Long Wave/Technology

The conventional economic thinking about the likely impact of AI is misguided because it extrapolates linearly from what AI can do today to what it can do tomorrow. Just as the investment community and the broader public were blindsided by the exponential rise in Covid cases during the early days of the pandemic, they will be blindsided by how quickly AI transforms society and the economy.

In this volume of BCA Crypto we compare gold against bitcoin. We begin by dispelling some common misconceptions that investors have about gold, and why, at its core, gold is driven more by belief than by intrinsic value. We then proceed to explain why gold still serves an important role in our economy and how it differs from fiat money. Later, we explain how bitcoin is different from other cryptocurrencies, and why it could rival gold as a reserve asset in the future. Finally, we discuss the outlook for bitcoin, as well as which macro factors investor should watch.

In this week’s report, we look at the current de-dollarization discussion within the context of the USD’s near-term cyclical outlook, and whether it warrants a bullish or bearish stance.

The regulatory clampdown on Chinese platform companies is over. However, these companies have entered a new phase of active government control. Going forward, most platform companies’ strategic and business decisions will prioritize national interests, at the expense of shareholder interests. After the recent sharp outperformance, we suggest reducing the allocation to China's Investable Index from neutral to underweight within both global and EM equity portfolios.

Russia’s conflict with the West will escalate and trigger more bad news for risky assets this fall. Beyond that, stalemate looms. Latin American equities present a potential opportunity once the macro and geopolitical backdrop improve.

Executive Summary Dollar Still The Largest Global Reserve Currency Dollar Still Dominating Global Reserves Dollar Still Dominating Global Reserves The rise of cryptocurrencies like stablecoins theoretically pose risks to fiat currencies and their general use. In the US, the Federal Reserve will look to adopt a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) – a digital dollar – this decade, to stave off these risks and usher in a new era of central bank money. A digital dollar would likely be integrated as seamlessly as possible into the current monetary regime, thereby maintaining an intermediated role played by existing financial sector actors as well as operating alongside existing circulating currency. The US dollar will eventually face rising competition from digital currencies, both at home and abroad. While other central banks make headway into developing their own CBDCs, China is by far the most advanced. China’s digital yuan will not resolve all of China’s problems with internationalizing its currency but it will create new opportunities. Public and political pushback will occur and will slow adoption of a digital dollar. Gridlock in 2023 may prove to be another headwind. To adopt a digital dollar, politicians will need to work along bipartisan lines to ensure the US remains at the forefront of digital and monetary innovation, especially as foreign competition on CBDCs rises. Recommendation (Tactical) Initiation Date  Return Long DXY (Dollar Index) 23-FEB-22 10.7% Bottom Line: Policymakers will adopt a CBDC – a digital dollar – this decade. Political pushback may slow adoption, but foreign competition will overcome domestic constraints. Feature Technological innovation over the past decade has given rise to a new asset class – digital assets. Investors are most familiar with cryptocurrencies, and to a lesser extent, non-fungible tokens and decentralized finance-based lending, among others. These assets have witnessed a boom and bust over the past few years (Chart 1). Chart 1Manias: Then And Now Manias: Then And Now Manias: Then And Now Cryptocurrencies have been touted to have money-like characteristics, the most popular being Bitcoin, and others like stablecoins. Stablecoins are mostly used as a medium of exchange between fiat money and cryptocurrencies and vice versa. They are pegged to fiat money and often backed by highly liquid traditional assets1 to maintain their pegs. But cryptocurrencies do not exhibit the traits of durable money today. However, the technological innovation of digital currency represents a natural evolution of money that is irreversible and could someday possess the main characteristics of money: a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and store of value. Cryptocurrencies with money-like qualities theoretically pose a challenge to fiat currencies, i.e. those issued by governments that are not backed by any underlying real asset but rather by trust in government institutions, including the treasury and central bank. Not that trust is a poor basis for a currency. But that trust could fail and new trust could be placed in cryptocurrencies. Governments could eventually lose control of the money supply and payments system, suffer from financial instability, fail to provide regulatory oversight, or fail to prevent the illicit use of digital assets for criminal gain. The same technology driving growth in digital assets has led central banks the world around to research and in some cases develop CBDCs. For an introductory guide to CBDCs, see BCA’s “The Investor’s Guide To Central Bank Digital Currencies.” CBDC research and development are at varying stages across the world’s central banks.2 In the US, the Federal Reserve (Fed) continues to research a CBDC (digital dollar) and its use-case, or justification for being. The Fed has made no commitment to designing a digital dollar anytime soon. But we bet that the Fed’s position will change in coming years. Introducing a digital dollar will reduce the various risks associated with cryptocurrencies whilst also creating efficiencies in the US economy. These efficiencies will also transverse into cross-border efficiencies. Globally, central banks are showing increasing activity in developing CBDCs and introducing a digital dollar would help the Fed maintain monetary dominance across the world while staving off cryptocurrencies, especially stablecoins. The Fed won’t sit idle as a global monetary revolution unfolds. But the policy front is fraught with challenges. Policy makers in the US have expressed mixed views on adopting a digital dollar. Some suggest the Fed would exercise even more control over monetary policy than it does today. Others note risks to consumer data privacy, which could be exploited by government. Public opinion is also mixed with no clear understanding of or need for a digital dollar. Commercial bank business interests may come under attack too, with a digital dollar scalping profit margins from banks, depending on the type and extent of the CBDC operating model employed. Ultimately, the US will want to maintain its position as the global monetary leader. Continued dollar dominance in the global economy is strategically advantageous for the US, especially in a hypo-globalizing world (Chart 2). Ensuring ongoing monetary dominance while rooting out domestic competition from stablecoins will be aided by adopting a digital dollar. Chart 2Dollar Still Dominating Global Reserves Dollar Still Dominating Global Reserves Dollar Still Dominating Global Reserves Bottom Line: The Fed will most likely adopt a digital dollar within the decade. The Fed And A Digital Dollar The Fed has been actively researching a digital dollar for several years with growing research on design, implementation, and necessity. As it stands, the Fed has not committed to introducing a digital dollar in the foreseeable future. But what would a digital dollar look like and what role would it play in the economy if the Fed decided to introduce one? CBDC Model Briefly, the Fed could choose from three different CBDC operating models: unilateral, synthetic, or intermediated (Diagram 1). A unilateral model would mean the Fed performs all CBDC related functions including direct interaction with end-users. A synthetic model would mean non-Fed actors issuing money backed by Fed assets. Diagram 1Three CBDC Operating Models Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Realistically, a unilateral and synthetic digital dollar are unlikely. The former would crowd out traditional banking services, while the latter would let actors other than the Fed issue money, violating the Federal Reserve Act. Hence the Fed will most likely pursue an intermediated CBDC model. This model entails digital dollar issuance by the Fed