature The Fed is pacing a globally synchronized monetary-policy tightening cycle at a time when the war in Ukraine is escalating. Russia’s mobilization of a reported 300k reserve forces raises the spectre of an expansion of the Ukraine war – perhaps crossing into a NATO state’s border – if tactical nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons are used. This is a low-probability outcome, but it would increase the odds of significantly higher inflation should it come to pass.1 The US central bank lifted its Fed funds rate 75 bps Wednesday to a range of 3% - 3.25% – and strongly indicated further rate hikes will follow. The Fed is one of numerous banks increasing policy rates. This synchronous monetary-policy tightening has not been observed for 50 years, and raises the odds of a global economic recession, according to the World Bank.2 The World Bank notes that since 1970, recessions have been “preceded by a significant weakening of global growth in the previous year, as has happened recently,” and, importantly, “all previous global recessions coincided with sharp slowdowns or outright recessions in several major economies.” The withdrawal of monetary and fiscal support “are necessary to contain inflationary pressures, but their mutually compounding effects could produce larger impacts than intended, both in tightening financial conditions and in steepening the growth slowdown.” Markets are acting in a manner consistent with this assessment, but, in our view, need to expand the risk set to include a higher likelihood of a war widening beyond Ukraine. While this is not our base case, it is worthwhile recalling the link between war and inflation. Prior to and during the 20th century’s two world wars, then the Korean and Vietnam wars, US CPI inflation rose sharply (Chart 1).3 Price controls and tighter monetary policy were needed to address these inflationary episodes. Chart 1A Wider Ukraine War Would Stoke Inflation Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Stronger USD Remains Oil-Demand Headwind Fed policy will continue to push US interest rates higher, which will push the USD higher on the back of continued global demand for dollar-denominated assets. This will keep the cost of most commodities ex-US higher in local currency terms, which, all else equal, will weaken commodity demand in general, and oil demand in particular. This will be compounded if tighter monetary policy at systemically important central banks (led by the Fed) results in a global recession in 2023. This is especially true for EM oil demand: The income elasticity of EM oil consumption is 0.61, which means a 1% decrease (increase) in real EM GDP translates into a 0.61% decrease (increase) in oil demand, all else equal. In our base case, we expect global oil demand to grow 2.2mm b/d this year and 1.91mm b/d next year, roughly in line with the US EIA’s and IEA’s estimates (Chart 2). We expect EM demand will increase 1.25mm b/d this year, and 1.90mm b/d next year, accounting for almost all of global growth. As before, we expect China’s oil demand growth to be de minimus this year, on the back of its zero-tolerance COVID-19 policy. EM remains the key driver of our global oil demand assumptions, which, in our modeling, are a function of real income (GDP). Offsetting the stronger USD effects on demand is gas-to-oil switching demand, resulting from record-high LNG prices this year. This will add 800k b/d to demand globally this winter (November – March). Chart 2Global Oil Demand Holding Up Global Oil Demand Holding Up Global Oil Demand Holding Up Oil Supply Getting Tighter Oil supply will remain challenged this year and next, as core OPEC 2.0 – the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – approaches the limit of what it can supply to the market and still retain sufficient spare capacity to meet unexpected supply shocks (Chart 3). Among the anticipated shocks we believe core OPEC 2.0 is aware of is the loss of 2mm b/d of Russian crude oil output over the next year, due to the imposition of EU embargoes on seaborne crude oil and refined products, which will go into effect 5 December 2022 and 5 February 2023, respectively. The continued inability of non-core OPEC 2.0 states to maintain higher production – “The Other Guys” in our nomenclature – is another foreseeable shock (Chart 4). This is becoming acute for OPEC 2.0, given The Other Guys account for most of the 3.6mm b/d of below-quota output currently registered by the producer coalition.4 This is a record gap between expected production and actual production from OPEC 2.0, which was registered in August. Chart 3Core OPEC 2.0 Conserves Supplies Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Chart 4'Other Guys' Production Keeps Falling Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Net, demand will continue to outpace supply in our base case (Chart 5, Table 1). This will require continued inventory draws for the next year or so, as core OPEC 2.0 continues to conserve supplies (Chart 6). Chart 5Demand Continues