but includes a role for private sector firms to interact with end-users. The intermediary role would be filled by financial firms but also other types of companies such as payment service providers and mobile phone operators. This means the Fed would not totally crowd out existing players across the payment and financial services space. An intermediated model would require the central bank to regulate and oversee other actors, which adds an extra layer of legal and operational complexity to implementation. But it is the model most consistent with the US’s combination of federal government and liberal capitalism, and the model cited by the Fed to most likely be adopted.3 The intermediated model will align with the current two-tier system currently in place (Diagram 2). Digital dollars will feature in both wholesale and retail transactions. Wholesale involves commercial banks and regulated financial intermediaries, while retail involves individuals and non-financial businesses. The model would also operate alongside existing paper money. A digital dollar would be a liability on the Fed, denominated in dollars, and would form an integral part of base money supply (M0). It would be distributed like, and act as a complement to, dollar bills and could be used in transactions conducted in currency and reserves. It would be legal tender just like the paper dollar. Diagram 2Two-Tier Monetary Regime System Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar Needs The Fed has stated that a digital dollar should, among other things, meet certain criteria before adoption (Table 1). Some of these criteria are already met. Others will be met with adoption. A digital dollar will benefit households, businesses, and the economy at large. For example, a digital dollar would enhance payment transparency, thereby supporting the Fed’s objective to promote safe and efficient payments. And depending on design choices, digital transactions could offer degrees of traceability and aggregate payment data could be analyzed in real time to provide insights into economic health and activity. Table 1Fed Criteria For CBDC Adoption Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Further, a digital dollar would promote diversification of the payments system, thereby increasing the safety and efficiency of US payment infrastructure. It may also attract new actors offering services related to the digital dollar, spurring financial innovation and fostering financial integration. The payments system is already broadly efficient but adding another layer of digitization with a digital dollar would mean that the US economy would be better positioned for the evolution of the digital economy over the next decade and beyond. The need for broad stakeholder support will be a difficult criterion to meet, however. There would need to be more engagement with the public, inter-government agencies, and Congress. For now, these “needs” outlined by the Fed are more than half met, signaling that a digital dollar could come to fruition within the decade from a policy perspective. International advances on this front will spur US policy makers into action even if they are disinclined. Bottom Line: The needs outlined by the Fed to adopt a digital dollar have been mostly met which ticks off one of the policy implementation checkboxes. There are gains to be had across the economy by introducing a digital dollar, ranging from a more efficient payments system to financial inclusion and decreasing transactions costs. Domestic Competition The proliferation of stablecoins has been noted by government agencies around the world. The Fed too has been keeping note. By the end of 2021, stablecoins had a relatively small market capitalization compared to the broader cryptocurrency market, approximately 6%. Now, stablecoins account for almost 16% of cryptocurrency market capitalization. But trading volumes point to stablecoins having a much larger role in transactions (Chart 3). Stablecoins resolve some of the problems of faith and trust that bedevil cryptocurrencies not backed by traditional assets. Chart 3Stablecoins Rise In Popularity Stablecoins Rise In Popularity Stablecoins Rise In Popularity Stablecoins pose two key threats that a digital dollar will essentially nullify: Systemic risk: A growing stablecoin market that is increasingly backed by traditional, high liquid assets could create systemic risk in traditional asset markets. An excessive rise or fall in demand for stablecoins would cause volatility in the liquid assets that back them. Moreover, for example, a fire sale in the stablecoin market would cause demand to fall excessively relative to the backing asset. Prices between stablecoins and the backing asset would diverge, potentially breaking the peg and resulting in further price divergence. And more broadly, high volatility from crypto markets can penetrate traditional or risk-free markets. A digital dollar would render stablecoins unnecessary, allowing cryptocurrency users to transact and convert digital dollars to cryptocurrency while enjoying the backing of the Fed on the value of digital dollars. Cross-border transactions: Stablecoins are also increasingly used for cross-border transactions. According to Fed data, the US pays 5.4% in fees on average per cross-border transaction, which also takes several days to settle. Stablecoins settle almost instantaneously and have much lower transaction fees. So too can a digital dollar. It would settle just as quickly as a stablecoin, if not quicker, and reduce transaction costs for cross-border payments. And because stablecoins are designed to maintain their pegs, they have more potential than cryptocurrencies to act as mediums of exchange outside of the crypto market and economy, potentially threatening the ongoing use of fiat money. Bottom Line: The Fed will design a CBDC around its existing monetary and payments system to allow for seamless integration. There are not many reasons holding back digital dollar adoption from a point of need and benefit. By adopting a digital dollar, the Fed will also fight off the growing risk of stablecoins, which could pose a threat to the use-case of fiat money in everyday life. Other Central Banks On The March The authority to issue money is an important element of economic power. History is replete with examples of currency competition both within countries and between them. CBDC research and development are picking up speed across central banks (Charts 4A and 4B). China is the world leader with its digital yuan, as we discuss below. Design and implementation of CBDCs will follow in coming years just like in the case of the digital yuan. If the theoretical payoffs to adopting a CBDC are met by real-world green shoots, then foreign CBDCs could pose a threat to continued dollar dominance in the global monetary and economic system, namely if countries can draw down their dependence on dollar reserves. Chart 4ACentral Banks Paying More Attention To CBDCs Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Chart 4BCentral Banks Paying More Attention To CBDCs Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Central Bank Competition Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has noted this challenge in recent remarks explaining that any implementation of a “US central bank digital currency must support the prominent role the dollar plays in the global financial system.”4 The Fed is on the same page as the Treasury noting that any CBDC should be used to preserve the dominant international role of the dollar. The dollar is the world’s most widely used currency for payments and investments and serves as the world’s premier reserve currency. The dollar’s international role allows the US to influence the practices and standards of the global monetary and economic system. Basically, when the US constricts the supply of dollars in response to domestic conditions, the rest of the world suffers tighter monetary conditions, and when the US expands the supply, the rest of the world enjoys looser conditions, almost regardless of what other nations want or need. Central banks have made their policy goals clear in respect to developing a CBDC. Some central banks look to expand financial inclusion, market access, and their payments system while others are looking to compete with one another (Table 2). Canada, China, and Sweden want to gain a local and international market advantage for their currencies by introducing CBDCs. Table 2CBDC Policy Goals Of Central Banks Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? China Leading CBDC Race, But… At this early stage, China’s digital yuan poses the largest threat to a digital dollar on the international stage. It is the most prominent CBDC project at this current juncture. The digital yuan entered beta testing at the end of 2020 in parts of the country. Wider testing across provinces is being phased in. China’s monetary endeavors began with the Cross-Border Inter-Bank Payment Service in 2015. The digital yuan will be positioned as an extension of this system to promote the national currency and fight global dollar dominance. But how big of a challenge could a digital yuan mount? The answer is not much, not now. China is the world’s largest trading partner but the renminbi accounts for less than 3% of the world’s reserve currency (Chart 5). The disparity between trade and currency status in the global economy reflects a lack of global trust in the renminbi and is a cause for concern for China. China is structurally invested in the dollar-dominated financial system and hence vulnerable to American influence by means of that system. Chart 5Global Renminbi Reserves Are Low Global Renminbi Reserves Are Low Global Renminbi Reserves Are Low The digital yuan would support more debt issuance based on cost and payment incentives to debt holders when financing BRI projects. This will help drive the use of the digital yuan going forward. For example, China can assert its influence over countries with Chinese debt by having them accumulate digital yuan reserves to pay back loans. China can even provide countries with concessions on loans to promote its digital yuan. Concessions on Chinese debt may lead to easier uptake, therefore promoting issuance. If the cost of switching to the digital yuan is low, countries will see no benefit in continuing their trade transactions with China in US dollars. Using the digital yuan as the currency of invoice to disburse loans can make these transactions more transparent and manageable. This could also allow for more state control over funds, an attractive scenario for China. However, China’s monetary ambitions face serious constraints. Lack of trust in the currency is the most critical challenge for internationalization of the yuan, digital or otherwise. Even if the digital yuan project is five to ten years ahead of the curve, countries still opt to hold the dollar over the yuan in any type of crisis, as has been amply demonstrated in history, and over a range of global shocks since 2019. Hence digital yuan adoption will require guarantees from Chinese institutions. But these same institutions have struggled to internationalize the paper renminbi. Lack of openness, transparency, and convertibility are persistent problems. Bottom Line: Central banks around the world are gearing up to introduce CBDCs in coming years. Some are looking to promote financial inclusivity. Others like China’s digital yuan want to chip away at the dollar’s global dominance. Digital versions of fiat currencies will have to demonstrate substantial economic and trade efficiencies in order to encourage diversification away from the US dollar, since there is no inherent reason a digital version of a nation’s currency would increase trust beyond what is already established. But those efficiencies could take shape, which would put pressure on the US to respond. The US faces significant monetary challenges over the long run, including from CBDCs. But the US is a technological power and will eventually respond by developing its own CBDC. Pushback Against A Digital Dollar The Fed has stated that it would only pursue a digital dollar in the context of broad public and cross-governmental support. However, neither the public nor congress broadly support one at present. Public opinion is uneducated on the issue and therefore highly malleable depending on leadership and events. Public Opinion Is Non-Supportive Across age groups, people do not know enough about digital currencies and think it is a bad idea to introduce a digital dollar (Chart 6). A 2020 poll found that only 13% of respondents approved of a digital dollar.5 Low approval is becoming a trend. However, the same poll showed that 38% of respondents think the US dollar is backed by gold, bonds, or oil. Addressing poor monetary literacy among the public would help to improve public support of a digital dollar. US households say they are more likely to trust traditional financial institutions than government agencies to safeguard their personal data (Chart 7). A digital dollar will grant the Fed and federal government far-reaching information regarding the everyday financial transactions of households. Trust in government has been declining and a digital dollar underpinned by a central ledger system would provoke consumer privacy lobby groups and government activists to fight and protest adoption (Chart 8). Chart 6Popular Support For A Digital Dollar Is Lacking Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Chart 7Households Trust Government Less Than Financial Institutions Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Chart 8Trust In Government Has Been Waning Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Chart 9Inflation Outbreak Will Limit Big Government Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? About half of the US public already view the government as “doing too much” (Chart 9). The explosive inflation of 2020-22 will slow the underlying ideological shift to the political left, potentially limiting support for a digital dollar. Public opinion has been shifting for decades in favor of more government involvement in people’s day-to-day lives (Chart 10), but that trend may well stall now that excess of government creates tangible negatives for household pocketbooks (inflation). The bigger of a problem the Fed has in taming inflation in 2022-23, the bigger the political backlash will be. Federal solutions will suffer as a result. This is our theme of “Limited Big Government,” since the role of the state will increase relative to the past 40 years but still within an American context of checks and balances. Chart 10People Have Favored Government Involvement Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Bottom Line: There is no clear public demand for the digitization of the dollar at present. A major financial or economic disruption stemming from the monetary system or digital assets may be necessary to call public attention to the question. Meanwhile the private sector will drive innovation and the federal government will react to try to maintain domestic stability and international competitiveness. These data support the Fed taking an intermediated approach to cbdc when forced to take action. Policymakers Will Resist Policymakers are divided over the idea of a digital dollar. Senator Ted Cruz introduced a bill in March 2022 to “prohibit the Federal Reserve from offering products or services directly to individuals, maintaining accounts on behalf of individuals, or issuing a central bank digital currency directly to an individual.”6 Cruz has yet to receive widespread party support on the bill but he could get the backing from more GOP members if Republicans take over Congress, as expected, this November. Some Republicans and Democrats have favored cryptocurrencies while others have not, advocating for crypto-mining and crypto start-ups in progressive-left and libertarian right states. But the center-left and center-right might lean more toward cryptocurrency regulation and digital dollar adoption. Coalitions may need to be formed on the topic of a digital dollar, in parties and between parties. A digital dollar will cause a level of disruption, which will affect both the Democrats and Republicans. Government gridlock will create challenges to digital dollar adoption too. The upcoming mid-term elections favor the GOP. Both the House and the Senate are expected to flip in favor of the GOP in 2023. The “Blue Sweep” policy setting will end and only the White House will remain in Democrat control. Republicans have a shot at flipping the White House in 2024, which could see a “Red Sweep.” This scenario may slow adoption of a digital dollar but it will only preclude the unilateral cbdc model, not the intermediated model. The period of 2023-24 is too soon for adoption of a digital dollar anyway but the fact is that gridlock will delay the process until external factors force US action. Bottom Line: Public and political pushback will slow the adoption of a digital dollar. Politicians will need to work along bipartisan lines to ensure the US remains at the forefront of digital and monetary innovation but this will be difficult in a highly polarized country and will likely depend on foreign competition. Investment