To Outpace Supply Demand Continues To Outpace Supply Demand Continues To Outpace Supply Chart 6Inventory Will Continue Drawing Inventory Will Continue Drawing Inventory Will Continue Drawing Table 1BCA Global Oil Supply - Demand Balances (MMb/d, Base Case Balances) To Dec23 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Russian Wild Card Battlefield losses in Ukraine are forcing Russia’s military to activate some 300k reserve troops. These losses again are prompting veiled threats to deploy nuclear and perhaps chemical weapons, which drew a sharp warning from US President Biden.5 Further economic losses will begin mounting in a little more than two months, as the first of two major EU oil-import embargoes and a ban on insuring/re-insuring vessels carrying Russian crude and products takes hold. In addition, a US-led G7 price cap on Russian oil purchases will go into effect with the December embargo on seaborne crude imports into the EU.6 We continue to expect Russia will be forced to shut in ~ 2mm b/d of crude oil production by the end of next year – taking output from a little more than 10mm b/d to ~ 8mm b/d.7 Russian’s President Putin already has threatened to cut off oil supplies to anyone abiding by the G7 price cap.8 In our modeling, a unilateral 2mm b/d cut in Russian output – in addition to the lost sales from the EU embargoes and insurance/reinsurance bans – would take Brent prices above $200/bbl (Chart 7). On the downside, a severe global recession that removes 2mm b/d of demand next year could send prices below $60/bbl. Equally plausible cases for either outcome can be made, given current supply-demand fundamentals and the geopolitical backdrop discussed above. This can be seen in the lack of skew in the options markets, which is measured by the difference in out-of-the-money call and put implied volatilities (Chart 8). The skew sits close to zero at present – meaning options buyers are not giving higher odds to a sharp upside or downside move at present.9 Chart 7Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias Chart 8Option Skew Shows Up Or Down Moves Equally Likely Option Skew Shows Up Or Down Moves Equally Likely Option Skew Shows Up Or Down Moves Equally Likely In our modeling and analysis, we continue to believe the balance of risk is to the upside. As can be seen in Chart 6, inventories are below the 2010-14 five-year average – OPEC 2.0’s original target when it was formed – which means KSA and the UAE will be able to respond to any demand shocks that cause unintended inventory accumulation (e.g., the sort that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic or the OPEC market-share war of 2015-16). Managing the upside risk is more difficult: KSA and the UAE are close to the limits of what they can supply and still carry sufficient spare capacity to meet unexpected production losses. KSA’s crude oil output is just over 11mm b/d, and the UAE’s is at 3.2mm b/d, according to OPEC’s Monthly Oil Market Report. This puts both within 1mm b/d of their max production capacity of 12mm and 4mm b/d. Both got close to producing at these max levels in early 2020, when Russia provoked a market share war; this was quickly reversed as a magnitude of the COVID-19 demand destruction became apparent. The only other large producer outside the OPEC 2.0 coalition capable of increasing and sustaining higher output is the US shales, which are producing at 7.8mm b/d and have pushed total US crude oil output to 12.2mm b/d (Chart 9). Leading producers in the shales have foreclosed any sharp increase in output this year, given tight labor markets and services and equipment markets in the US. Chart 9US Shales Close To Max Output US Shales Close To Max Output US Shales Close To Max Output Investment Implications Global crude oil markets remain tight, with demand continuing to exceed supply. The risk that the economic war pitting the EU and its allies against Russia could expand to a more kinetic confrontation involving additional states is higher, as more Russian troops are called up to serve in Ukraine. If the additional troops do not reverse Russia’s battlefield losses – or if Ukraine looks like it will win this war – Putin likely will feel cornered, and get more desperate.10 We believe Putin will first attempt to impose as much economic pain on the West as possible by cutting off all natural gas and oil flows to the EU and states and firms observing the G7 price cap. However, if that does not force the West to relent on its economic war with Russia, a war with NATO could evolve in which tactical nukes or other weapons of mass destruction are employed. At that point, Putin would have concluded there would be nothing he could do to restore Russia’s standing as a world power. Any plume – nuclear, biological or chemical (NBC) – that crosses a NATO border likely would be treated as an act of war. NATO would have to act at that point. This is not our expectation, nor is it any part of our base case. But it is a higher non-trivial risk than it was last month or last week. This raises the odds of higher war-driven inflation, as well, which will further complicate central-bank monetary policy at a time of war. Our baseline forecast remains intact, with a strong bias to the upside. We remain long the COMT and XOP ETFs to retain exposure to commodities.   