Takeaways We avoided cryptocurrencies during the irrational exuberance over the past two years. We expect governments to regulate the sector in order to preserve a monopoly over money supply and hence geopolitical interests. With monetary conditions tightening, we expect continued volatility in the crypto space. The US dollar remains strong tactically but is nearing its peak cyclically. We remain long but have put the currency on downgrade watch as the market more fully prices a range of bad news this year. On the global stage, the US dollar will remain the premier reserve currency despite cyclical ups and downs. The current macroeconomic backdrop is negative for the US financial sector (Chart 11). Mergers and acquisitions are drying up while regulatory risks loom. Initial public offerings are also slowing, while trading volume is low. Consumers had already accumulated debt earlier in the cycle and with rising interest rates amid a more challenging job environment, growth in loans and ultimately bank profits will slow. The commercial banking sector faces challenges during the upcoming transitional period of disruptive innovation and regulatory uncertainty. We believe the Fed and policymakers in general will want to cause as little disruption as possible, by integrating any digital dollar with the traditional finance sector as seamlessly as possible. However, transitions, especially those digital in nature, bring with them high uncertainty in the financial sector and elsewhere. Chart 11Financial Sector Facing Macro Headwinds Financial Sector Facing Macro Headwinds Financial Sector Facing Macro Headwinds     Guy Russell Senior Analyst guyr@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     Stablecoins are backed by various assets and means. Fiat money, commodities, other cryptocurrencies and by algorithmic means are some examples. 2     See The Bank For International Settlements, Central Bank Digital Currencies: Executive Summary, September 2021, bis.org. 3    See The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Money and Payments: The U.S.Dollar in the Age of Digital Transformation, January 2022, federalreserve.gov. 4    See U.S. Department Of The Treasury, Remarks from Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen on Digital Assets, April 2022, treasury.gov. 5    See Cointelegraph, Most Americans are against a digital dollar CBDC, survey reveals,september 25, 2020, cointelegraph.com 6    See Ted Cruz’s Proposed Bill to amend the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit the Federal reserve banks from offering certain products or services directly to an individual, and for other purposes, March 2022, cruz.senate.gov.   Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)   Table A2Political Risk Matrix Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Table A3US Political Capital Index Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Chart A1Presidential Election Model Third Quarter US Political Outlook: Last Ditch Effort Third Quarter US Political Outlook: Last Ditch Effort Chart A2Senate Election Model Third Quarter US Political Outlook: Last Ditch Effort Third Quarter US Political Outlook: Last Ditch Effort  Table A4House Election Model Will Trump Run Again? What About Biden? Will Trump Run Again? What About Biden? Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon? Digital Dollar, Will US Policymakers Launch One Soon?

Executive Summary The Declining Value Of An Old Friendship Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? India may buy cheap oil from Russia, but oil alone cannot expand this partnership. India needs to maintain a balance of power against China and Pakistan. With Russia’s heft set to decline, India will be compelled to explore a configuration with America. India will slowly yet surely move into America’s sphere of influence. Strong geopolitical as well as economic incentives exist for both sides to develop partnership. The US’s grand strategy will continue to collide with that of Russia and China. China will increasingly align with Russia and is doomed to stay entangled in a strategic conflict with India. With India a promising emerging market set to cleave to America, we reiterate our strategic buy call on India. Tactically however we are bearish on India. We also recommend investors go strategically long Indian tech / short Chinese tech. This pair trade is likely to keep rising on a secular basis. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG INDIAN TECH / CHINESE TECH EQUITIES 2022-04-21   Bottom Line: For reasons of geopolitics as well as macroeconomics, we maintain our constructive view on India and our negative view on China on a strategic time frame. On a tactical timeframe, we remain sellers of India given cyclical political and macro risks. Feature Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has forced all players at the global geopolitical table to show their hand. The one major player at the table who is yet to show her cards is India. Which side India choses matters. Its geopolitical rise is one of the many reasons we live in a brave new multipolar world. India will gain influence in the global economy as a large buyer of oil and guns and as a user of tech platforms and capital. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyFrom Nixon-Mao To Putin-Xi The situation is complicated by mixed signals. India has played a geopolitically neutral or “non-aligned” role for most of its time since independence in 1947. Those who believe India will stay neutral point to the fact that India has continued buying oil from Russia and has abstained from voting on both anti-Russia and anti-Ukrainian resolutions at the United Nations. Those who predict that India will side with Russia have trouble explaining how India will get along with China, which committed to a “no limits” strategic partnership with Russia prior to the invasion. Those who speculate that India will align with the US have trouble explaining India’s persistent ties with Russia and the Biden administration’s threat of punishment for those who help Russia circumvent US sanctions. In this report we argue that the Indo-Russian friendship is destined to fade over a long-term, strategic horizon. The reason is simple: Russia’s geopolitical power is fading and hence it can no longer help India meet its regional security goals. The growing Russia-China alignment will only alienate India further. Hence, we expect the relationship between India and Russia to be reduced to a transactional status – mainly trade in oil and guns over the next few years, while strategic realities will drive India to tighten relations with the US and its Asian allies. Three geopolitical forces will break down the camaraderie between India and Russia, namely: (1) A collision in the grand strategies of America with that of both China and Russia, (2) India’s need to align with the US to underwrite its own regional security, and (3) China’s rising distrust of India as India aligns with the US and its allies. In fact, we expect China and India to stay embroiled in a strategic conflict over the next few years. Any thaw in their relations will be temporary at best. The rest of this report explains and quantifies these forces. We conclude with actionable investment conclusions. Let’s dive straight in. US Versus China-Russia: A Grand Strategy Collision “For the enemy is the communist system itself – implacable, insatiable, unceasing in its drive for world domination … For this is not a struggle for supremacy of arms alone – it is also a struggle for supremacy between two conflicting ideologies: freedom under God versus ruthless, Godless tyranny. “ – John F. Kennedy, Remarks at Mormon Tabernacle, Utah (September 1960) Chart 1China’s Is An Export-Powered Economic Heavyweight Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? It’s been six decades since these words were spoken and today the quotation is more relevant than at any time since the Cold War ended in 1991. The excerpt captures how the Biden administration has positioned itself with respect to Russia and China, only replacing “communist” with “autocratic” in Russia’s case. The Ukraine war helps America advance its grand strategy with respect to Russia. The Ukraine war is steadily draining Russia’s already limited economic might. Western sanctions aim to weaken Russia further. Russia’s military capabilities are now in greater doubt than before, so that its only remaining geopolitical strengths are nuclear weapons and, significantly, its leverage as an energy supplier. With Russia weakened, yet capable of reinforcing China, America will focus more intensely on China over the coming years and the breakdown in US-China relations will only accelerate. China is a genuine economic competitor to the United States (Chart 1). Its strategic rise worries America. To make matters worse, America poses a unique threat to China. China relies heavily on energy imports (Chart 2) from the Middle East (Chart 3). This is a source of great vulnerability as China’s fuel imports must traverse seas that America controls (Map 1). During peace time, and periods of robust US-China strategic engagement, this vulnerability is not an issue. But China is acutely aware that America has the capability to choke China’s energy access at will in the event of hostilities, just as it did to Japan in World War II. Russia has managed to wage war in Ukraine, against US wishes, since it is a net energy supplier to Europe and the global economy. Chart 2China And India Rely On Imports For Energy Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​ Chart 3India And China Both Depend On Middle East For Oil Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Map 1US Military Footprint In Middle East Threatens China … Yet US Presence In South Asia Is Weak Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Atop China’s fuel-supply related insecurities, America has begun a strategic pivot to Asia in recent years. For instance, America has pulled troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, declared a trade war on China, and strengthening strategic alliances and partnerships with regional geopolitical powers like India and Australia (Table 1). The US has retained its alliance with the Philippines despite an adverse government there, while South Korea has just elected a pro-American president again. With Japan, South Korea and Australia aligned militarily with the US, China’s naval power pales in comparison (Chart 4). Table 1America’s Influence In Asia Is Rising Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Chart 4China’s Naval Power Pales Versus US Allies In Asia Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Now China cannot watch America refurbish its grand strategy in Asia silently. Given China’s need for supply security, geopolitical independence, and regional influence, Beijing will double down on building its influence in Asia and in the eastern hemisphere. Against this backdrop of US-China competition, military conflict becomes increasingly likely, especially in the form of “proxy wars” involving China’s neighbors but conceivably even in the form of US-China naval warfare. China’s plans to modernize and enhance its economic prowess will add to America’s worries (Chart 5). A bipartisan consensus of American lawmakers is focused on reviving America’s economic strength but simultaneously limiting China’s benefit by restricting Chinese imports and American high-tech exports (Chart 6). Since Beijing cannot afford to base its national strategy on the hope of lingering American engagement, US-China trade relations will weaken regardless of which party controls the White House. Chart 5China’s Growing Might Worries America Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Chart 6US Growth Does Not Equal Growth In Imports From China Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ The consensus in global financial media (which we never bought) held that the Biden administration would reduce tensions with China – but the détente never occurred and the remaining window for détente is limited by the uncertainty of the 2024 election. The US is currently occupied with Russia but threatening to impose secondary sanctions on China if it provides military assistance or circumvents sanctions. The Russo-Ukrainian war has led to an energy price shock that hurts an industrial economy like China’s. For the rest of this year China’s leaders will be consumed with managing the energy shock, a nationwide Covid-19 outbreak, and the important political reshuffle this fall. Only in 2023 will Beijing have room for maneuver when it comes to the US. But the US cannot return to engagement, which strengthens China’s economy, while China cannot open up to the US economy and become more exposed to future US sanctions. Bottom Line: A grand strategy collision between the US and China is certain. US dominance of sea routes that China uses for energy imports necessarily intimidates China. America’s pivot to Asia threatens China’s regional influence. This will prompt China to restrict American advances in strategic geographies —and not only the Taiwan Strait but also, as we will see, in South Asia. US-India Strategic Alignment: Only A Matter Of Time “If they [nation states] wish to survive, they must be willing to go to war to preserve a balance against the growing hegemonic power of the period.” – Nicholas J. Spykman, America's Strategy in World Politics (Harcourt, Brace and Co, 1942) For reasons of strategy, China will continue to build its influence in South Asia. South Asia offers prospects of sea access to the Indian Ocean, namely via Pakistan. This factor could ease China’s fuel supply insecurities. Also, penetrating northern India helps China set up a noose around India’s neck, thus neutralizing a potential enemy and US ally. In short China will pursue a two-pronged strategy of Eurasian development and naval expansion, both of which threaten India. Against this backdrop, India needs US support to counter Pakistan to its west, China’s latest intrusions into its eastern flank (Map 2), and China’s maritime challenge. India has historically spent generously on defense, but its military might pales in comparison to that of China. Even partial support from America would help India make some progress toward a balance of power in South Asia (Chart 7). Map 2China’s Newfound Interest In India’s Eastern Flank Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Chart 7America Can Provide Military Heft To India Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Chart 8US Is A Key Trading Partner For India Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ There’s another reason why US alignment makes sense for India. Much like China, India is highly import-dependent for its fuel needs (Chart 2). Given India’s high reliance on the Middle East for energy, India stands to benefit from America’s solid military footprint in this region (Map 1). The US too has a motive in exploring this alliance. India can provide a strategic foothold on the Eurasian rimland. America will value this new access route to Eurasia because America knows that its military footprint in South Asia is surprisingly weak – a weakness it needs to address against the backdrop of China’s increasing influence in the region (Map 1). Meaningful economic interests also underpin the US-India relationship. India and the US appear like sparring partners from time to time. The US may raise issues of human rights violations in India and the two may bicker over trade. However there exist strong economic incentives for the two countries to keep their differences under check and develop a long-term strategic partnership. The US is a major user of India’s software services and buys nearly a fifth of India’s merchandise exports. The trading relationship that India shares with the US is far more developed than India’s trading relationship with China and Russia (Chart 8). Capital is a factor of production that India desperately needs to finance its high growth. America and its allies are also major suppliers of capital to India (Chart 9). India is averse to granting China the political influence that would go along with major capital infusions and direct investments. Chart 9US And Its Allies Are Major Suppliers Of Capital To India Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Chart 10India Offers US Firms Access To High Growth Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Chart 11India Is A Key Market For American Big Tech Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? India on its part is a large marketplace which offers high growth prospects (Chart 10) and remains open and accessible to American corporations (unlike say Russia or China). The growth element is something that American firms will value more over time, as the American economy is mature and has a lower potential growth rate. Most importantly if the US imposes sanctions on India, then two key business lobbies are sure to mitigate the damage. In specific: Since India is a key potential market for American tech firms (Chart 11), Big Tech will always desire amicable Indo-US relations. Since India is the third largest buyer of defense goods globally, American defense suppliers will have similar intentions. In both cases, US policy planners will support these industries’ lobbying efforts due to the grand strategic considerations outlined above. Bottom Line: India will slowly yet surely move into America’s sphere of influence. Notwithstanding persistent differences, the Indo-US relationship will strengthen over a strategic timeframe. Strong geopolitical motives as well as notable economic incentives exist for both sides to develop this alignment. Indo-Russian Alignment: Destined To Fade The Indo-Russian friendship can be traced back to the second half of the 20th century. The fulcrum was the fact that Russia was a formidable land-based power and provided an offset against threats from China and Pakistan (Chart 12). The finest hour of this friendship perhaps came in 1971 when Russia sided with India in its war with Pakistan. India’s citizens hold an unusually favorable opinion of Russia (Chart 13). Chart 12The Declining Value Of An Old Friendship Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Chart 13Indians Hold A Favorable Opinion Of Russians Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Despite this rich past, the Indo-Russia friendship is doomed to fade over a strategic timeframe. Even if  Russia’s share in Indian oil rises from current low levels of 2%, this glue alone cannot hold the Indo-Russian relationship together for one key reason: Russia’s geopolitical might has been waning and Russia can no longer help India establish a balance of power against China and Pakistan (Table 2). In fact, since 2006, the Russo-Indian partnership has been commanding lower geopolitical power than that of China (Chart 12). Table 2Russia’s Military Heft Is Of Limited Use To India Today Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Managing regional security is a key strategic concern for India. As Russia’s geopolitical power wanes so will India’s utility of Russia as an effective guarantor of India’s security. Russia’s war in Ukraine is ominous in this regard, as Russian armed forces were forced to retreat from Kyiv, while the country’s already bleak economic prospects have worsened under western sanctions. The solidification of the China-Russia axis will alienate India further (Chart 14). China is essential to Russia’s economy now while Moscow is essential to China’s Eurasian strategy of bypassing American naval dominance to reduce its supply insecurity. Russia holds the keys to Central Asia, from a military-security point of view, and hence also to the Middle East. Furthermore, limited economic bonds exist to prevent India and Russia from falling out. Russia accounts for a smidgen of India’s trade (Chart 8). India is Russia’s largest arms client (accounting for +20% of its arms sales) but this reliance could also decline over time: The Indian government has been pursuing a range of policies to increase the indigenous production of arms. This is a strategic goal that would also reinforce India’s economic need for more effective manufacturing capabilities. Russia’s own defense franchise had been coming under pressure, even before the Ukraine war (Chart 15). On the contrary, Western arms manufacturers’ franchise has been steadily growing. Chart 14China-Russia Axis Will Alienate India Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​ Chart 15The Rise & Rise Of Western Arms Manufacturers Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ While the US may look the other way in the short term when India buys arms from Russia, over a period of time the US is bound to pull India away by using a combination of sticks (mild sanctions) and carrots (heavy discounts). Two aforementioned external factors will also work against the Indo-Russia relationship namely (1) The Russo-Chinese alignment and its clash with US grand strategy and (2) The coming-to-life of a US-India strategic alignment. Bottom Line: India’s need for cheap oil will preserve basic Indo-Russian relations for some time. But oil alone cannot drive a deeper strategic alignment. Regional security concerns are paramount for India. Russia’s geopolitical decline will force India to explore an alignment with America, which will offer India security in the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf in the face of China’s emergence in this region. Is A Realignment In Indo-China Relations Possible? But why should India not join the other Asian giants to balance against America’s threat of global dominance? Would such a bloc not secure India’s interests? And what if the US imposes harsh sanctions for India’s continued trade with Russia and strategic neutrality? Or what if a future US administration grows restless and attempts to force India to choose sides sooner rather than later? Even if the US offends India, it will only lead to a temporary improvement in India’s ties with the China-Russia alliance. This is because America stands to lose if India cleaves towards the Sino-Russian alliance and would thus quickly correct its policy. In specific: Security Interests: America will risk losing all influence in South Asia if India were to cleave towards China. India provides a key foothold for America to control China’s regional ascendance especially given that the US has now withdrawn from Afghanistan and its bilateral relations with Pakistan are weak. Business Interests: India’s movement into the China-Russia sphere of influence can have adverse business implications for American corporations and US allies, given that the US is abandoning the Chinese market over time, while India is a large and fast-growing consumer of American tech exports and services. India could emerge as a major buyer of American defense goods and will import more and more energy provided by the US and its partners in the Persian Gulf. These business groups will lobby for the withdrawal of US sanctions on India given India’s long-term potential. Meanwhile any improvement in Indo-Chinese relations will have a limited basis. In specific: Ascendant Nationalism In China And India: China’s declining potential GDP is motivating a rise in nationalism and an assertive foreign policy. Meanwhile India’s inability to create plentiful jobs for a young and growing population is also fuelling a wave of nationalism. A historic turn toward Sino-Indian economic engagement would require the domestic political ability to embrace and promote each other’s well-being. Pakistan Factor: India’s eastern neighbor Pakistan is controlled by its military. The military’s raison d'être is enforced by maintaining an aggressive stance towards India, while pursuing economic development through whatever other means are available. As long as Pakistan’s military stays influential its stance towards India will be hostile. And as long as Pakistan’s economy remains weak (Chart 16), its reliance on China will remain meaningful (Chart 17). Chart 16Pakistan: High Military Influence, Low Economic Vigor Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Chart 17China & Pakistan: Iron Brothers? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? ​​​​​​ Chart 18Indians View China And Pakistan Negatively Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis? Indo-Russian Relations: Quo Vadis?   China also benefits from its alliance with Pakistan because it provides an alternative entry point into India and access to the Indian Ocean. Fundamental Distrust: For reasons of history, Indians harbor a negative opinion of both Pakistan and China (Chart 18). This factor reinforces the first point that any Indian administration will see limited political dividends from developing a long-term alignment with China or with Pakistan. Bottom Line: If any Indo-Chinese détente materializes owing to harsh US sanctions, which we do not expect, the result will be temporary. America has limited incentives to push India towards the Sino-Russian camp. More importantly, China and India will stay entangled in a strategic conflict for reasons of both history and geography. Investment Conclusions Chart 19Sell India Tactically But Buy India On A Strategic Horizon Sell India Tactically But Buy India On A Strategic Horizon Sell India Tactically But Buy India On A Strategic Horizon The historic Indo-Russia relationship will weaken over the next few years as India and Russia explore new alignments with USA and China respectively. The relationship may not collapse entirely but has limited basis to grow given Russia’s declining geopolitical clout. Indo-American economic interests are set to deepen not just for reasons of security. India may consider looking for alternatives to Russian arms in the American defense industry while American Big Tech will be keen to grow their footprint in India. With India set to cleave to America, a country whose geopolitical power remains unparalleled today, we reiterate our constructive long-term investment view on India (Chart 19). However, tactically we remain worried about near-term geopolitical and macro headwinds that India must confront. China will strengthen relations with Russia over the next few years. It needs Russia’s help to execute its Eurasian strategy and to diversify its sources of fuel supply, over the long run. Given that the US and its allies will be engaged in a conflict with China over a strategic horizon, we reiterate our strategic sell call on China. Tactically we are neutral on Chinese stocks, given that they have already sold off sharply in accordance with our views over the past two years. In view of both these calls, we urge clients with a holding period mandate of more than 12 months to reduce exposure to Chinese assets and increase exposure to Indian assets. We also recommend investors go strategically long Indian tech / short Chinese tech. This pair trade is likely to keep rising on a secular basis.   Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist ritika.mankar@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix

Cybersecurity Primer Cybersecurity Primer In the coming weeks, we will continue our series of thematic Special Reports by conducting a “deep dive” analysis of cybersecurity stocks. This is a pervasive investment theme, and we recommend it as a new structural overweight. While cybersecurity is not new to the investment community, it is still in the early innings: The pandemic-driven shift to remote work, broad-based migration to cloud computing, development of the internet-of-things, and increasing geopolitical tensions create new targets for hackers who are after valuable data or just want to achieve maximum damage to the networks.  With cybercrimes costing the world nearly $600 billion each year,1 and cyber-attacks increasing in number and sophistication, the global cybersecurity market is expected to grow from $125 billion in 2020 to $175 billion by 2024.2 Both large and small businesses are yet to fully implement cybersecurity defenses. According to a survey by Forbes magazine, 55% of business executives plan to increase their budgets for cybersecurity in 20213 aiming to prevent malicious attacks. These developments, are a boon for the cybersecurity stocks, making them an attractive long-term investment. In the upcoming Special Report, we will discuss the outlook and the key drivers of the industry, the types of cyber security defenses and companies behind them, and evaluate the fundamentals and valuation of our cyber security basket. We will draw investment conclusions to gauge the theme’s prospects as a tactical (three to six months investment horizon) investment. Bottom Line: Stay tuned for an upcoming Special Report on cybersecurity equities in the coming weeks. Top three cybersecurity ETFs by AUM are: CIBR, HACK, and BUG.   Footnotes 1Mordor Intelligence, 2020. 2IDC, “Ongoing Demand Will Drive Solid Growth for Security Products and Services, According to New IDC Spending Guide,” Aug 13, 2020. 3Forbes, 2020

Dear Client, In addition to our regular report, this week we are sending a Special Report written by my colleague Lucas Laskey from BCA Research’s Equity Analyzer service titled “Is The Reopening Trade Closed?”. The report discusses the state of the reopening trade through the lens of Equity Analyzer's factor model. I hope you find the report insightful. Additionally, please join us next week on Friday, May 7, 2021 at 10am EDT as I moderate a debate between my colleagues Arthur Budaghyan, BCA Research’s Chief Emerging Market Strategist, and Robert Ryan, Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist. Titled “A Debate On Commodities,” Arthur and Bob will discuss the outlook for commodities, touching on the trajectory both DM and China/EM growth will follow, the path for the US dollar, and other cyclical and structural forces currently shaping commodity markets. During the webcast, Arthur and Bob will highlight the areas they disagree on and the reasons behind their differing views. Best regards, Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist Highlights Bitcoin is on a collision course with ESG. ESG interests will win out. Widespread adoption of cryptocurrencies, if it were to happen, would erode the purchasing power of traditional money, while robbing governments of billions of dollars in seigniorage revenue. Governments have already begun to take steps to thwart such an outcome. Restrictions on the use of cryptocurrencies will only increase over the coming years. The rollout of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) represents an existential threat not only to cryptos, but potentially to credit card companies and online payment processors such as PayPal, Square, Venmo, WeChat Pay, and Alipay. Shorting cryptocurrencies, meme stocks, or any other high-flying asset is risky business. Fortunately, there is a way to flip the usual risk-reward from going short on its head. Rather than facing unlimited losses and a maximum gain of only 100% of the initial position, we outline a shorting strategy that caps the loss at 100% but allows for unlimited gains. Bitcoin’s Questionable ESG Record Crypto critics have often blamed cryptocurrencies for facilitating illicit transactions and enlarging the world’s carbon footprint. There is some truth to both claims. Motivated to avoid detection, online scammers, smugglers, and terrorists have been drawn to cryptocurrencies. Cryptos have also been used to evade capital controls and conceal wealth from the tax authorities. On the environmental side, Bitcoin mining now consumes more energy than entire countries such as Sweden, Argentina, and Pakistan (Chart 1). Moreover, about 70% of Bitcoin mining currently takes place in China, mainly using electricity generated by burning coal. A lot of the remaining mining occurs in countries such as Russia and Iran with questionable governance records. Chart 1How Dare You, Bitcoin How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts Cryptos And Inequality One criticism of Bitcoin that is less frequently mentioned is its role in exacerbating wealth inequality. We are not just talking about the small number of “whales” who amassed huge fortunes by buying or mining Bitcoin shortly after it was created. If these whales sell their coins at today’s prices and the price of  Bitcoin eventually crashes, those early investors will have ended up profiting at the expense of smaller investors who bought at the top. While such a transfer of income may be unsavory, it is not much different from what happens when someone sells a high-flying stock to the proverbial bagholder just as the stock is peaking. The more interesting question is what happens if Bitcoin prices do not crash. It might be tempting to think that in such a scenario, no one would be worse off. But that is incorrect. There would still be losers, and importantly, these losers would consist of people who never bought or sold Bitcoin in their lives. To see why, ask yourself who suffers from counterfeit currency. One possibility is shopkeepers who inadvertently accept counterfeit cash and find themselves stuck with worthless money. But even if the counterfeit money is never detected, there would still be losers: Fake money dilutes the value of genuine money, making everyone who holds the genuine money worse off. Crypto evangelists like to argue that cryptocurrencies offer protection against the “debasement of fiat money.” Ironically, the widespread adoption of cryptocurrencies could produce a self-fulfilling cycle that leads to just such an inflationary outcome. If enough people decide to swap fiat currencies for cryptos, the dollar and other fiat monies could become “hot potatoes.” The price of cryptos would rise in relation to dollars. Feeling more wealthy, crypto holders would spend some of their wealth on goods and services. As long as the economy is operating below potential, this would not be such a bad thing since increased spending would generate more output and employment. However, once the output gap disappears, more spending would result in higher inflation. The purchasing power of fiat currencies would decline. The Empire Strikes Back Will governments allow such a massive transfer of wealth from holders of fiat currencies to holders of crypto currencies to occur? It seems highly unlikely. In order to entice people to hold on to their fiat currency bank deposits, central banks would have to raise interest rates. Debt-strapped governments would not like that. Governments also generate significant revenue from their ability to print currency and then exchange it for goods and services. For the US, this “seigniorage revenue” is around $100 billion per year (Chart 2). No government will want to part with this revenue. A financial system where loans and deposits are denominated in cryptocurrencies would be highly unstable. Even if the supply of each individual cryptocurrency were capped, the rise and fall of competing cryptocurrencies could still result in large shifts in the aggregate cryptocurrency money supply. Moreover, wild swings in cryptocurrency prices, both versus fiat currencies and one another, could destroy any semblance of price stability. The value of bank loans made in Bitcoin or other cryptos would experience great fluctuations. Powerless to issue cryptocurrencies themselves, central banks would not be able to provide unlimited liquidity support to commercial banks as they do now. The situation would resemble the US in the late 19th century when myriad currencies competed with one another and the financial system veered from one crisis to another (Chart 3). Chart 2Governments Will Not Part With Seigniorage Revenue Governments Will Not Part With Seigniorage Revenue Governments Will Not Part With Seigniorage Revenue Chart 3An Inelastic Money Supply Historically Led To More Banking Crises How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts   What Is It Good For? One might argue that the ultimate aim of cryptocurrencies is not to displace fiat money. Okay, but if Bitcoin can never truly function as a medium of exchange or a unit of account, what exactly underpins its utility as a store of value? At least with gold, you get an extremely rare metal, forged in the collision of neutron stars billions of years ago, that has great aesthetic value. With cryptos, you get fairy dust. In past reports, we referred to Bitcoin as a “solution in search of a problem.” In retrospect, that characterization was much too charitable. Bitcoin is a problem in search of a problem. Whereas the Visa network can process over 20,000 transactions per second, the Bitcoin network can barely process five (Chart 4). Bitcoin transactions take 10 minutes-to-an hour to complete compared to just a few seconds for most debit or credit card transactions. The average fee for a Bitcoin transaction is around $30. This fee has been rising, not falling, over the past few years (Chart 5). Chart 4Bitcoin: The Speed Of Transactions, Or Lack Of It Bitcoin: The Speed Of Transactions, Or Lack Of It Bitcoin: The Speed Of Transactions, Or Lack Of It Chart 5Bitcoin: The Cost Per Transaction Is Rising Bitcoin: The Cost Per Transaction Is Rising Bitcoin: The Cost Per Transaction Is Rising     Look Out Below Table 1A Growing List Of Cryptocurrency Bans How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts Cryptos are heading for a world of pain. ESG concerns will force companies to step back from their newfound infatuation with these magic beans. Meanwhile, governments will tighten the screws on cryptocurrencies while rolling out their own digital monies. As my colleague Chester Ntonifor pointed out last week, a growing list of countries have already moved to ban Bitcoin transactions (Table 1). In addition, most G10 central banks have outlined their own digital currency plans (Map 1). Not only will Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) squeeze out decentralised cryptocurrencies, they will also pose an existential risk to credit card companies and online payment processors such as PayPal, Square, Venmo, WeChat Pay, and Alipay. Map 1Many Central Banks Are Planning A Digital Currency How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts The Risk Of Shorting Bitcoin These days, there is no shortage of ways to short Bitcoin. Many cryptocurrency platforms permit short selling. In addition, one can bet against Bitcoin through the futures market. To the extent that the fortunes of companies such as Coinbase are tied to the crypto market, one can also express a short view on cryptos through listed equities. Yet, shorting cryptos is a risky strategy. Cryptocurrencies do not have any intrinsic value. What you think a Bitcoin is worth depends on what others think it is worth and vice versa. At present, the value of all Bitcoins that have ever been issued is about $1 trillion. Eighteen cryptocurrencies have valuations exceeding $10 billion (Table 2). The market capitalization of all cryptocurrencies in circulation stands at $2 trillion. In contrast, the value of all the gold that has ever been mined is around $10 trillion (Chart 6). It is certainly possible that euphoric investors will push up the value of cryptocurrencies to the point that they are collectively worth more than all the gold in the world. Table 2Close To 20 Cryptos Have A Market Cap In Excess Of US$10bn How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts Chart 6Gold Versus Cryptocurrencies Gold Versus Cryptocurrencies Gold Versus Cryptocurrencies     To guard against this risk, one needs a prudent strategy for shorting not just high-flying cryptocurrencies, but any security whose price can rise significantly. Luckily, such a strategy exists. How To Short Without Losing Your Shorts Clients sometimes ask me what I invest my money in. The answer is that most of my liquid wealth is held in publicly traded US small cap stocks. I have been investing in this space for over two decades (prior to joining Goldman, I even wrote a blog about it). I used my knowledge of stock picking to develop an early version of BCA’s Equity Analyzer. David Boucher and his team have since transformed it into a powerful, state-of-the-art stock selection service. Table 3Don’t Be Like Melvin How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts Shorting small cap stocks is risky business. To limit the risk, I have employed a strategy that flips the usual risk-reward from shorting on its head. Normally, when you short a stock, your gain is capped at 100% of the initial position whereas your potential loss is unlimited. With my shorting technique, your potential loss is capped at 100% while your potential gain is unlimited. To illustrate how the strategy works, let us consider shorting one particular overpriced “meme” stock that has been in the news a lot this year. I won’t single out the name of the company, other than to note that it begins with “G” and ends with “stop.” At the time of writing, this mystery stock was trading at $180 per share. Suppose you shorted 1,000 shares at that price. The basic idea is to then short 2% more shares if the price falls by 1% and cover 2% of your shares if the price rises by 1%. So, in this case, you would increase your short position to 1020 shares if the price were to fall to around $178 but cover 20 shares (leaving you with 980 shares short) if the price were to rise to $182. Table 3 shows the number of shares you would need to be short for any given price between $5 and $360. If the price of the shares were to fall to $10 (double what it was last August), the strategy would generate roughly $3,060,000 in profits.1 In contrast, if the price were to rise to $360 per share, the strategy would incur a loss of $90,000. Even if the price went to infinity, the most you would lose is $180,000. There are a number of challenges to implementing this strategy: 1) It requires frequent trading; 2) gap downs and gap ups in the price could meaningfully hurt the results; 3) it is not always possible to short a stock and even when it is, the borrowing costs could be high, etc. Nevertheless, as a “rule of thumb,” I have found this strategy to be extremely effective in mitigating risk.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist pberezin@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1    Notice that the profit of $3,060,000 from going short 1,000 shares in the case where the price of the stock falls from $180 to $10 is equal to 17 times the initial short position of $180,000 (i.e., $3,060,000 divided by 180,000 is 17). This is exactly the same return that one would earn if one went long the stock and the price rose from $10 to $180. In this case, the profit would also be equal to 17 times the initial investment (i.e., $1,800,000-$100,000 divided by $100,000 is 17). Global Investment Strategy View Matrix How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts Special Trade Recommendations How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts Current MacroQuant Model Scores How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts How To Short Bitcoin, Or Anything Else, Without Losing Your Shorts