Robert P. Ryan  Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish In its September update, the US EIA reported natural gas consumption will hit record levels in 2022, increasing by 3.6 Bcf/d to just under 87 Bcf/d on average, led by increases in the electric power residential and commercial sectors (Chart 10). US natural gas consumption in the electric power sector will increase in 2022 due to limitations at coal-fired power plants and weather-driven demand. It is expected to decrease in 4Q22 and in 2023, due to more renewable electricity generation capacity. Natural gas consumption in the residential and commercial sectors for 2023 is expected to be similar as 2022 levels. Base Metals: Bullish According to Eurometaux, a consortium of European metal producers, approximately 50% of the EU’s zinc and aluminum production capacity is offline due to high power prices. More operations are expected to shut as European power prices remain elevated and metal prices drop on recessionary fears (Chart 11). The decision to reopen a smelter following a shutdown is expensive and can result in long wait times. This will make the bloc’s manufacturers heavily reliant on metal imports from other states, which likely will lead to higher pollution from these plants. Aluminum supply is particularly vulnerable to this power crisis since one ton needs an eye-watering 15 megawatt-hours of electricity – enough to power five homes in Germany for a year. Precious Metals: Neutral The Fed’s additional 75-bps rate hike will strengthen the USD and weaken gold prices. Geopolitical risk has been a tailwind for the greenback thus far, as investors rush to the USD instead of the yellow metal for safe-haven investments. If this trend continues, along with further Fed rate increases, the additional risk arising from Putin’s reserve force mobilization and possible expansion of the Ukraine war will boost the USD and leave gold in the doldrums.   Chart 10 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Chart 11 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22 Oil Markets Anxiously Enter 4Q22   Footnotes 1     Please see Vladimir Putin mobilises army reserves to support Ukraine invasion, published by ft.com on September 21, 2022. 2     Please see Is a Global Recession Imminent?, published by the World Bank on September 15, 2022.  The report notes, “Policymakers need to stand ready to manage the potential spillovers from globally synchronous withdrawal of policies supporting growth. On the supply-side, they need to put in place measures to ease the constraints that confront labor markets, energy markets, and trade networks.” 3    Please see One hundred years of price change: the Consumer Price Index and the American inflation experience, published by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics in April 2014.  4    Please see OPEC+ supply shortfall now stands at 3.5% of global oil demand, published 20 September 2022 by reuters.com. 5    Please see Biden warns Putin over nuclear, chemical weapons, published by politico.eu on September 17, 2022. 6    Please see EU Russian Oil Embargoes, Higher Prices, which we published on August 18, 2022, for discussion. 7    We include Russia among “The Other Guys” in our balances estimates.  8    Please see Explainer: The G7's price cap on Russian oil begins to take shape, published by reuters.com on September 19, 2022. 9    We use the standard measure of skew – i.e., the difference between 25-delta calls and puts – to determine whether option market participants are discounting a higher likelihood of an up or down move, respectively. 10   Please see CIA director warns Putin's 'desperation' over Russia's failures in Ukraine could lead him to use nukes, published by businessinsider.com on April 15, 2022. Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022

Executive Summary There’s Value In TIPS There's Value In TIPS There's Value In TIPS A survey of economic and financial market indicators suggests that we are not yet close to the end of the Fed’s tightening cycle. This argues for a continued flattening of the yield curve and one more push higher in bond yields before the end of the cyclical bond bear market. While headline inflation has rolled over, there is so far little indication of a slowdown in core price appreciation. We see core CPI reaching 3.6% during the next 12 months, driven by decelerating goods prices but sticky wage growth and services inflation. The TIPS market is discounting an overly sanguine view of headline inflation for the next 12 months, and there is value in owning TIPS versus nominal Treasuries. Bottom Line: Investors should reduce portfolio duration to ‘below-benchmark’ and hold a position in 5-year/30-year Treasury curve flatteners. Investors should also overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries and own 2-year/10-year TIPS breakeven inflation curve flatteners. Feature US bond yields continued their ascent last week, spurred on by August’s surprisingly high core CPI print and the perception that the Fed will have to tighten policy even more quickly to bring inflation back down. Currently, the market is discounting that the Fed will lift the funds rate to 4.61% by April of next year and then bring it back down to 4.26% by the end of 2023 (Chart 1). Chart 1Rate Expectations Rate Expectations Rate Expectations This market-implied interest rate path would involve 225 bps of tightening at the next 5 FOMC meetings, or an average rate increase of +45 bps per meeting. With a 75 basis point rate increase looking like a lock for this week, market pricing is consistent with additional 50 basis point increases at the final two meetings of this year (November and December) and then two more 25 basis point rate hikes in Q1 2023. After that, the market anticipates that the tightening cycle will be over. Our view continues to be that the peak in the fed funds rate will occur later than April 2023 and that, while a pause in the Fed’s tightening cycle is likely at some point next year, inflation will be strong enough to preclude outright rate cuts. In terms of investment strategy, last week’s report presented empirical evidence showing that, on average, Treasury yields peak 1-2 months before the last rate hike of the cycle.1 In fact, in the seven Fed tightening cycles that we analyzed, the 10-year Treasury yield always peaked within a window spanning four months before the last rate hike and four months after (Table 1). This analysis suggests that even if the fed funds rate peaks in April, as is implied by the market, bond yields likely have one more leg higher before the end of the cyclical bear market. Table 1Timing Fed Tightening Cycles One Last Hurrah For Bond Bears One Last Hurrah For Bond Bears While we have been consistently highlighting that the market is not pricing-in a sufficiently high average fed funds rate for 2023, we have been recommending an ‘at benchmark’ portfolio duration stance on the view that falling inflation could briefly send bond yields lower in the near term. The 10-year Treasury yield did fall back to 2.60% on August 1, but it then rebounded quickly and has continued to head higher since. With Treasury yields unlikely to re-test those depths anytime soon, we recommend shifting to a ‘below-benchmark’ portfolio duration stance to play the final leg higher in bond yields before a US recession ends the cyclical bond bear market. The next section of this report surveys nine cyclical economic indicators and argues that the balance of evidence suggests that the fed funds rate’s peak will occur later than April 2023. Then, the final section of this report discusses our recommended TIPS investment strategy in light of last week’s CPI report and our outlook for inflation. Tracking The Tightening Cycle One of the most useful tools in our arsenal for assessing the state of the interest rate cycle is our Fed Monitor. The Fed Monitor is a composite of 47 economic and financial market variables that has been designed to output a positive value when the data recommend interest rate hikes and a negative value when rate cuts are required. Historically, the Monitor does a good job of lining up with the actual path of the fed funds rate (Chart 2). Chart 2Fed Monitor Says More Tightening Required Fed Monitor Says More Tightening Required Fed Monitor Says More Tightening Required The Fed Monitor is currently down off its highs, but at 1.03 it is well above the zero line. Looking at past tightening cycles, we find that the Monitor has averaged 0.41 on the day of the last rate hike of a cycle, with a range of outcomes spanning -0.49 to +0.93. Notably, the +0.93 upper-end of that range occurred in 1995, a time when the Fed only delivered a modest amount of policy easing before pivoting back to tightening in 1999. The variables in our Fed Monitor can be grouped into three categories: (i) economic growth variables, (ii) inflation variables and (iii) financial market variables. Interestingly, we observe that the Economic Growth component of our Monitor has dipped into negative territory while the Inflation and Financial Conditions components continue to argue for tighter policy (Chart 2, bottom 3 panels). A negative Economic Growth component suggests that we are getting closer to the end of the tightening cycle, but the Fed will likely stay hawkish and tolerate an even deeper negative reading from Economic Growth as long as inflation remains high. In addition to our Fed Monitor, we have identified nine economic indicators (some included in the Fed Monitor and some not) that are particularly relevant for the Fed’s policy stance. In this week’s report, we look at the message these indicators were sending on the day of the last rate hike of seven past tightening cycles. The indicators are: The Sahm Rule: Economist Claudia Sahm has noted that a recession always occurs when the 3-month moving average of the unemployment rate rises by more than 0.5% off its trailing 12-month low.2 We include the unemployment rate’s deviation from its 12-month low as a measure of labor market utilization. Employment Momentum: We look at the 6-month growth rate in nonfarm payrolls as a measure of momentum in the labor market. Inflation: We use 12-month core PCE as a measure of inflation that is most closely related to the Fed’s target. Inflation Momentum: To measure momentum in inflation we look at the difference between 3-month core PCE and 12-month core PCE. Labor Market Tightness: Using responses from the Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Survey, we look at the number of people who describe jobs as “plentiful” minus the number who describe jobs as “hard to get”. Economic Growth: We use the ISM Manufacturing PMI as a simple measure of the trend in aggregate demand in the US economy. Housing: To assess trends in the housing market we look at the 12-month moving average in housing starts minus the 24-month moving average. Financial Conditions: We use the Goldman Sachs Financial Conditions Index to assess whether financial conditions are accommodative or restrictive. The Yield Curve: We look at the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope to ascertain whether the bond market perceives the monetary policy stance as accommodative or restrictive. Table 2A lists the nine indicators described above and shows their values on the day of the last rate hike of seven past tightening cycles. We also include the current reading from each indicator. Finally, we shade in red every cell that we deem consistent with the Fed stopping its tightening cycle. To make this determination we compare the value on the day of the last rate hike to the median value witnessed on the day of the last hike across all seven tightening cycles. We don’t use median values for the Goldman Sachs Financial Conditions Index or the Treasury slope. Rather, we say that an inverted yield curve and a Financial Conditions reading above 100 are both consistent with the end of rate hikes. Table 2AEconomic Indicators At The End Of Fed Tightening Cycles One Last Hurrah For Bond Bears One Last Hurrah For Bond Bears The last column of Table 2A simply adds up the number of red cells in each row. As of today, we see that only 2 out of nine indicators are consistent with the end of the tightening cycle. The end of a tightening cycle has never occurred with less than four indicators flashing red. Table 2B takes a slightly more sophisticated approach to the same exercise. Rather than simply comparing above or below the median, we rank each indicator as a percentile relative to its value on the day of the last rate hike across seven different tightening cycles. We then combine those percentile ranks with an equal weighting to get an “End of Tightening Score”. Larger values are consistent with a greater likelihood that the tightening cycle will end and lower values are consistent with a lower likelihood. Currently, the End of Tightening Score stands at 28%, lower than on the day of the last rate hike in all of the cycles we analyzed. Table 2BEconomic Indicators At The End Of Fed Tightening Cycles: Percentile Ranks One Last Hurrah For Bond Bears One Last Hurrah For Bond Bears As is the case with our Fed Monitor, the closest End of Tightening Score to today’s occurred in 1995. One key difference between 1995 and today is that core inflation was running much closer to target in 1995. This gave the Fed scope to fine tune its policy stance without risking its inflation fighting credibility. That flexibility is not available to the Fed in today’s high inflation environment. Bottom Line: A survey of economic and financial market indicators suggests that we are not yet close to the end of the Fed’s tightening cycle. This argues for a continued flattening of the yield curve and one more push higher in bond yields before the end of the cyclical bond bear market. Investors should set portfolio duration to ‘below benchmark’ and maintain a position in 5-year/30-year Treasury curve flatteners.3 The TIPS Market Is Too Complacent August’s month-over-month core CPI print came in well above expectations at +0.57%, sending bond yields higher and risk assets lower last week. Zooming out, while falling gasoline prices appear to have shifted the trend in headline inflation, there is so far little evidence of a meaningful move down in core or trimmed mean measures of CPI (Chart 3). Chart 3No Slowdown In Core CPI No Slowdown In Core CPI No Slowdown In Core CPI Chart 4Core CPI Forecast Core CPI Forecast Core CPI Forecast In a recent Special Report, we went through the five major components of CPI (energy, food, shelter, goods and services) and came up with 12-month forecasts for both core and headline inflation.4  For core inflation, we forecast that it will fall to 3.6% during the next 12 months (Chart 4). The main driver of the drop will be a return of goods inflation to pre-pandemic levels (Chart 4, panel 3). We anticipate only a minor pullback in shelter inflation (Chart 4, panel 2) and that services inflation will remain elevated, driven by strong wage growth (Chart 4, bottom panel). Recently, we have seen some evidence that home prices and rents on new leases are decelerating, no doubt a response to high and rising mortgage rates. That said, we don’t anticipate much pass through from those trends into shelter inflation during the next 12 months. First, home price appreciation leads shelter CPI by 18 months (Chart 5A). This means that we shouldn’t expect falling home prices to meaningfully impact shelter inflation until the end of 2023. Second, rental growth on new leases as measured by Zillow and Apartment List has clearly decelerated, but it is still running much hotter than shelter CPI (Chart 5B). Given the limited historical track record, it’s very difficult to say how much (if any) of the recent deceleration in rental growth will ultimately pass through to the CPI. Chart 5AHome Prices & Shelter CPI Home Prices & Shelter CPI Home Prices & Shelter CPI Chart 5BDecelerating Rents Decelerating Rents Decelerating Rents In our research, we have found that measures of labor market utilization are the most important variables to include in any model of shelter inflation. For ease of forecasting, the model shown in Chart 4 and in the top panel of Chart 6 uses the unemployment rate as its measure of labor market tightness. This model works well, but it arguably understates shelter inflation because it doesn’t include a variable capturing wage growth. If we replace the unemployment rate in our model with the more comprehensive aggregate weekly payrolls measure, then we get a much tighter fit and a model that does a better job explaining the recent surge in shelter CPI (Chart 6, bottom panel).5 All in all, we conclude that our expectation that shelter inflation will fall from 6.3% to 4.7% during the next 12 months may wind up being a tad optimistic. When we combine our forecast for 3.6% core inflation with two scenarios for the oil price – a benign one based on what is priced into the futures curve and another based on the forecasts of our commodity strategists – we get an expected range of 2.1% to 4.7% for headline CPI during the next 12 months (Chart 7). According to our Golden Rule of TIPS Investing, if 12-month headline CPI comes in above the current 1-year CPI swap rate then TIPS will outperform nominal Treasuries during the 12-month investment horizon.6 Chart 6Modeling Shelter Inflation Modeling Shelter Inflation Modeling Shelter Inflation Chart 7There's Value In TIPS There's Value In TIPS There's Value In TIPS At present, the 1-year CPI swap rate is 2.76%, near the bottom of our expected range of outcomes for 12-month headline CPI. It seems to us that a lot of things will have to go right for inflation to come in below market expectations during the next year. For this reason, we think it makes sense for investors to overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries in US bond portfolios. Chart 8Own Inflation Curve Flatteners Own Inflation Curve Flatteners Own Inflation Curve Flatteners Additionally, we see a lot of value in owning TIPS breakeven curve flatteners (Chart 8). The 2-year and 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rates are both currently 2.38%, meaning that the 2-year/10-year TIPS breakeven slope is at zero. Higher-than-expected inflation during the next 12 months will put more pressure on the front-end of the breakeven curve than the long end, flattening the curve. Further, logic dictates that an inverted inflation curve is more consistent with an environment where the Fed is fighting above-target inflation than a positively sloped one. There will come a time when it makes sense for the inflation curve to move back into positive territory, but that won’t be until the Fed has brought inflation down much closer to its target. Bottom Line: The inflation outlook priced into markets for the next 12 months is too benign. Investors should overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries and own TIPS breakeven inflation curve flatteners.   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1  Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “A Brief History Of Fed Tightening Cycles”, dated September 13, 2022. 2  https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ES_THP_Sahm_web_20190506.pdf 3  For more details on this curve trade please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Great Soft Landing Debate”, dated August 9, 2022. 4  Please see US Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of TIPS Investing”, dated August 23, 2022. 5  Aggregate weekly payrolls = nonfarm employment x average weekly hours x average hourly earnings 6   Please see US Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of TIPS Investing”, dated August 23, 2022. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns