Sectors

Executive Summary The recent pullback was all about a multiples contraction while strong earnings growth helped absorb the blow. With the multiple contraction phase complete, the S&P 500 performance is now all about earnings. Consensus still expects earnings to grow at 10% over the next 12 months, despite negative corporate guidance and a whole constellation of factors that present challenges to corporate profitability. We need to see downgrades or earnings will disappoint. Our brand-new model predicts that earnings growth will trend towards zero over the next three months. Earnings growth is a tug of war between rising input costs and corporate pricing power. There is a high likelihood of an earnings recession, even if an economic recession is unlikely over the next 12 months. Because growth is slowing not only in the US but also abroad. If an earnings recession does materialize, equities may have another leg down, perhaps another 5-8%. Earnings Growth Is A Tug Of War Between Rising Costs And Pricing Power Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Bottom Line: We forecast that earnings growth will undershoot consensus expectations and an earnings recession is likely.  Since the multiples contraction phase of the bear market is likely over, equities performance will be dictated by earnings growth.  In the short run, we expect equities to be range-bound, with rallies and pullbacks alternating.  In case of an earnings recession, equities may fall another 5-8%. Feature Related Report  US Equity StrategyMarginally Worse Ever since the Fed started hiking interest rates back in March, investors started worrying about the recession. The BCA house view is that a recession is unlikely over the next 12 months.  However, to us, of even greater concern is the likelihood of an earnings disappointment or even an outright earnings recession. We believe that earnings growth will slow dramatically. We wrote back in October 2021 report, “Marginally Worse”, that margins will contract at the beginning of the year – indeed, this prediction materialized during the Q1-2022 earnings season (Chart 1). Shrinking profit margins are likely to translate into flat to negative real earnings growth over the next 12 months. However, economic and earnings growth expectations remain elevated. As our readers may recall from the “Have We Hit Rock Bottom?” and “Fat and Flat” reports, we believe that for the markets to begin to heal, growth expectations need to come down and a negative outlook needs to get priced in. Chart 1Margins Are Contracting Margins Are Contracting Margins Are Contracting In this week’s report, we take a close look at the S&P 500 earnings growth expectations and provide our own estimate based on a simple regression model. We will also discuss implications for the US equity market. Sneak Preview: We estimate that earnings growth will trend towards zero over the next three to six months, consistent with current trends in US economic growth, inflation, corporate pricing power, monetary conditions, and the strength of the USD. Sell-off Driven By Multiples Contraction, Not Earnings Growth This year’s sell-off has been triggered by fears of an aggressive Fed, tighter monetary policy, and rising rates. However, decomposition of the total return demonstrates that the pullback was all about multiples contraction, while strong earnings growth helped absorb the blow (Chart 2). A pertinent question is what happens to the market when earnings growth softens? One may wonder whether the bad news has already been priced in, as multiples tend to front-run growth. A case in point is strong market performance in 2020 on the back of multiples expansion in anticipation of a post-pandemic rebound in earnings growth (Chart 3).  Chart 2Sell-off Was Driven By A Multiples Contraction Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Chart 3Multiples Lead Earnings Multiples Lead Earnings Multiples Lead Earnings With multiples down from 23x to 17x over the past two years, and the S&P 500 down by 19% from its January 2022 peak, arguably much of the upcoming earnings growth slowdown/contraction is priced in. Much but not all. The next chapter of the bear market will be driven by earnings growth. Earnings Growth Headwinds As we have pointed out on multiple occasions, it is confounding that, despite negative corporate guidance and a whole constellation of factors that present challenges to corporate profitability, earnings estimates for 2022 have been revised up (Chart 4) and stand at about 10% (Chart 5). However, at long last, upgrades are starting to moderate (Chart 6). We need to see downgrades. Chart 42022 Earnings Estimates Are Still Trending Up 2022 Earnings Estimates Are Still Trending Up 2022 Earnings Estimates Are Still Trending Up Chart 5Earnings Are Expected To Grow At 10% Earnings Are Expected To Grow At 10% Earnings Are Expected To Grow At 10% Chart 6Analysts Are No Longer Upgrading Analysts Are No Longer Upgrading Analysts Are No Longer Upgrading Chart 7Slowing Global Growth Has An Adverse Effect On The US Earnings Growth Slowing Global Growth Has An Adverse Effect On The US Earnings Growth Slowing Global Growth Has An Adverse Effect On The US Earnings Growth Since the beginning of 2022, there have been quite a few developments that will weigh on earnings growth: Slowing growth in the US and globally means sales growth is decelerating. This week, the World Bank downgraded global GDP growth from 4.1% to 2.9%. Global manufacturing PMI is also trending towards 50 (Chart 7). Consumer demand is weakening: Negative real wage growth saps consumers’ confidence and cuts into their purchasing power. Moreover, demand for goods is returning to the pre-pandemic trend, and retail sales, especially in real terms, are flagging (Chart 8). Demand for services remains strong, but the S&P 500 index is dominated by goods producers. Corporate pricing power is still strong but is showing signs of waning as many US consumers, distraught by the negative wage growth, are strapped for cash (Chart 9). Chart 8Retail Sales Are Contracting In Real Terms Retail Sales Are Contracting In Real Terms Retail Sales Are Contracting In Real Terms Chart 9Corporate Pricing Power Is Waning Corporate Pricing Power Is Waning Corporate Pricing Power Is Waning Prices of raw materials have soared and supply disruptions are exacerbated by lockdowns in China and the war in Ukraine. Companies’ COGS (Cost of Goods Sold) bills are skyrocketing. Nominal wage growth is 6% and is on the rise, affecting companies’ bottom lines. The dollar is strong: it has gained 15% since January 2021. This makes US goods more expensive and reduces companies’ earnings via the currency translation effect. These are the reasons why it is increasingly hard for companies to preserve margins and grow earnings – a commentary that we have heard repeatedly during earnings calls. According to Refinitiv, for Q2-2022, there have been 73 negative EPS preannouncements issued by S&P 500 corporations, compared to 42 positive EPS preannouncements (N/P=73/42=1.7). A year ago, in Q2-2021, the N/P ratio was 0.8, with more companies offering positive guidance. All of this points to weakening profitability. Refinitiv also estimates the earnings growth rate for the S&P 500 for Q2-2022 at 5.3%. If the energy sector is excluded, the growth rate declines to -1.9%. We believe growth will come to a halt or contract into the end of the year. We expect slower top-line growth and shrinking profit margins to translate into flat to negative real earnings growth over the next 12 months. Earnings Recessions Often Happen When The Economy Is Still Growing One may wonder if an earnings recession is even possible without an economic recession. In fact, that happened quite a lot in the past. Out of 27 earnings recessions since 1927, 11 did not coincide with economic recessions (Chart 10). Chart 10Earnings Recessions And Economic Recession Often Don't Coincide Earnings Recessions And Economic Recession Often Don't Coincide Earnings Recessions And Economic Recession Often Don't Coincide The S&P 500 does not mirror the US economy, with the former dominated by larger companies, many of which are multinationals and more exposed to global demand and the USD than the broad economy. Also, services and consumer spending constitute roughly 70% of the US economy, while the index overrepresents manufacturing, technology, and goods-producing companies. With the S&P 500 being global in nature, quite a few earnings recessions were triggered by events abroad: The 2016 earnings recession was caused by the devaluation of the Chinese yuan; in 2012, one was triggered by a post-GFC double-dip recession in Europe; and the 1998 one was triggered by an Asian financial crisis. It is also often the case that a profit recession is a harbinger of economic recession. Both the 2000 dot-com crash and GFC economic recessions were preceded by earnings recessions, one starting in December 2000, and the other in August 2007. The 2019 earnings recession was brief and came hand in hand with widespread fears of the end of the business cycle. Hence, we believe that a confluence of factors both at home and abroad, as discussed above, makes an earning recession a high probability event. There is a high likelihood of an earnings recession, even if an economic recession is unlikely over the next 12 months, because of slowing growth not only in the US but also abroad. Modeling Earnings Growth Since we are distrustful of the consensus of 10% expected eps growth, we have built our own simple earnings growth forecast model to gauge what earnings growth rate we may expect over the next quarter. The model has five factors, each of which has fundamental relevance to earnings growth (Table 1): Table 1EPS Growth Forecast Model Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? ISM PMI is a gauge of US economic growth and a proxy for top-line growth. PPI stands for the change in input costs. Pricing Power is a BCA proprietary indicator and captures companies’ ability to pass costs onto their customers. HY Spreads indicate costs of borrowing and also the state of the economy (spreads tend to shoot up in a slowing economy). USD represents the ability of US multinationals to sell goods abroad. Roughly 35% of S&P 500 sales are outside the US. Each factor is calculated on a year-on-year percentage change basis, with a three-month lag to allow the effects of macroeconomic developments to get priced in. Adjusted R2 is 65%, which is a strong fit. All factors are statistically significant at the 1% level. The model forecasts that earnings growth will come down from 6% MoM as of April 2021 to 1.3% as of August 2022 (Chart 11). While this does not map directly to the “next 12 months” of eps growth, it does indicate that earnings growth is trending towards zero in nominal terms and will be outright negative in real terms. Further, while we are unable to predict earnings growth more than three months ahead, we do expect that it will reach zero and then shift into contraction territory into the balance of the year. Chart 11Model Predicts That Earnings Growth Will Be Flat Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Is Earnings Recession In The Cards?   Looking closer at the key drivers of growth (Chart 12), we observe that there is a tug of war between pricing power and rising costs (PPI), with earnings growth falling as pricing power starts to give away ground. The other factors that have an adverse effect on earnings growth are slowing growth (ISM PMI), an appreciating dollar, and rising borrowing costs (HY spreads). Chart 12Earnings Growth Is A Tug Of War Between Rising Costs And Pricing Power Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? The model indicates that earnings growth is trending towards zero over the next three months. Price Target What does all of this mean for US equities?  If the multiple contraction phase is complete, the S&P 500 performance is now all about earnings.  If we expect earnings to grow only 0-3% in nominal terms, with the forward earnings multiple unchanged at roughly 18x, then the S&P 500 is likely to come down another couple of percentage points. If earnings contract 5%, the index may be down as much as 8%. If multiples contract another point to 17x and earnings contract by 5%, the market may be down as much as 15% (Table 2). Table 2The S&P 500 Target Scenario Analysis Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? For now, we are sticking with our “fat and flat” thesis expecting the S&P 500 performance to continue to trend down as rallies and pullbacks alternate. Earnings growth slowdown/shallow contraction is likely to result in another leg down of roughly 5-8%. Investment Implications Street forward earnings growth expectations are too high at 10% and need to be downgraded. There are multiple reasons why earnings growth will be underwhelming, ranging from slowing growth abroad to weaker demand for goods and rising wages at home. We anticipate that earnings growth will be flat to negative into the balance of the year. The multiple contraction phase of the bear market is over, and now equities performance will be dictated by earnings growth. If an earnings recession does materialize, equities may have another leg down, perhaps another 5-8%. Bottom Line We forecast that earnings growth will undershoot consensus expectations and that an earnings recession is likely. Since the multiple contraction phase of the bear market is likely over, equity performance will be dictated by earnings growth. In the short run, we expect equities to trend down, with rallies and pullbacks alternating. In the case of an earnings recession, equities may fall another 5-8%.     Irene Tunkel Chief Strategist, US Equity Strategy irene.tunkel@bcaresearch.com   Recommended Allocation Recommended Allocation: Addendum Is Earnings Recession In The Cards? Is Earnings Recession In The Cards?

Executive Summary ECB & Inflation: Whatever It Takes? Pricey Industrials Pricey Industrials Inflation is the European Central Bank’s single focus. This single-mindedness heightens the risks to Euro Area growth, especially because wider peripheral spreads do not seem to worry the ECB yet. Italian spreads will widen further, which will contribute to weaker financials, especially in the periphery. The money market curve already prices in the path of the ECB; the upside in Bund yields is therefore capped. Cyclical assets, including stocks, are vulnerable to the confluence of weaker growth and tighter monetary policy. Industrials are fragile. Downgrade to neutral for now. German industrials will outperform Italian industrials.     Bottom Line: The ECB will do whatever it takes to slow inflation, which will further hurt an already brittle European economy. This backdrop threatens European stocks and peripheral bonds. Downgrade industrials to neutral and go long German / short Italian industrials. Feature Last week, the European Central Bank’s Governing Council sided with the hawks. The doves have capitulated. This development creates mounting risks this summer for European assets, especially when global growth is slowing. Worryingly, the ECB has given speculators the green light to widen peripheral and credit spreads in the near term. Cyclical assets remain at risk. We are downgrading industrials and financials. Hawkish Chart 1Higher Inflation Forecast = Hawkish ECB Don’t Fight The ECB Don’t Fight The ECB The ECB’s forward guidance proved more hawkish than anticipated by the market, as highlighted by the 16bps increase in the implied rate of the December 22 Euribor contract following the press conference. The ECB also refused to sooth investors’ nerves regarding fragmentation risk in the periphery. A large part of the ECB move was already anticipated. The ECB will lift its three interest rate benchmarks by 25bps at its July meeting. It also increased its headline inflation forecasts to 6.8% from 5.1% in 2022, to 3.5% from 2.1% in 2023, and most importantly, it raised its long-term HICP forecast to 2.1% from 1.9% (Chart 1). The ECB now expects medium-term inflation to be above its 2% target. The true hawkish shock came in response to the higher-than-target medium-term inflation forecast. By September, if the 2024 inflation forecast does not fall back below 2%, then a 50bps hike that month will be inevitable. The whole interest rate curve moved up in response to that guidance. The most concerning part of the statement was the lack of clarity about the fragmentation fighting tool. The ECB specified that it will re-invest the principal of its holdings under the APP and PEPP until 2024, at least. However, the program to prevent stress in peripheral bond markets was not revealed and was presented as an eventuality to be deployed only if market conditions deteriorate further. Investors may therefore assume that the ECB is still comfortable with Italian bond yields above 3.5% and high-yield spreads of 464bps (Chart 2). Ultimately, the ECB’s single-minded focus is inflation, even though it is mostly an imported shock. The ECB cares little for the effect of its actions on growth. It will therefore remain very hawkish until it sees enough evidence that the medium-term inflation outlook will fall back below 2%. Before the ECB can tabulate a decline in the inflation outlook, the following developments must take place: The economy must slow in order to extinguish domestic inflationary pressures. The labor market, to which President Christine Lagarde referred often in the press conference, must cool. Specifically, the very elevated number of vacancies must decline relative to the low number of unemployed persons (Chart 3). A weaker economy will cause this shift. Energy inflation must recede to choke secondary effects on prices. Chart 2Tight But Not Tight Enough For The Hawks Tight But Not Tight Enough For The Hawks Tight But Not Tight Enough For The Hawks Chart 3The Labor Market Must Cool The Labor Market Must Cool The Labor Market Must Cool The good news is that the decline in commodity inflation is already underway. Last week, we argued that if energy prices remain at their current levels, (or if Brent experiences the additional upside anticipated by BCA’s Commodity and Energy strategists), then energy inflation will decelerate significantly. Already, the inflationary impact of commodities is dissipating (Chart 4). European growth has not slowed enough to hurt the labor market, but it will decline further. Real disposable income is falling, and the manufacturing sector is decelerating globally. Moreover, European terms of trade are tumbling, which hurts the Euro Area’s growth outlook, especially compared to the US where the terms of trade are improving (Chart 5). Chart 4Dwindling Commodity Impulse Dwindling Commodity Impulse Dwindling Commodity Impulse Chart 5Europe's Terms-of-Trade Problem Europe's Terms-of-Trade Problem Europe's Terms-of-Trade Problem The European periphery, especially Italy, faces particularly acute problems. We argued two months ago that Italian yields of 4.5% would not cause a sovereign debt crisis if economic activity were strong. As we go to press, Italian yields stand at 3.7%, or higher than those in Canada and Australia. Yet, Italy suffers from poor demographic and productivity trends; its neutral rate of interest is lower than that of both Canada and Australia. Moreover, Canada and Australia today enjoy robust terms-of-trades. Meanwhile, Italy is among the European economies most hurt by surging energy prices. Consequently, a vicious circle of higher yields and lower growth is likely to develop. Chart 6The BTP-EUR/USD Valse The BTP-EUR/USD Valse The BTP-EUR/USD Valse Italy’s economic problems imply that investors will continue to push Italian spreads higher until the ECB provides a clear signal of support for BTPs, which could happen after spreads reach 300bps over German 10-year yields. Italy’s weakness is a major handicap for the monetary union as well. The higher Italian spreads widen, the weaker the euro will be (Chart 6). However, a depreciating euro is inflationary, which invites higher rates for the Euro Area and tighter financial conditions. The great paradox is that, if the ECB were more pro-active about the fragmentation risk, it could fight inflation with less danger to the economy and thus, the Eurozone could achieve higher rates down the road. Weaknesses in global and European growth, risks of higher Italian and peripheral spreads, and an ECB solely focused on inflation will harm European risk assets further. Specifically, credit spreads will widen more and cyclical stocks will remain vulnerable. Within cyclical stocks, Italian and Spanish financials are the most exposed to the fragmentation threat in Euro Area bond markets. We have held an overweight recommendation on industrial equities. We maintain a positive long-term bias toward this sector, but a neutral stance is warranted in the near term. Finally, Bund yields have limited upside from here. The curve already anticipates 146bps of tightening by the end of this year and 241bps by June 2023. The ECB is unlikely to increase rates more than is anticipated, which caps German yields. Instead, the ECB is likely to undershoot the €STR curve pricing if it increases interest rates once a quarter after the September 50bps hike. Bottom Line: Don’t fight the ECB. The Governing Council is single-mindedly focused on fighting inflation. Growth must slow significantly to cool the labor market and allow the ECB to cut back its medium-term inflation forecast to 2%. Therefore, European assets will remain under stress in the coming months as global growth deteriorates. Italian and peripheral spreads are particularly vulnerable, which will also weigh on financials because of Spanish and Italian banks. Chart 7Pricey Industrials Pricey Industrials Pricey Industrials Neutral On Industrials Industrials stocks have outperformed other cyclicals and have moved in line with the Euro Area broad market. However, relative forward EPS have not tracked prices; industrials are now expensive and vulnerable to shocks (Chart 7). The increase in the relative valuations of industrials reflects their robust pricing power. Normally, the economic weakness pinpointed by the Global Growth Expectations component from the ZEW Survey results in falling valuations for industrials, since it is a growth-sensitive sector (Chart 8). However, this year, the earnings multiples of industrials relative to the broad market have followed inflation higher (Chart 8, bottom panel). This paradox reflects the strong pricing power of the industrial sector, which allows these firms to pass on a greater share of their increasing input-costs and protect their profits (Chart 9). Chart 8Ignore Growth, Loving Inflation Ignore Growth, Loving Inflation Ignore Growth, Loving Inflation Chart 9Pricing Power Is The Savior Pricing Power Is The Savior Pricing Power Is The Savior The ability of industrials to weather a growth slowdown is diminishing: European inflation will peak in response to the decline in commodity inflation (see Chart 4, on page 4). Already, the waning inflation of metal prices is consistent with lower relative multiples for industrials (Chart 10) Last week, we argued that global PMIs have greater downside because of the tightening in global financial conditions. Weaker global manufacturing activity hurts the relative performance of industrials. Capex in advanced economies is likely to drop in the coming quarters. US capex intentions are rapidly slowing, which has hurt European industrials. European capex intentions have so far withstood this headwind; however, the outlook is worsening. European final domestic demand is weakening, and European inventories are growing rapidly (Chart 11). Capex is a form of derived demand; the challenges to European growth translate into downside for investment. Chart 10The Commodity Paradox The Commodity Paradox The Commodity Paradox Chart 11The Inventory Buildup Threat The Inventory Buildup Threat The Inventory Buildup Threat The Euro Area Composite Leading Economic Indicator is already contracting and will fall further. The ECB’s focus on inflation and its neglect of financial conditions will drag the LEI lower. Moreover, central banks across the world are also tightening policy, which will filter through to weaken global and Europe LEIs. A declining LEI hurts industrials (Chart 12). The relative performance of European industrials is positively correlated to that of US industrials (Chart 13). BCA’s Global Asset Allocation has recently downgraded industrials to neutral from overweight. Chart 12Weaker LEIs Spell Trouble Weaker LEIs Spell Trouble Weaker LEIs Spell Trouble Chart 13Where the US Goes, So Does Europe Where the US Goes, So Does Europe Where the US Goes, So Does Europe Despite these risks, we are reluctant to go underweight industrials because financials are more exposed to the ECB’s neglect of financial conditions. Moreover, the headwinds against the industrial complex are temporary, especially when it comes to China. Chinese authorities have greatly stimulated their economy, and Beijing is softening its stance on the tech sector. A loosening of the regulatory crackdown would revive animal spirits and credit demand. Moreover, the aerospace and defense industry, which is a large component of the industrial sector, still offers attractive prospects. Instead, we express our concerns for industrials via the following pair trade: Long German industrials / short Italian Industrials. This is a relative value trade. German industrials have underperformed their relative earnings, while Italian ones have moved significantly ahead of their earning power. Thus, German industrials are very cheap and oversold relative to their southern neighbors (Chart 14). Interestingly, this derating took place despite the widening in Italian government bond spreads, which normally explains this price ratio well (Chart 15). This disconnect presents a trading opportunity. Chart 14A Relative Value Trade A Relative Value Trade A Relative Value Trade Chart 15An Unusual Disconnect An Unusual Disconnect An Unusual Disconnect Chart 16German Industrials And Growth Expectations German Industrials And Growth Expectations German Industrials And Growth Expectations While global growth has yet to bottom, the performance of German relative to Italian industrials fluctuates along growth expectations (Chart 16). Germany seats earlier in the global supply chain than Italy. The Global Growth Expectations component from the ZEW Survey is extremely depressed and approaching levels where a rebound would be imminent. German industrials suffer more from the energy crunch than Italian ones. They will therefore benefit more from the decline in energy inflation. Historically, German industrials outperform Italian ones when commodity prices rise, but this relationship normally reflects the strong global demand that often lifts natural resource prices (Chart 17). Today, commodities are skyrocketing because of supply constraints, not strong demand. Therefore, they are hurting rather than mimicking growth. This inversion in the relationship between the performance of German compared to Italian industrials and natural resources prices is particularly evident when looking at European energy prices (Chart 18). Consequently, once the constraint from commodities and global supply chains ebb, German industrials will outshine their Italian counterparts. Chart 17Commodities: From Friends To Foes Commodities: From Friends To Foes Commodities: From Friends To Foes Chart 18Energy: From Friend To Foe Energy: From Friend To Foe Energy: From Friend To Foe German industrials suffer when stagflation fears expand (Chart 19). The ECB’s focus on inflation will assuage the apprehension of entrenched inflation in Europe. The recent improvement in our European Stagflation Sentiment Proxy will continue to the advantage of German industrials. Additionally, a firm ECB stance will push European inflation expectations lower, which will help German industrials compared to their Italian competitors (Chart 20). Chart 19Stagflation Hurts Germany More Stagflation Hurts Germany More Stagflation Hurts Germany More Chart 20The ECB"s Inflation Focus Helps German Industrials The ECB"s Inflation Focus Helps German Industrials The ECB"s Inflation Focus Helps German Industrials German PMIs are improving relative to Italian ones. The trend in Germany’s industrial activity compared to that of Italy dictates the evolution of industrials relative performance between the two countries (Chart 21). The tightening in financial conditions in Italy due to both wider BTP spreads and their negative impact on the Italian banking sector will accentuate the outperformance of Germany’s manufacturing sector. German industrials are more sensitive than Italian ones to the gyrations of the Chinese economy. BCA’s Geopolitical Strategy service anticipates an improvement in China’s economy for the next 18 months or so in response to previous stimuli and the easing regulatory burden. The close link between the performance of German industrials relative to Italian ones and the yuan’s exchange rate indicates that a stabilizing Chinese economy will undo most of the valuation premium of Italian industrials (Chart 22). An improvement in China’s economy will also lift its marginal propensity to consume (which the spread between the growth rate of M1 and M2 approximates). A rebound in Chinese marginal propensity to consume will boost comparative rates of returns in favor of Germany (Chart 22, bottom panel). Chart 21Relative Growth Matters Relative Growth Matters Relative Growth Matters Chart 22The China Factor The China Factor The China Factor Bottom Line: Industrials have become expensive relative to the rest of the market, but they are still too exposed to the global economy’s downside risk. This tug-of-war warrants a downgrade to neutral for now. Going long German industrials / short Italian industrials is an attractive pair trade within the sector. German industrials are cheap and they will benefit from both the ECB’s policy tightening and the upcoming decline in European inflation. Mathieu Savary, Chief European Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com Tactical Recommendations Cyclical Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Trades

Executive Summary Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Over the next six-to-18 months, the Xi Jinping administration will “let 100 flowers bloom” – i.e., relax a range of government policies to secure China’s economic recovery from the pandemic. The first signs of this policy are already apparent via monetary and fiscal easing and looser regulation of Big Tech. However, investors should treat any risk-on rally in Chinese stocks with skepticism over the long run. Political risk and policy uncertainty will remain high until after Xi consolidates power this fall. Xi is highly likely to remain in office but uncertainty over other personnel – and future national policy – will be substantial. Next year China’s policy trajectory will become clearer. But global investors should avoid mistaking temporary improvements for a change of Xi’s strategy or China’s grand strategy. Beijing is driven by instability and insecurity to challenge the US-led world order. The result will be continued economic divorce and potentially military conflicts in the coming decade. Russia’s reversion to autocracy led to falling productivity and poor equity returns. China is also reverting to autocratic government as a solution to its domestic challenges. Western investors should limit long-term exposure to China and prefer markets that benefit from China’s recovery, such as in Southeast Asia and Latin America. Image Bottom Line: The geopolitical risk premium in Chinese equities will stay high in 2022, fall in 2023, but then rise again as global investors learn that China in the Xi Jinping era is fundamentally unstable and insecure. Feature Chart 1Market Cheers China's Hints At Policy Easing Market Cheers China's Hints At Policy Easing Market Cheers China's Hints At Policy Easing In 1957, after nearly a decade at the helm of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao Zedong initiated the “Hundred Flowers Campaign.” The campaign allowed a degree of political freedom to try to encourage new ideas and debate among China’s intellectuals. The country’s innovative forces had suffered from decades of foreign invasion, civil war, and repression. Within three years, Mao reversed course, reimposed ideological discipline, and punished those who had criticized the party.  It turned out that the new communist regime could not maintain political control while allowing liberalization in the social and economic spheres.1 This episode is useful to bear in mind in 2022 as General Secretary Xi Jinping restores autocratic government in China. In the coming year, Xi will ease a range of policies to promote economic growth and innovation. Already his administration is relaxing some regulatory pressure on Big Tech. Global financial markets are cheering this apparent policy improvement (Chart 1). In effect, Xi is preparing to let 100 flowers bloom. However, China’s economic trajectory remains gloomy over the long run – not least because the US and China lack a strategic basis for re-engagement. Chinese Leaders Fear Foreign Encroachments Mao’s predicament was not only one of ideology and historical circumstance. It was also one of China’s geopolitics. Chinese governments have always struggled to establish domestic control, extend that control over far-flung buffer territories, and impose limits on foreign encroachments. Mao reversed his brief attempt at liberalization because he could not feel secure in his person or his regime. In 1959, the Chinese economy remained backward. The state faced challenges in administration and in buffer spaces like Tibet and Taiwan. The American military loomed large, despite the stalemate and ceasefire on the Korean peninsula in 1952. Russia was turning against Stalinism, while Hungary was revolting against the Soviet Union. Mao feared that the free exchange of ideas would do more to undermine national unity than it would to promote industrialization and technological progress. The 100 flowers that bloomed – intellectuals criticizing government policy – revealed themselves to be insufficiently loyal. They could be culled, strengthening the regime. However, what followed was a failed economic program and nationwide famine. Fast forward to today, when circumstances have changed but the Chinese state faces the same geopolitical insecurities. Xi Jinping, like all Chinese rulers, is struggling to maintain domestic stability and territorial integrity while regulating foreign influence. Although the People’s Republic is not as vulnerable as it was in Mao’s time, it is increasingly vulnerable – namely, to a historic downshift in potential economic growth and a rise in international tensions (Chart 2). The Xi administration has repeatedly shown that it views the US alliance system, US-led global monetary and financial system, and western liberal ideology as threats that need to be counteracted. Chart 2China: Less Stable, Less Secure China: Less Stable, Less Secure China: Less Stable, Less Secure In addition, Russia’s difficulties invading Ukraine suggest that China faces an enormous challenge in attempting to carve out its own sphere of influence without shattering its economic stability. Hence Beijing needs to slow the pace of confrontation with the West while pursuing the same strategic aims. Xi Stays, But Policy Uncertainty Still High In 2022  2022 is a critical political juncture for China. Xi was supposed to step down and hand the baton to a successor chosen by his predecessor Hu Jintao. Instead he has spent the past decade arranging to remain in power until at least 2032. He took a big stride toward this goal at the nineteenth national party congress in 2017, when he assumed the title of “core leader” of the Communist Party and removed term limits from its constitution. This year’s Omicron outbreak and abrupt economic slowdown have raised speculation about whether Xi’s position is secure. Some of this speculation is wild – but China is far less stable than it appears. Structurally, inequality is high, social mobility is low, and growth is slowing, forcing the new middle class to compromise its aspirations. Cyclically, unemployment is rising and the Misery Index is higher than it appears if one focuses on youth employment and fuel inflation (Chart 3). The risk of sociopolitical upheaval is underrated among global investors. Chart 3AStructurally China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Chart 3BCyclically China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Cyclically China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Cyclically China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Yet even assuming that social unrest and political dissent flare up, Xi is highly likely to clinch another five-to-ten years in power. Consider the following points: The top leaders control personnel decisions. The national party congress is often called an “election,” but that is a misnomer. The Communist Party’s top posts will be ratified, not elected. The Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee select the members of the Central Committee; the national party congress convenes to ratify these new members. The Central Committee then ratifies the line-up of the new Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee, which is orchestrated by Xi along with the existing Politburo Standing Committee (Diagram 1). Xi is the most important figure in deciding the new leadership. Diagram 1Mechanics Of The Chinese Communist Party’s National Congress Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. There is no history of surprise votes. The party congress ratifies approximately 90% of the candidates put forward. Outcomes closely conform to predictions of external analysts, meaning that the leadership selection is not a spontaneous, grassroots process but rather a mechanical, elite-driven process with minimal influence from low-level party members, not to mention the population at large.2  The party and state control the levers of power: The Communist Party has control over the military, state bureaucracy, and “commanding heights” of the economy. This includes domestic security forces, energy, communications, transportation, and the financial system. Whoever controls the Communist Party and central government exerts heavy influence over provincial governments and non-government institutions. The state bureaucracy is not in a position to oppose the party leadership. Xi has conducted a decade-long political purge (“anti-corruption campaign”). Upon coming to power in 2012, Xi initiated a neo-Maoist campaign to re-centralize power in his own person, in the Communist Party, and in the central government. He has purged foreign influence along with rivals in the party, state, military, business, civil society, and Big Tech. He personally controls the military, the police, the paramilitary forces, the intelligence and security agencies, and the top Communist Party organs. There may be opposition but it is not organized or capable. Chart 4China: Big Tech Gets Relief ... For Now China: Big Tech Gets Relief ... For Now China: Big Tech Gets Relief ... For Now There are no serious alternatives to Xi’s leadership. Xi is widely recognized within China as the “core” of the fifth generation of Chinese leaders. The other leaders and their factions have been repressed. Xi imprisoned his top rivals, Bo Xilai and Zhou Yongkang, a decade ago. He has since neutralized their followers and the factions of previous leaders Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin. Premier Li Keqiang has never exercised any influence and will retire at the end of this year. None of the ousted figures have reemerged to challenge Xi, but potential rivals have been imprisoned or disciplined, as have prominent figures that pose no direct political threat, such as tech entrepreneur Jack Ma (Chart 4).  Additional high-level sackings are likely before the party congress. China’s reversion to autocracy grew from Communist Party elites, not Xi alone. China’s slowing potential GDP growth and changing economic model raise an existential threat to the Communist Party over the long run. The party recognized its potential loss of legitimacy back in 2012, the year Xi was slated to take the helm. The solution was to concentrate power in the center, promoting Maoist nostalgia and strongman rule. In essence, the party needed a new Mao; Xi was all too willing to play the part. Hence Xi’s current position does not rest on his personal maneuvers alone. The party has invested heavily in Xi and will continue to do so. Characteristics of the political elite underpin the autocratic shift. Statistics on the evolving character traits of Politburo members show the trend toward leaders that are more rural, more bureaucratic, and more ideologically orthodox, i.e. more nationalist and communist (Chart 5). This trend underpins the party’s behavior and Xi’s personal rule. Chart 5China: From Technocracy To Autocracy Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Chart 6China: De-Industrialization Undermines Stability China: De-Industrialization Undermines Stability China: De-Industrialization Undermines Stability Xi has guarded his left flank. By cornering the hard left of the political spectrum Xi has positioned himself as the champion of poor people, workers, farmers, soldiers, and common folk. This is the political base of the Communist Party, as opposed to the rich coastal elites and westernizing capitalists, who stand to suffer from Xi’s policies. Ultimately de-industrialization – e.g. the sharp decline in manufacturing and construction sectors (Chart 6) – poses a major challenge to this narrative. But social unrest will be repressed and will not overturn Xi or the regime anytime soon. Xi still retains political capital. After centuries of instability, Chinese households are averse to upheaval, civil war, and chaos. They support the current regime because it has stabilized China and made it prosperous. Of course, relative to the Hu Jintao era, Xi’s policies have produced slower growth and productivity and a tarnished international image (Chart 7). But they have not yet led to massive instability that would alienate the people in general. If Chinese citizens look abroad, they see that Xi has already outlasted US Presidents Obama and Trump, is likely to outlast Biden, and that US politics are in turmoil. The same goes for Europe, Japan, and Russia – Xi’s leadership does not suffer by comparison.  Chart 7China’s Declining International Image Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. External actors are neither willing nor able to topple Xi. Any outside attempt to interfere with China’s leadership or political system would be unwarranted and would provoke an aggressive response. The US is internally divided and has not developed a consistent China policy. This year the Biden administration has its hands full with midterm elections, Russia, and Iran, where it must also accept the current leadership as a fact of life. It has no ability to prevent Xi’s power consolidation, though it will impose punitive economic measures. Japan and other US allies have an interest in undermining Xi’s administration, but they follow the US’s lead in foreign policy. They also lack influence over the political rotation within the Communist Party. The Europeans will keep their distance but will not try to antagonize China given their more pressing conflict with Russia. Russia needs China more than ever and will lend material support in the form of cheaper and more secure natural resources. North Korean and Iranian nuclear provocations will help Xi stay under the radar.  There is no reason to expect a new leader to take over in China. The Xi administration’s strategy, revealed over the past ten years, will remain intact for another five-to-ten years at least. The real question at the party congress is whether Xi will be forced to name a successor or compromise with the opposing faction on the personnel of the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee. But even that remains to be seen – and either way he will remain the paramount leader. Bottom Line: Xi Jinping has the political capability to cement another five-to-ten years in power. Opposing factions have been weakened over the past decade by Xi’s domestic political purge and clash with the United States. China is ripe for social unrest and political dissent but these will be repressed as China goes further down the path of autocracy. Foreign powers have little influence over the process. Policy Uncertainty Falls In 2023 … Only To Rise Again What will Xi Jinping do once he consolidates power? Xi’s administration has weighed heavily on China’s economy, foreign relations, and financial markets. The situation has worsened dramatically this year as the economy struggles with “A Trifecta Of Economic Woes” – namely a rampant pandemic, waning demand for exports, and a faltering housing market (Chart 8). In response the administration is now easing a range of policies to stabilize expectations and try to meet the 5.5% annual growth target. The money impulse, and potentially the credit impulse, is turning less negative, heralding an eventual upturn in industrial activity and import volumes in 2023. These measures will give a boost to Chinese and global growth, although stimulus measures are losing effectiveness over time (Chart 9).  Chart 8China's Trifecta Of Economic Woes China's Trifecta Of Economic Woes China's Trifecta Of Economic Woes Chart 9More Stimulus, But Less Effectiveness More Stimulus, But Less Effectiveness More Stimulus, But Less Effectiveness This pro-growth policy pivot will continue through the year and into next year. After all, if Xi is going to stay in power, he does not want to bequeath himself a financial crisis or recession at the start of his third term. Still, investors should treat any rally in Chinese equity markets with skepticism. First, political risk and uncertainty will remain elevated until Xi completes his power grab, as China is highly susceptible to surprises and negative political incidents this year (Chart 10). For example, if social unrest emerges and is repressed, then the West will impose sanctions. If China increases its support of Russia, Iran, or North Korea, then the US will impose sanctions.     Chart 10China: Policy Uncertainty And Geopolitical Risk To Stay High In 2022, Might Improve In 2023 China: Policy Uncertainty And Geopolitical Risk To Stay High In 2022, Might Improve In 2023 China: Policy Uncertainty And Geopolitical Risk To Stay High In 2022, Might Improve In 2023 Chart 11China Needs To Court Europe China Needs To Court Europe China Needs To Court Europe The regime will be extremely vigilant and overreact to any threats this year, real or perceived. Political objectives will remain paramount, above the economy and financial markets, and that means new economic policy initiatives will not be reliable. Investors cannot be confident about the country’s policy direction until the leadership rotation is complete and new policy guidance is revealed, particularly in December 2022 and March 2023. Second, after consolidating power, investors should interpret Xi’s policy shift as “letting 100 flowers bloom,” i.e., a temporary relaxation that aims to reboot the economy but does not change the country’s long-term policy trajectory. Economic reopening is inevitable after the pandemic response is downgraded – which is a political determination. Xi will also be forced to reduce foreign tensions for the sake of the economy, particularly by courting Europe, which is three times larger than Russia as a market (Chart 11). However, China’s declining labor force and high debt levels prevent its periodic credit stimulus from generating as much economic output as in the past. And the administration will not ultimately pursue liberal structural reforms and a more open economy. That is the path toward foreign encroachment – and regime insecurity. The US’s sanctions on Russia have shown the consequences of deep dependency on the West. China will continue diversifying away from the US. And, as we will see, the US cannot provide credible promises that it will reduce tensions. US-China: Re-Engagement Will Fail The Biden administration is focused on fighting inflation ahead of the midterm elections. But its confrontation with Russia – and likely failure to freeze Iran’s nuclear program – increases rather than decreases oil supply constraints. Hence some administration officials and outside observers argue that the administration should pursue a strategic re-engagement with China.3  Theoretically a US-China détente would buy both countries time to deal with their domestic politics by providing some international stability. Improved US-China relations could also isolate Russia and hasten a resolution to the war in Ukraine, potentially reducing commodity price pressures. In essence, a US-China détente would reprise President Richard Nixon’s outreach to China in 1972, benefiting both countries at the expense of Russia.4  This kind of Kissinger 2.0 maneuver could happen but there are good reasons to think it will not, or if it does that it will fall apart in one or two years. In 1972, China had nowhere near the capacity to deny the US access to the Asia Pacific region, expel US influence from neighboring countries, reconquer Taiwan, or project power elsewhere. Today, China is increasingly gaining these abilities. In fact it is the only power in the world capable of rivaling the US in both economic and military terms over the long run (Chart 12). Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently outlined the Biden administration’s China policy and declared that China poses “the most serious long-term challenge” to the US despite Russian aggression.5  Chart 12US-China Competition Sows Distrust, Drives Economic Divorce Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. While another decade of US engagement with China would benefit the US economy, it would be far more beneficial to China. Crucially, it would be beneficial in a strategic sense, not just an economic one. It could provide just the room for maneuver that China needs – at this critical juncture in its development – to achieve technological and productivity breakthroughs and escape the middle-income trap. Another ten-year reprieve from direct American competition would set China up to challenge the US on the global stage. That would be far too high of a strategic price for America to pay for a ceasefire in Ukraine. Ukraine has limited strategic value for the US and it does not steer US grand strategy, which aims to prevent regional empires from taking shape. In fact Washington is deliberately escalating and prolonging the war in Ukraine to drain Russia’s resources. Ending the war would do Russia a strategic favor, while re-engaging with China would do China a strategic favor. So why would the defense and intelligence community advise the Biden administration to pursue Kissinger 2.0? Chart 13US Unlikely To Revoke Trump Tariffs US Unlikely To Revoke Trump Tariffs US Unlikely To Revoke Trump Tariffs Biden could still pursue some degree of détente with China, namely by repealing President Trump’s trade tariffs, in order to relieve price pressures ahead of the midterm election. Yet even here the case is deeply flawed. Trump’s tariffs on China did not trigger the current inflationary bout. That was the combined Trump-Biden fiscal stimulus and Covid-era supply constraints. US import prices are rising faster from the rest of the world than they are from China (Chart 13). Tariff relief would not change China’s Zero Covid policy, which is the current driver of price spikes from China. And while lifting tariffs on China would not reduce inflation enough to attract voters, it would cost Biden some political credit among voters in swing states like Pennsylvania, and across the US, where China’s image has plummeted in the wake of Covid-19 (Chart 14).   Chart 14US Political Consensus Remains Hawkish On China Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. If Biden did pursue détente, would China be able to reciprocate and offer trade concessions? Xi has the authority to do so but he is unlikely to make major trade concessions prior to the party congress. Economic self-sufficiency and resistance to American pressure have become pillars of his support. Promises will not ease inflation for US voters in November and Xi has no incentive to make binding concessions because the next US administration could intensify the trade war regardless.  Bottom Line: The US has no long-term interest, and a limited short-term interest, in easing pressure on China’s economy. Continued US pressure, combined with China’s internal difficulties, will reinforce Xi Jinping’s shift toward nationalism and hawkish foreign policy. Hence there is little basis for a substantial US-China re-engagement that improves the global macroeconomic environment over the coming years. Investment Takeaways Chart 15Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Xi Jinping will clinch another five-to-ten years in power this fall. To stabilize the economy, he will “let 100 flowers bloom” and ease monetary, fiscal, regulatory, and social policy at home. He will also court the West, especially Europe, for the sake of economic growth. However, he will not go so far as to compromise his ultimate aims: self-sufficiency at home and a sphere of influence abroad. The result will be a relapse into conflict with the West within a year or two. Ultimately a closed Chinese economy in conflict with the West will result in lower productivity, a weaker currency, a high geopolitical risk premium, and low equity returns – just as it did for Russia (Chart 15). Any short-term improvement in China’s low equity multiples will ultimately be capped. Over the long run, western investors should hedge against Chinese geopolitical risk by preferring markets that benefit from China’s periodic stimulus yet do not suffer from the break-up of the US-China and EU-Russia economic relationships, such as key markets in Latin America and Southeast Asia (Charts 16 & 17). Chart 16China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For … Latin America China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Latin America China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Latin America Chart 17China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For … Southeast Asia China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Southeast Asia China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Southeast Asia     Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     Modern scholarship has shown that Mao intended to entrap the opposition through the 100 Flowers Campaign. For a harrowing account of this episode, see Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, Mao: The Unknown Story (New York: Anchor Books, 2006), pp. 409-17. 2     “At least 8% of CPC Central Committee nominees voted off,” Xinhua, October 24, 2017, english.www.gov.cn. 3    Christopher Condon, “Yellen Says Biden Team Is Looking To ‘Reconfigure’ China Tariffs,” June 8, 2022, www.bloomberg.com. 4       Niall Ferguson, “Dust Off That Dirty Word Détente And Engage With China,” Bloomberg, June 5, 2022, www.bloomberg.com. 5    See Antony J Blinken, Secretary of State, “The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China,” George Washington University, Washington D.C., May 26, 2022, state.gov. Additionally, see President Joe Biden’s third assertion of US willingness to defend Taiwan against China, in a joint press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister Kishida Fumio, “Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Kishida Fumio of Japan in Joint Press Conference,” Akasaka Palace, Tokyo, Japan, May 23, 2022, whitehouse.gov.

Executive Summary The Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) is flawed. This Holy Grail of financial economics assumes that investors are a homogenous bunch with identical investment horizons, when the reality is that investors have a wide spectrum of time horizons. The alternative but less well-known Fractal Market Hypothesis (FMH) recognizes that investors with different time horizons interpret the same facts and information differently. The key conclusion of the FMH is that when the different investment horizons are all active in the market, the price reflects all available information, meaning that the market is efficient, liquid, and stable. But when the different investment horizons start to converge and coalesce, the market becomes inefficient, illiquid, and vulnerable to a trend reversal. Using the FMH over the past six months, 5 structured recommendations were closed in profit: Short ILS/GBP, Short Coffee versus Cocoa, Short World Basic Resources versus Market, Long EUR/CHF, and Short Semiconductors versus Tech. Against this, 3 structured recommendations were closed in loss: Short Nickel versus Silver, Long Polish Bonds versus US Bonds, and Short World Semiconductors versus Biotech. Within the 10 open trades, 3 are in healthy profit, 4 are flat, and 3 are in loss. The Efficient Market Hypothesis Does Not Describe The Truth; The Fractal Market Hypothesis Does Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 Bottom Line: As few investors are aware of the Fractal Market Hypothesis, it gives a competitive advantage to those that use it to identify potential trend reversals. Feature For nations and societies, disagreement and conflict are unhealthy. But for financial markets, the opposite is true – it is the lack of disagreement and conflict that is unhealthy. This is because the market needs disagreement to generate liquidity, the ability to trade quickly and in large volume without destabilizing the market price. If I want to buy a share, then somebody must sell me that share. It follows that I and the seller must disagree about the attractiveness of the share at the current price. Likewise, if I and like-minded individuals want to buy ten million shares, it follows that lots of market participants must disagree with us. If lots of market participants do not disagree with us, there will be insufficient liquidity to complete the transaction without a price change. And if too many people are engaged in groupthink, the price change could be extreme. Markets Become Inefficient When There Is Not Enough Disagreement How can there be major disagreement about the attractiveness of an investment when we all have access to the same facts and information? According to the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) there cannot be, because asset prices always reflect all available information.1   Unfortunately, the Efficient Market Hypothesis is flawed. This Holy Grail of financial economics assumes that investors are a homogenous bunch with identical investment horizons, when the reality is that investors have a wide spectrum of time horizons – ranging from the milliseconds of momentum-driven high-frequency trading (HFT) to the decades of a value-driven pension fund. The market is efficient only when a wide spectrum of investment horizons is setting the price, signified by the market having a rich fractal structure. The alternative but less well-known Fractal Market Hypothesis (FMH) recognizes the reality of different time horizons. Crucially, the FMH acknowledges that investors with different time horizons interpret the same facts and information differently. In other words, they disagree (Box I-1). Box 1-1The Efficient Market Hypothesis Does Not Describe The Truth; The Fractal Market Hypothesis Does Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 For example, the momentum-based high frequency trader might interpret a sharp one-day sell-off as a sell signal, but the value-based pension fund might interpret the same information as a buying opportunity. This disagreement will create liquidity without requiring a big price adjustment. Thereby it also fosters market stability. The key conclusion of the Fractal Market Hypothesis is that when the different investment horizons are all active in the market, the price does reflect all available information, meaning that the market is efficient, liquid, and stable. But when the different investment horizons start to converge and coalesce, the market becomes inefficient, illiquid, and vulnerable to a trend reversal. Buy and sell orders will no longer match without a price change, possibly extreme. Can we measure the loss of efficiency in a specific investment, and thereby anticipate a potential trend reversal? The answer is yes, by monitoring its fractal dimension, using the expression in the Appendix. Although many readers may find the concept of a fractal dimension intimidating, the idea is simple and intuitive. It just measures the complexity – or information content – in an object or structure. Thereby, when an investment’s fractal dimension reaches its lower limit, it warns that the information content of longer-term investors is missing from the price.  When the longer-term investors do ultimately re-enter the price setting process, the question is: will they endorse the recent trend because of some major change in the fundamentals – such as the start of the Russia/Ukraine war? Or will they reject it, as an unjustified deviation from a fundamental anchor. In most cases, it is the latter: a rejection and a trend reversal. As few investors are aware of the Fractal Market Hypothesis, it gives a competitive advantage to those that use it to identify potential trend reversals. Fractal Trading Update Using the Fractal Market Hypothesis over the past six months, 5 structured recommendations were closed in profit: Short ILS/GBP, Short Coffee versus Cocoa, Short World Basic Resources versus Market, Long EUR/CHF, and Short Semiconductors versus Tech. A fragile fractal structure warns of a crowded trade. One structured recommendation was closed flat: Short Personal Goods versus Consumer Services. Against this, 3 structured recommendations were closed in loss: Short Nickel versus Silver, Long Polish Bonds versus US Bonds, and Short World Semiconductors versus Biotech. Within the 10 open trades, 3 are in healthy profit, 4 are flat, and 3 are in loss. As for the unstructured recommendations, for which we do not define profit targets or expiry dates, we are pleased to report that out of 31 recommendations, only 2 failed to experience a countertrend reversal. Wins 1) November 18th: Short ILS/GBP Achieved its profit target of 4.2 percent. 2) November 25th: Short Coffee versus Cocoa (Chart I-1) Achieved almost half of its 30 percent profit target at expiry. Chart I-1Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In Coffee Versus Cocoa Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In Coffee Versus Cocoa Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In Coffee Versus Cocoa 3) January 20th: Short World Semiconductors versus Tech (Chart I-2) Achieved its profit target of 6 percent. Chart I-2Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Semiconductors Versus Technology Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Semiconductors Versus Technology Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Semiconductors Versus Technology 4) March 10th: Long EUR/CHF Achieved its profit target of 3.6 percent. 5)  April 14th: Short World Basic Resources versus Market (Chart I-3) Achieved its profit target of 11.5 percent. Chart I-3Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Basic Resources Versus Market Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Basic Resources Versus Market Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Basic Resources Versus Market In addition, Short World Personal Goods versus Consumer Services which was opened on December 9th reached a high-water mark of 10.5 percent but expired flat. Losses 1) December 2nd: Short World Semiconductors versus Biotech Hit its stop loss of 9.5 percent. 2) January 13th: Long Poland versus US: 10-Year Government Bonds Reached a high-water mark of 3.7 percent, but then reversed to hit its stop loss of 8 percent. In the current geopolitical crisis, Poland has been a casualty due to its lengthy border with Ukraine. 3) February 3rd: Short Nickel versus Silver (Chart I-4) Hit its stop loss at 20 percent following an explosive short-squeeze rally in the Nickel price. Chart I-4Nickel's Short-Squeeze Rally Forced A Price Trend Prolongation Nickel's Short-Squeeze Rally Forced A Price Trend Prolongation Nickel's Short-Squeeze Rally Forced A Price Trend Prolongation Open Trades 1) January 27th: Long MSCI Korea versus All-Country World (Chart I-5) Open, in profit, having reached a high-water mark of 6 percent (versus an 8 percent target). Chart I-5Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Rebound In Korea Versus All-Country World Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Rebound In Korea Versus All-Country World Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Rebound In Korea Versus All-Country World 2) February 24th: Long US Biotech versus US Tech Open, in profit, having reached a high-water mark of 10.5 (versus a 17.5 percent target). 3) March 3rd: Short World Banks versus Consumer Services Reached a high-water mark of 7.3 percent (versus a 12 percent target), but then reversed and is in loss. 4) March 24th: Long 5-Year T-bond Open, in modest loss. 5) April 7th: Short World Non-Life Insurance versus Homebuilders (Chart I-6) Open, in profit having reached a high-water mark of 12.4 percent (versus a 14 percent target). Chart I-6Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Non-Life Insurance Versus Homebuilders Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Non-Life Insurance Versus Homebuilders Fractal Analysis Correctly Predicted A Reversal In World Non-Life Insurance Versus Homebuilders 6) April 7th: Long JPY/CHF Reached a high-water mark of 3.4 percent versus a 4 percent target, but then reversed into modest loss. This suggests that the trade needed a narrower profit target. 7) April 28th: Short High Dividend ETF versus US 10-Year T-bond Open, in modest loss, having reached a high-water mark of 2.9 percent (versus a 6 percent target). 8) May 19th: Short FTSE 100 versus STOXX Europe 600 Open, and flat. 9) June 2nd: Long JPY/USD (Chart I-7) Open, and flat. Chart I-7The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point 10) June 2nd: Short Australia Basic Resources versus World Market (Chart I-8) Open, and flat. Chart I-8The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal   Our full watchlist of 29 investments that are at, or approaching turning points, is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Appendix: Calculating The Fractal Dimension Of A Financial Market Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 Chart 1AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 2Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Chart 3Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 4US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 5BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 6Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 7CNY/USD Has Reversed CNY/USD Has Reversed CNY/USD Has Reversed Chart 8CAD/SEK Is Vulnerable To Reversal CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 9Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 10The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 11The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 12FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing Chart 13Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Is Ending Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Chart 14The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 15The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 16Food And Beverage Outperformance Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Chart 17The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 18The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 19A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 20Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 21Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 22Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Chart 23Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Ended Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 24The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended Chart 25The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 26A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 27Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart 28US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 29GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Hadi Elzein Research Associate hadi.elzein@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1  Strictly speaking, the EMH assumes there is some disagreement, but that this disagreement is random and follows a standard Gaussian (bell-curve) distribution. Therefore, the EMH assumes that a share price just follows a random walk until new (unpredictable) fundamental information arrives. Fractal Trades Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 Fractal Trading Update - June 2022 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Executive Summary Chinese Infrastructure Investment Growth: A Slowdown Ahead Chinese Infrastructure Investment Growth: A Slowdown Ahead Chinese Infrastructure Investment Growth: A Slowdown Ahead Despite the authorities’ push, China’s infrastructure1  investment nominal growth2 will likely slow from the current rate of 8% to 1-3% in 2022H2, on a year-over-year basis.   Funding shortages will limit local governments’ capability to invest in traditional infrastructure fixed-asset investment (FAI), which will likely grow by only 1-2% in 2022H2. We expect China’s cheap green loans to support a 10-15% growth in tech infrastructure spending in the second half of this year. However, the scale of China’s tech infrastructure investment is too small in absolute terms to offset the weakness in traditional infrastructure spending.  Tech infrastructure plays will likely outperform traditional infrastructure plays in the long term as China continues its efforts to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and reach carbon neutrality before 2060. As new infrastructure investment will accelerate in the coming years, we are positive on the sectors of NEV and NEV charging poles. Given the still-high valuation of the sector and mounting downward pressure that the Chinese economy is currently facing, we look to buy these sectors at a better price entry point. Bottom Line: China’s infrastructure investment growth will likely slow from the current 8% rate to 1-3% in 2022H2 due to funding constraints and a shrinking pool of profitable infrastructure projects. Feature Infrastructure investment growth in China accelerated to 8% (nominal) in the first four months of this year (Chart 1, top panel). The authorities demanded that local governments execute infrastructure projects sooner and faster to offset the strong headwinds to the economy from COVID restrictions and continued property downturn. Nonetheless, China’s infrastructure investment growth will likely slow from the current annual rate (YoY) of 8% to 1-3% in 2022H2 due to funding constraints and a lack of financially feasible projects, bringing the whole year’s growth to slightly below 4%.  Although a 4% YoY growth in infrastructure investment this year would be an improvement from the 0.4% YoY contraction in 2021, it is far below the 12% average rate of infrastructure spending growth over the past decade (Chart 1). Moreover, we estimate that traditional infrastructure investment, which accounts for 95% of China’s total infrastructure spending, will only grow by 1-2% in 2022H2 (Chart 2, top panel). Chart 1Chinese Infrastructure Investment: Moderate Growth In 2022H2 Chinese Infrastructure Investment: Moderate Growth In 2022H2 Chinese Infrastructure Investment: Moderate Growth In 2022H2 Chart 2Investment Growth In 2022H2: Deceleration In Traditional Infrastructure While Acceleration In Tech Infrastructure Investment Growth In 2022H2: Deceleration In Traditional Infrastructure While Acceleration In Tech Infrastructure Investment Growth In 2022H2: Deceleration In Traditional Infrastructure While Acceleration In Tech Infrastructure For the tech infrastructure, we are more positive as building cutting-edge tech infrastructure– including 5G networks, data centers, artificial intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things (IoT) – has become a top development priority for China. With supportive policies and cheap green loans, we expect a 10-15% YoY growth in Chinese tech infrastructure in 2022H2 (Chart 2, bottom panel). However, the scale of China’s tech infrastructure investment is too small in absolute terms to offset the weakness in traditional infrastructure spending. After all, tech infrastructure currently only accounts for about 5% of the total Chinese nominal infrastructure FAI (Chart 3). Chart 3Breaking Down Chinese Infrastructure Investment China's Infrastructure Push: How Much Upside? China's Infrastructure Push: How Much Upside? Tech infrastructure plays will likely outperform their traditional infrastructure counterparts in the long term as China continues its efforts to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and reach carbon neutrality before 2060. As new infrastructure investment will accelerate in the coming years, we are positive on the sectors of NEV and NEV charging poles. Yet, considering China’s economy is still facing downward pressure and the sector’s valuations are still high, we look to buy these sectors at a better price entry point. Funding Constraints The recent strong rebound in Chinese infrastructure investment was mainly driven by a massive frontload of local government special purpose bond (SPB) sales, as well as funding from last year’s SPB proceeds – both funding resources will not sustain into the second half of this year.   According to the data from the Ministry of Finance, in the first five months of 2022, special bond issuance has already reached 2.03 trillion RMB, significantly higher than the 1.2 trillion RMB issued during the same period last year. In addition, there has been an estimated 1.2 trillion unused SPB proceeds from 2021 that have been carried over to 2022 to fund infrastructure spending. However, such a boost in local government funding of infrastructure investment is unsustainable. We expect Chinese infrastructure investment growth to fall back to the 1-3% range in 2022H2 due to limited financial availability and a shrinking pool of infrastructure projects. Chart 4 shows the breakdown of the major funding sources of Chinese infrastructure investment. Most of them are likely to face considerable constraints over the next six months. Chart 4Major Funding Sources Of Chinese Infrastructure Investment China's Infrastructure Push: How Much Upside? China's Infrastructure Push: How Much Upside? (1) Less Revenues Chinese local governments face tremendous shortfalls of cash, which will impede their ability to meet their nearly 30% contribution to overall infrastructure funding: Land sales by local governments contribute nearly 90% of government-managed funds (GMF3). The latter's revenues, excluding proceeds from SPB issuance, account for 16% of overall infrastructure funding. The deep contraction in home sales has depressed real estate developers’ land purchases, which has considerably reduced local government revenues (Chart 5). This will curb the ability of local governments to finance their infrastructure projects through GMFs. Although we expect a moderate rebound in property sales over the next six months from very depressed levels in recent months, the improvement in local government land sales will likely be very limited as real estate developers are still overleveraged and under severe funding constraints.   In addition to the slump in land sales, tax cuts for corporates and low-income households are also eroding local government revenues, and COVID-related expenses add to spending needs. Shrinking corporate profits will also pose downward risks to the tax revenues of local governments (Chart 6). Chart 5Government-Managed Funds: Headwinds From Falling Land Sales Government-Managed Funds: Headwinds From Falling Land Sales Government-Managed Funds: Headwinds From Falling Land Sales Chart 6Declining Government Tax##br## Revenues Declining Government Tax Revenues Declining Government Tax Revenues   The general budget of local governments,4 which contributes to about 14% of overall infrastructure financing, is extremely tight this year. In the first four months of the year,  revenues of local governments fell by about 18% from the same period last year, while their expenditures increased by 5%. As a result, the general government’s fiscal deficit will likely exceed both the 2.8% target set for this year and the 3.2% fiscal deficit of last year (Chart 7).   Chart 7Government General Budget: Large Deficit Government General Budget: Large Deficit Government General Budget: Large Deficit (2) Less SPB Available In H2 Chart 8Local Government Special Bond Issuance Will Decrease In 2022H2 Local Government Special Bond Issuance Will Decrease In 2022H2 Local Government Special Bond Issuance Will Decrease In 2022H2 Local government SPB issuance, which is used exclusively to fund infrastructure projects, has been another major source of financing for domestic infrastructure projects since 2016 (Chart 8).    As local governments frontloaded 56% of their 2022 SPB quota in the first five months of this year, they will have less fiscal support from SPBs in 2022H2. As net local government SPB issuance made up about 16% of overall infrastructure FAI on average in the past three years, there is quite a financing gap to be filled in 2022H2. (3) Contracting Domestic Loan Demand Domestic loans contribute to about 20% of overall infrastructure financing, with 14% from regular non-household medium-long-term (MLT) lending, and another 6% from domestic green loans. Infrastructure projects are generally long-term investments in nature and hence often require MTL loans. Presently, the impulse of non-household MLT lending is contracting (Chart 9). While not all MLT loans are used for infrastructure, sluggish MLT lending also reflects corporates’ reluctance to borrow for and invest in infrastructure projects. Strong economic headwinds due to COVID-induced lockdowns and the slumping property market, mounting local government debt, and low returns on infrastructure projects will continue to curb corporates’ demand for bank loans to fund infrastructure projects, particularly from the private sector. The “green loans”,5 which are used for but not limited to new energy infrastructure projects, will continue to grow strongly in 2022H2. In 2021, the increase in green loans for infrastructure was 1.64 trillion RMB, or a 62% increase from the previous year. In 2022, we expect new green loans could rise 50%-80% to 2.5-3 trillion RMB, with an increase of 0.6-1.1 trillion RMB in new green loans in the second half of the year. While green loans will help support the overall infrastructure investment, given their small size (green loans accounted for about 8% of China’s total infrastructure investment in 2021), they will unlikely fully offset the shortfall from other financing sources this year (Chart 10). Chart 9Sluggish Medium/Long-Term Bank##br## Lending Sluggish Medium/Long-Term Bank Lending Sluggish Medium/Long-Term Bank Lending Chart 10Green Loans: Strong Growth In 2022H2 But Still Small Amount Relative To Overall Infrastructure Investment Green Loans: Strong Growth In 2022H2 But Still Small Amount Relative To Overall Infrastructure Investment Green Loans: Strong Growth In 2022H2 But Still Small Amount Relative To Overall Infrastructure Investment In the long run, though, to reach peak carbon emissions by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060, China will continue to lean heavily on its banking system to accelerate green projects and infrastructure investment. (4) Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) Since 2014, PPPs have become an important financing model for Chinese local governments to fund infrastructure investments. However, to control rising local government leverage, the central government has tightened regulations on PPP projects since early 2018. Heightened scrutiny has resulted in a sharp deceleration in both PPP investment and overall infrastructure investment growth. Consequently, PPP contributions to total infrastructure FAI have been consistently declining, from over 30% in 2017 to about 4% currently (Chart 11). So far this year, the amount of signed and implemented PPP investments has been falling. While the private sector’s propensity to invest has been extremely weak, a shrinking pool of profitable infrastructure projects could be another contributing factor. The number of projects – which are in the preparation stage in the national total project entries – has been falling from its peak of 2,550 in June 2017 to only 465 in March 2022 (Chart 12). Chart 11Public-Private Partnerships Funding: Limited Growth In 2022H2 Public-Private Partnerships Funding: Limited Growth In 2022H2 Public-Private Partnerships Funding: Limited Growth In 2022H2 Chart 12A Shrinking Pool Of Public-Private Partnership##br## Projects A Shrinking Pool Of Public-Private Partnership Projects A Shrinking Pool Of Public-Private Partnership Projects (5) Other Funding Sources Local government financing vehicles (LGFV) and shadow bank borrowing were major financing sources prior to 2018. However, following the 2017/2018 financial de-risking and anticorruption campaign, local governments have scaled back their shadow bank activities significantly. Shadow banking remains in deep contraction (Chart 13). We expect only a modest pick-up in LGFV leveraging during the rest of the year, given that both the anticorruption campaign and a reshuffling of local government officials are ongoing. Chart 13Shadow Banking Will Remain In Deep Contraction Shadow Banking Will Remain In Deep Contraction Shadow Banking Will Remain In Deep Contraction In addition, policy banks could sell special sovereign bonds to help fund domestic infrastructure projects. For example, in a recent State Council meeting, Premier Li Keqiang requested policy banks to provide 800 billion RMB ($120 billion) in funding for infrastructure projects. An 800-billion-RMB additional funding, if fully invested, would only add about 0.4% growth to this year’s infrastructure spending. Bottom line: Due to funding constraints and a shrinking pool of profitable infrastructure projects, China’s infrastructure investment growth rate will likely slow from the current 8% pace to 1-3% in 2022H2. Infrastructure Investment Focus: Shifting From Traditional To New Chart 14China Is Shifting Its Focus Away From Traditional Infrastructure Development… China Is Shifting Its Focus Away From Traditional Infrastructure Development... China Is Shifting Its Focus Away From Traditional Infrastructure Development... The pace of new infrastructure (including but not limited to tech infrastructure) is set to accelerate both cyclically (in the next 6 to 12 months) and structurally (in the next 3 to 5 years), while traditional infrastructure investment growth will slow. However, over a cyclical time horizon, infrastructure investment in new economy sectors is too small to offset the weakness in spending in traditional sectors. Decelerating Investment In Traditional Infrastructure In 2022H2 And Beyond Chart 14 shows the real growth rate of railways, highways and airports has all dropped to below 3% last year. Correspondingly, investment in transport infrastructure only grew 1.4% in 2020 and 1.6% in 2021, a distinctly slower pace from 3.9% in 2018 and 3.4% in 2019. Similar growth deceleration has also occurred in the Water Conservancy, Environment & Utility Management sector. Investment growth in nominal terms this sector fell from 3.3% in 2018 and 2.9% in 2019 to 0.2% in 2020 and saw a 1.2% contraction in 2021. Most Chinese cities with large populations and/or high population density have already upgraded their sewer system in recent years and, therefore, localities have only been maintaining rather than upgrading these systems. The Water Conservancy, Environment & Utility Management sector and the Transport, Storage and Postal Service sector together account for the lion’s share (78%) of total infrastructure investment. A growth deceleration in these two sectors will likely lead to slower growth in overall infrastructure investment, compared with the first four months of this year, when both sectors grew by 7.2% and 7.4%, respectively, in nominal terms. Accelerating Investment In New Infrastructure In 2022H2 And Beyond Chart 15...To New Infrastructure Development ...To New Infrastructure Development ...To New Infrastructure Development Investment in new economy sectors–such as Electricity, Gas & Water Production and Supply, which currently accounts for about 18% of overall infrastructure investment–will remain strong in 2022H2. Investment in the subsector of ultra-high-voltage electricity transmission (UHV electricity transmission) and smart grid, as well as new electricity infrastructure, such as wind and solar power, will also continue to accelerate. The construction of 5G base stations will grow strongly in the coming years but may see a moderation in growth this year. Network operators such as China Mobile, China Unicom and China Telecom plan to build about 600,000 5G base stations, slightly lower than last year’s 650,000. The construction of new electric vehicle (NEV) charging poles accelerated because of a significant increase in NEV sales (Chart 15). Elevated oil prices and technology improvement in NEV performance have boosted NEV sales in China. As such, investment growth in NEV charging infrastructure is set to rise in the coming years. Bottom line: China’s investment focus is shifting from traditional infrastructure to new economy infrastructure. As such, we expect new infrastructure investment in tech and green energy to rise at the expense of traditional infrastructure (Chart 16). Chart 16"Green Investment" Is Rising, “Dirty Thermal” Investment Is Falling China's Infrastructure Push: How Much Upside? China's Infrastructure Push: How Much Upside? Investment Implications The infrastructure sector accounts for about 10-15% of China’s total steel consumption and about 30-40% of cement consumption (Chart 17). Chart 17A Slowdown In Chinese Infrastructure Spending Will Weigh On Steel And Cement Prices A Slowdown In Chinese Infrastructure Spending Will Weigh On Steel And Cement Prices A Slowdown In Chinese Infrastructure Spending Will Weigh On Steel And Cement Prices We expect China’s infrastructure investment, particularly in traditional sectors like highway construction, to slow in the second half of the year. As such, steel prices are at risk of falling further. Moreover, sluggish construction activity in property markets will be a drag on steel prices (Chart 18). Slower growth in traditional infrastructure investment in the next six months, as well as structurally will pose downward pressures on the performance of both global and Chinese onshore machinery stocks (Chart 19). Chart 18Dismal Property Markets Will Be A Drag On##br## Steel Prices Dismal Property Markets Will Be A Drag On Steel Prices Dismal Property Markets Will Be A Drag On Steel Prices Chart 19Slower Growth In Traditional Infrastructure Investment Will Weigh On Global/Chinese Machinery Stocks Slower Growth In Traditional Infrastructure Investment Will Weigh On Global/Chinese Machinery Stocks Slower Growth In Traditional Infrastructure Investment Will Weigh On Global/Chinese Machinery Stocks Chart 20Look To Buy NEV Stocks Look To Buy NEV Stocks Look To Buy NEV Stocks We are positive on China’s NEV sector’s structural outlook and stock performance, based on an acceleration in new economy infrastructure investment in the coming years. However, the near-term outlook on the sector’s stock performance is neutral at best. The sector’s valuations are high, considering China’s economy is still facing downward pressure due to a faltering property market, sluggish household income growth and consumption, falling export demand, as well as heightened risks of further COVID-induced lockdowns. NEV stocks will likely have more shakeouts in the coming six months before any sustainable uptrend. Hence, we look to buy these sectors at a better price entry point (Chart 20).   Ellen JingYuan He Associate Vice President ellenj@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1  Including both traditional infrastructure and tech infrastructure. For the purposes of this report, the composition of “infrastructure” includes “traditional infrastructure” and “tech infrastructure.” The “traditional infrastructure” comprises three categories – (1) Transport, Storage and Postal Service; (2) Water Conservancy, Environment & Utility Management; and (3) Electricity, Gas & Water Production and Supply. 2 Please note that all growth rates in this report are nominal growth rates. 3 According to the country’s Budget Law, the GMF budget refers to the budget for revenues and expenditures for the funds raised for specific developmental objectives. In brief, GMFs constitute de-facto off-balance-sheet government revenues and spending. 4 The general budget of local governments covers local governments’ day-to-day operation as well as local infrastructure development (mainly in four categories: Environment Protection,  Urban & Rural Community Affairs, and Affairs of Agriculture, Forest  & Irrigation and Transportation). In contrast, the government-managed funds (GMF) excluding proceeds from SPB issuance finances the big ang national-level important infrastructure projects. 5 Last November, the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) launched a carbon emission reduction facility (CERF) to offer low interest loans to financial institutions that help firms cut carbon emissions. The targeted green lending program will provide 60% of loan principals made by financial institutions for carbon emission cuts at a one-year lending rate of 1.75%. The funding will be available retroactively after the loans are made, and can be rolled over twice. Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations

Executive Summary Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Bond yields in the developed world have ticked higher recently, due to a renewed increase in oil prices and the spillover effect from more hawkish policy expectations out of Europe. The competing forces of slowing global growth momentum and geopolitical uncertainty on one side, and high inflation with tightening monetary policies on the other, will keep global government bond yields rangebound over the next several months. UK investment grade corporate bonds now offer an intriguing combination of higher yields, attractive spread valuations and strong financial health. By maturity, shorter-maturity corporates offer the best value. At the industry level, spreads look most attractive for Financials. A hawkish Bank of England, both through rate hikes and upcoming outright sales of corporate debt the central bank has purchased via quantitative easing, remains a major headwind to UK corporate bond returns. Sectors most at risk to central bank sales are Water, Consumer Cyclicals and Consumer Non-Cyclicals. Bottom Line: Stay neutral on overall duration exposure in global bond portfolios. Maintain a neutral stance on UK corporates, favoring shorter-maturity bonds and Financial names, but look to upgrade once UK inflation peaks and the Bank of England pauses on tightening. Trendless, Friendless Bond Markets Chart 1Recovering From The Ukraine War Shock... Recovering From The Ukraine War Shock... Recovering From The Ukraine War Shock... Although it may not feel like it given the ferocity of some daily price swings, many important financial markets have not moved all that much, cumulatively, since the first major shock of 2022 – the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24. For example, the S&P 500 is only down around -2% from the pre-invasion level, while the VIX index of equity option volatility is at 24, seven points below the closing level on February 23 (Chart 1). The Bloomberg US investment grade corporate bond index spread is only 12bps above its pre-invasion level, down 20bps from the peak seen in mid-May. More recently, even US bond yields have shown signs of stabilization. The 10-year US Treasury yield has traded in a 2.70-3.15% range since the start of April, while the MOVE index of US Treasury option volatility has fallen by one-quarter since its most recent peak in early May. Not all markets, however, have seen this kind of relative stability. Global oil prices are trading close to post-invasion highs, as are government bond yields in Germany and the UK. High-yield credit spreads in the US and Europe are both still around 50bps above where they were pre-invasion. The DXY US dollar index is 6% above the pre-invasion level, led by the USD/JPY currency pair that has appreciated to levels last seen in 2002. Given the mix of slowing global growth momentum and ongoing geopolitical uncertainty, but with persistent high inflation and tightening global monetary policy, it is unsurprising that financial markets are having a difficult time formulating a consistent message. This is especially true for global government bond yields. Chart 2Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Even as market-based inflation expectations have eased a bit in recent weeks, bond yields across the developed world have been unable to decline because markets continue to discount more rate hikes (Chart 2). Yet with such a significant amount of monetary tightening now priced in across all countries, global bond yields are more likely to stay rangebound over the next 3-6 months than begin a new trend. Chart 3DM Bond Yields Discounting Tight Monetary Policy DM Bond Yields Discounting Tight Monetary Policy DM Bond Yields Discounting Tight Monetary Policy 10-year government bond yields and 2-year-ahead interest rate expectations in overnight index swap (OIS) curves are trading in lockstep in the US, Europe, UK, Canada and Australia (Chart 3). This correlation indicates that longer-term bond yields have become a pure play on future policy rate expectations, rather than a reflection of rising inflation expectations as was the case in 2021. However, both yields and rate expectations are now trading close to, or even well above, plausible estimates of neutral nominal policy rates in all regions - including estimates provided by central bankers themselves. For example, in Australia, where the RBA just delivered a 50bp rate hike this week, markets are pricing in a peak Cash Rate between 3.5-4%, even with RBA Governor Philip Lowe stating that the neutral rate is likely in the 2-3% range – a view that we agree with. The situation is even more extreme in the euro area, with the euro area OIS curve now pricing in a peak policy rate between 1.5-2%, with most of that increase coming over the next 12 months. While we expect the ECB to fully exit the negative (deposit) rate era by September, rate hikes beyond that are far less likely given slowing euro area growth momentum and still-moderate euro area inflation beyond the spillover effects from energy costs. Only in the US are markets potentially underestimating the potential peak in the fed funds rate for this tightening cycle. Estimates of the longer-run (neutral) funds rate from the latest set of FOMC projections back in March ranged from 2.0-3.0%. Thus, the current level of 10-year bond yields, and 2-year-ahead rates discounted in the US OIS curve, are only at the top end of that range. It is possible that the Fed will have to raise rates to restrictive levels (i.e. above 3%) given the size of the current US inflation overshoot. More importantly, the US neutral rate is likely higher than the Fed thinks it is, possibly as high as 4% according to BCA Research’s Chief Global Strategist, Peter Berezin. We continue to see the US as the one major government bond market where there is a risk that markets are underestimating the neutral policy rate. For that reason, we remain underweight US Treasuries in the BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy model bond portfolio. Don’t Dismiss The QT Effect One other factor that has likely kept global bond yields elevated, even as global growth has softened, has been the shift away from central bank asset purchases towards quantitative tightening (QT). As policymakers have moved to slow, or even stop, the buying of government bonds, the term premium component of longer-term bond yields has risen. The moves have been quite large. Using our own in-house estimates, the term premium on 10-year government bond yields have jumped by about 100bps on average in the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Europe since the lows seen during the 2020 COVID global recession (Chart 4). The jump in term premiums is occurring at the same time as markets have moved to price in more rate hikes and a higher path for real interest rates (bottom panel). Chart 4Yields Repricing As QE Moves To QT Yields Repricing As QE Moves To QT Yields Repricing As QE Moves To QT ​​​​​​ Chart 5Stay Neutral Global Duration Exposure Stay Neutral Global Duration Exposure Stay Neutral Global Duration Exposure ​​​​​​ That combined effect of the upward repricing of term premiums – especially as more price-sensitive private investors replace the demand for bonds from price-insensitive central banks - but with less upward movement in already elevated interest rate expectations will keep longer-term bond yields in trading ranges during the “Global QT Phase” over at least the next six months and likely longer. That message is reinforced by our Global Duration Indicator, which is heralding a peak in global bond yield momentum over the latter half of 2022 (Chart 5). Bottom Line: Stay neutral on overall duration exposure in global bond portfolios, with yields in the major developed markets likely to stay rangebound over the next few months. Assessing The Value In UK Investment Grade Corporates Chart 6A Big Jump In UK Investment Grade Corporate Yields A Big Jump In UK Investment Grade Corporate Yields A Big Jump In UK Investment Grade Corporate Yields Global credit markets have had a rough time in 2022, and UK corporate debt is no exception. The Bloomberg UK Corporate index of investment grade corporate debt has delivered a year-to-date total return of -11%, as the index yield-to-maturity rose 174bps to 4% - the highest level since 2014 (Chart 6). Relative to UK Gilts, the results have also been grim as corporate credit spreads have widened, with the Bloomberg UK corporate index realizing an excess return of -3% since the start of the year. We have maintained a neutral stance on UK corporate bond exposure in our global model bond portfolio during the selloff. This was the result of a relative value opinion, as we have concentrated our more defensive view on global investment grade corporate debt with an underweight to US corporates. However, after the significant repricing of UK investment grade credit, it is now a good time to reassess our opinion on the asset class. Spread Valuation From a pure spread valuation perspective, UK investment grade now looks more attractive. Our preferred valuation metric – 12-month breakeven spreads - shows that the UK investment grade corporate index spread, on a duration-adjusted basis, is now in the 75th percentile of its history over the past 25 years (Chart 7). Chart 7UK Corporate Spreads Now Offer Some Value UK Corporate Spreads Now Offer Some Value UK Corporate Spreads Now Offer Some Value We find 12-month breakevens to a useful spread valuation measure, as they show how much spreads would need to widen to make the expected one-year-ahead return on a credit product equal to that of a duration-matched position in government bonds. In other words, breakevens measure the spread “cushion” against excess return losses from spread widening. What makes the current attractive reading on UK investment grade spread valuation so interesting is that the absolute level of spreads is still relatively low. The Bloomberg UK investment grade corporate index spread is currently 170bps, but during previous episodes where the 12-month breakeven as near the top quartile ranking – as is currently the case – the index spread ranged from 200-350bps. The reason for that relates to the index duration which, at 7.3 years, is down 1.5 years from the 2020 peak and at the lowest level since 2011. Some of that lower duration is related to the convexity effect from higher corporate bond yields. But there has also been a reduction in the average maturity of the UK investment grade corporate bond universe, with the index average maturity now at 10.4 years, down a full year lower over the past 12 months and the lowest average maturity since 1999. UK companies appear to have shortened up the maturity profile of their bond issuance, which helped reduce the riskiness (duration) of corporate bond returns to rising yields. Thus, the message from the 12-month breakevens is correct – UK investment grade corporate bond yields are attractive from a historical perspective, on a duration-adjusted basis. Chart 8UK Credit Curves Are Relatively Flat UK Credit Curves Are Relatively Flat UK Credit Curves Are Relatively Flat When looking within the UK investment grade universe, the messages on valuation are a bit more mixed. The UK credit curve is not particularly steep, when looking at the spread differences by credit rating within the benchmark index universe (Chart 8). There is a similar message when looking at 12-month breakevens broken down by credit rating, where there is little difference between the percentile rankings (Chart 9). However, the 12-month breakeven percentile rankings broken down by maturity buckets show that shorter-maturity bonds have noticeably higher percentile rankings than longer-maturity UK corporates (top panel). From a cross-country perspective, UK corporate breakeven percentile rankings are much higher than equivalent rankings for US corporates, but are lower than those of the euro area. Chart 9Shorter-Maturity UK Spreads Are More Attractive Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Corporate Financial Health Our top-down UK Corporate Health Monitor (CHM) - which uses data on non-financial corporate sector revenues, expenses and balance sheets taken from GDP accounts – has shown a very strong improvement in UK corporate financial health over the past few years (Chart 10). The biggest improvements are in the categories related to debt service, with interest coverage at the highest level since 2002 and debt coverage is at the highest level since 1999. Chart 10UK Corporates Can Withstand Higher Borrowing Rates UK Corporates Can Withstand Higher Borrowing Rates UK Corporates Can Withstand Higher Borrowing Rates ​​​​​​ Chart 11Stay Neutral UK Corporates Until The BoE Is Done Stay Neutral UK Corporates Until The BoE Is Done Stay Neutral UK Corporates Until The BoE Is Done ​​​​​ The message from our top-down UK CHM is similar to the conclusions from an October 2021 BoE report that analyzed the UK corporate sector from a financial stability perspective. In that report, the BoE used a bottom-up sample of 500 UK companies and concluded that corporate borrowing rates could rise as much as 400bps before the share of companies with a “distressed” interest coverage ratio below 2.5 would rise to the past historical peak. Within our top-down UK CHM, relatively wide corporate profit margins are also contributing to the strong reading on UK corporate health. Like the interest/debt coverage ratios, those margins provide some cushion to profits in the current environment of high inflation and elevated input costs for businesses. The all-in message from our UK CHM is that financial health is a fundamental tailwind for UK corporate bond performance. Monetary Policy Attractive spread valuations and strong financial health metrics would normally justify an overweight stance on any corporate bond market. However, the monetary policy cycle is also an important factor that drives corporate bond performance. Currently, with the BoE not only hiking rates but also moving to QT on asset purchases, monetary policy is a severe headwind to UK corporate bond returns. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyIt’s Time To Flip The Script - Upgrade UK Gilts The annual growth rate of the BoE’s balance sheet has proven to be a reliable leading indicator of UK corporate bond annual excess returns. With the growth in the balance sheet set to turn negative in the latter half of 2022 (Chart 11), it will prove difficult for UK credit spreads to narrow in a way that will boost excess returns. The BoE’s aggressive (by its standards) rate hiking cycle, in response to UK inflation that is nearing 10% alongside a very tight labor market, remains a threat to UK economic growth that is already losing some momentum. As we discussed in a recent Special Report, the UK neutral interest rate is likely no more than 1.5-2%. If the BoE were to follow current market pricing and push Bank Rate toward 2.5%, this would be a restrictive policy stance that would likely result in a sharp growth slowdown if not a full-blown recession. Importantly, our UK Central Bank Monitor is showing signs of peaking (bottom panel), due to signs of slower economic growth and tightening financial conditions. A peak in UK inflation would help reduce the Monitor even further, and would likely correspond to a pause on BoE rate hikes – a necessary condition before we would upgrade our recommended stance on UK investment grade corporates to overweight. Some Final Thoughts On Industry Sector Valuation Our UK investment grade corporate sector valuation model is a cross-sectional analysis of individual industry/sector corporate credit spreads, after controlling for differences in duration, convexity and credit rating. The model is currently signaling that there are few compelling valuation stories with positive “risk-adjusted” spreads (Chart 12). Only Financials look cheap, while Consumer Cyclicals, Consumer Non-Cyclicals and Capital Goods are all trading at expensive risk-adjusted spreads. Chart 12Not Many Compelling Values Within UK Corporates By Industry Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields An additional risk to UK corporate bond performance relates to the BoE’s decision to unwind its corporate bond portfolio. The BoE has announced that there will be outright sales from the corporate holdings accumulated over the past couple of years, with a goal of having the stock of debt fully unwound by the end of 2023. This is important for much of the UK investment grade corporate bond universe, where the BoE holds between 8-10%, on average, of outstanding debt (Chart 13).1 Chart 13The BoE Has Become An Important Corporate Bondholder Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields When we compare our risk-adjusted spreads versus the BoE ownership share by sector, we conclude that Consumer Cyclicals, Consumer Non-Cyclicals and Other Utilities offer the most unattractive combination of expensive spreads and high BoE concentration (Chart 14). We recommended underweight allocations to those sectors within an overall neutral allocation to UK corporates. Chart 14BoE Asset Sales Are A Major Risk For Some UK Corporate Sectors Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Bottom Line: Maintain a neutral stance on UK corporates, given the mix of attractive valuations but tighter monetary policy. Favoring shorter-maturity bonds and Financial names, but look to upgrade once UK inflation peaks and the Bank of England pauses on tightening.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1      In Chart 13, we use the market capitalization of each sector from the Bloomberg UK corporate bond index in the numerator of all ratios shown, as a proxy for outstanding debt. GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning     Active Duration Contribution: GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. Custom Performance Benchmark Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields Mixed Messages & Range-Bound Bond Yields

Highlights Chart 1Wage Growth Is Cooling Wage Growth Is Cooling Wage Growth Is Cooling In a speech last week, Fed Governor Christopher Waller presented the theoretical underpinnings for how the Fed plans to achieve a soft landing for the US economy.1 The Fed’s hope is that tighter monetary policy will slow demand enough to reduce the number of job openings – of which there are currently almost two for every unemployed person – without leading to a significant increase in layoffs and the unemployment rate. A reduction in the ratio of job openings to unemployed will lead to softer wage growth and lower inflation. The May employment report – released last Friday – provides some evidence that the Fed’s plan may be working. In May, an increase in labor force participation led to strong employment gains and kept the unemployment rate flat. We also saw continued evidence of a deceleration in average hourly earnings (Chart 1). Fifty basis point rate hikes are all but assured at the June and July FOMC meetings, but softer wage growth and falling inflation make it more likely that the Fed will downshift to a pace of 25 bps per meeting starting in September. Feature Table 1 Recommended Portfolio Specification Table 2Fixed Income Sector Performance The Case For A Soft Landing The Case For A Soft Landing Investment Grade: Underweight Chart 2Investment Grade Market Overview Investment Grade Market Overview Investment Grade Market Overview Investment grade corporate bonds outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 79 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -215 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread tightened 5 bps on the month and it currently sits at 131 bps. Similarly, our quality-adjusted 12-month breakeven spread downshifted to its 45th percentile since 1995 (Chart 2). A recent report made the case for why investors should underweight investment grade corporate bonds on a 6-12 month horizon.2 The main rationale for this recommendation is that the slope of the Treasury curve is very flat, signaling that we are in the mid-to-late stages of the credit cycle. Corporate bond performance tends to be weak during such periods unless spreads start from very high levels. Despite our underweight 6-12 month investment stance, we see a high likelihood that spreads will narrow during the next few months as inflation falls and the Fed tightens by no more than what is already priced in the curve. That said, the persistent removal of monetary accommodation and flatness of the yield curve will limit how much spreads can compress. Last week’s report dug deeper into the corporate bond space and concluded that investment grade-rated Energy bonds offer exceptional value on a 6-12 month horizon.3  That report also concluded that long maturity investment grade corporates are attractively priced relative to short maturity bonds. Table 3A Corporate Sector Relative Valuation And Recommended Allocation* Table 3BCorporate Sector Risk Vs. Reward* The Case For A Soft Landing The Case For A Soft Landing High-Yield: Neutral Chart 3High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 35 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -316 bps. More specifically, high-yield sold off dramatically early in the month – the junk index lagged Treasuries by 368 bps between May 1 and May 20 – but then staged a rally near the end of May, outperforming Treasuries by 333 bps between May 20 and May 31. The 12-month spread-implied default rate – the default rate that is priced into the junk index assuming a 40% recovery rate on defaulted debt and an excess spread of 100 bps – moved higher in May. It currently sits at 5.1% (Chart 3). Last week’s report reiterated our view that investors should favor high-yield over investment grade within an overall underweight allocation to spread product versus Treasuries.4 Our main rationale for this view is that there are historical precedents for high-yield bonds outperforming investment grade during periods when the yield curve is very flat but when corporate balance sheet health is strong. The 2006-07 period is a prime example. With that in mind, our outlook for corporate profit and debt growth is consistent with a default rate of 2.7% to 3.7% during the next 12 months, well below the 5.1% that is currently priced in the index. MBS: Underweight Chart 4MBS Market Overview MBS Market Overview MBS Market Overview Mortgage-Backed Securities outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 70 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -109 bps. We discussed the outlook for Agency MBS in a recent report.5 We noted that MBS’s poor performance in 2021 and early-2022 was driven by duration extension. Fewer homeowners refinanced their loans as mortgage rates rose, and the MBS index’s average duration increased (Chart 4). But now, the index’s duration extension is at its end. The average convexity of the MBS index is close to zero (panel 3), meaning that duration is now insensitive to changes in rates. This is because hardly any homeowners have the incentive to refinance at current mortgage rates (panel 4). The implication is that excess MBS returns will be stronger going forward. That said, we still don’t see enough value in MBS spreads to increase our recommended allocation. The average index spread for conventional 30-year Agency MBS remains close to its lowest level since 2000 (bottom panel). At the coupon level, we observe that low-coupon MBS have much higher duration than high-coupon MBS and that convexity is close to zero for the entire coupon stack. This makes the relative coupon trade a direct play on bond yields. Given that we see some potential for yields to fall somewhat during the next six months, we recommend favoring low-coupon MBS (1.5%-2.5%) within an overall underweight allocation to the sector.ext 12 months, well below the 5.1% that is currently priced in the index. Emerging Market Bonds (USD): Underweight Chart 5Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Market (EM) bonds outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 29 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -565 bps. EM sovereigns outperformed the Treasury benchmark by 125 bps on the month, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -664 bps. The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index underperformed by 28 bps, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -501 bps. The EM Sovereign Index underperformed the duration-equivalent US corporate bond index by 27 bps in May. The yield differential between EM sovereigns and duration-matched US corporates remains negative (Chart 5). As such, we continue to recommend a maximum underweight allocation to EM sovereigns. The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index underperformed duration-matched US corporates by 109 bps in May, but it continues to offer a significant yield advantage (panel 4). As such, we maintain our neutral allocation (3 out of 5) to the sector. Despite modest weakness in the trade-weighted US dollar in May, EM currencies continue to struggle (bottom panel). If the Fed tightens no more quickly than what is already priced in the curve for the next six months – as we expect – it could limit the upward pressure on the US dollar and benefit EM spreads in the near term. Municipal Bonds: Overweight Chart 6Municipal Market Overview Municipal Market Overview Municipal Market Overview Municipal bonds outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 61 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -78 bps (before adjusting for the tax advantage). We view the municipal bond sector as better placed than most to cope with the recent bout of spread product volatility. As we noted in a recent report, state & local government revenue growth has been strong and yet governments have also been slow to hire.6 The result is that net state & local government savings are incredibly high (Chart 6) and it will take some time to deplete those coffers even as economic growth slows and federal fiscal thrust turns to drag. On the valuation front, munis have cheapened up relative to both Treasuries and corporates during the past few months. The 10-year Aaa Muni/Treasury yield ratio is currently 83%, up significantly from its 2021 trough of 55%. The yield ratio between 12-17 year munis and duration-matched corporate bonds is also up significantly off its lows (panel 2). We reiterate our overweight allocation to municipal bonds within US fixed income portfolios, and we continue to have a strong preference for long-maturity munis. The yield ratio between 17-year+ General Obligation Municipal bonds and duration-matched corporates is 85%. The same measure for 17-year+ Revenue bonds stands at 92%, just below parity even without considering municipal debt’s tax advantage. Treasury Curve: Buy 5-Year Bullet Versus 2/10 Barbell Chart 7Treasury Yield Curve Overview Treasury Yield Curve Overview Treasury Yield Curve Overview The Treasury curve bull-steepened in May. The 2-year/10-year Treasury slope steepened 13 bps on the month and the 5-year/30-year slope steepened 22 bps. The 2/10 and 5/30 slopes now stand at 30 bps and 16 bps, respectively. In a recent Special Report we noted the unusually large divergence between flat slopes at the long end of the curve and steep slopes at the front end.7 For example, the 5-year/10-year Treasury slope is currently 1 bp while the 3-month/5-year slope is 178 bps. The divergence is happening because the market has moved quicky to price-in a rapid near-term pace of rate hikes. However, so far, the Fed has only delivered 75 bps of tightening and this is holding down the very front-end of the curve. The oddly shaped curve presents us with an excellent trading opportunity. Specifically, we recommend buying the 5-year Treasury note versus a duration-matched barbell consisting of the 2-year and 10-year notes. This trade looks attractive on our model (Chart 7) and will profit if the rate hike cycle moves more slowly than what is currently priced but lasts longer. We also continue to recommend a position long the 20-year bullet versus a duration-matched 10/30 barbell as an attractive carry trade. TIPS: Underweight Chart 8TIPS Market Overview TIPS Market Overview TIPS Market Overview TIPS underperformed the duration-equivalent nominal Treasury index by 144 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to +237 bps. The 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate fell 25 bps last month, but it remains above the Fed’s 2.3% - 2.5% comfort zone (Chart 8). Our TIPS Breakeven Valuation Indicator shows that TIPS remain “expensive”, but not as expensive as they were a month ago (panel 2). While TIPS have become less expensive during the past month, we think TIPS breakeven inflation rates will continue to fall during the next few months as inflation moves lower. This will be particularly true at the front-end of the curve where breakevens remain disconnected from the Fed’s target (panel 4) and where breakevens exhibit a stronger correlation with the incoming inflation data. To take advantage of falling inflation between now and the end of the year, investors should position for a steeper TIPS breakeven curve (bottom panel) and/or a flatter real (TIPS) curve. We also recommend that investors hold outright short positions in 2-year TIPS.     ABS: Overweight Chart 9ABS Market Overview ABS Market Overview ABS Market Overview Asset-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 26 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -63 bps. Aaa-rated ABS underperformed by 26 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -59 bps. Non-Aaa ABS underperformed by 22 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -88 bps. During the past two years, substantial federal government support for household incomes caused US households to build up an extremely large buffer of excess savings. Nowhere is this more evident than in the steep drop in the amount of outstanding credit card debt that was witnessed in 2020 and 2021 (Chart 9). In 2022, consumers have started to re-lever. The personal savings rate was just 4.4% in April, the lowest print since September 2008, and the amount of outstanding credit card debt has almost recovered its pre-COVID level. But while household balance sheets are starting to deteriorate, they remain exceptionally strong in level terms. In other words, it will be some time before we see enough deterioration to cause a meaningful uptick in consumer credit delinquencies. Investors should remain overweight consumer ABS and should take advantage of the high quality of household balance sheets by moving down the quality spectrum, favoring non-Aaa rated securities over Aaa-rated ones. Non-Agency CMBS: Overweight Chart 10CMBS Market Overview CMBS Market Overview CMBS Market Overview Non-Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 105 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -189 bps. Aaa Non-Agency CMBS underperformed Treasuries by 84 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -152 bps. Non-Aaa Non-Agency CMBS underperformed by 165 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -290 bps. CMBS spreads remain wide compared to other similarly risky spread products. However, after several quarters of easing, commercial real estate lending standards shifted closer to ‘net tightening’ territory in Q1 (Chart 10). This trend will bear monitoring in the coming quarters.  Agency CMBS: Overweight Agency CMBS outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 19 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -23 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread tightened 2 bps on the month. It currently sits at 49 bps, not that far from its average pre-COVID level (bottom panel). Agency CMBS spreads also continue to look attractive compared to other similarly risky spread products. Stay overweight. Appendix A: The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing We follow a two-step process to formulate recommendations for bond portfolio duration. First, we determine the change in the federal funds rate that is priced into the yield curve for the next 12 months. Second, we decide – based on our assessments of the economy and Fed policy – whether the change in the fed funds rate will exceed or fall short of what is priced into the curve. Most of the time, a correct answer to this question leads to the appropriate duration call. We call this framework the Golden Rule Of Bond Investing, and we demonstrated its effectiveness in the US Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing”, dated July 24, 2018. Chart 11 illustrates the Golden Rule’s track record by showing that the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury Master Index tends to outperform cash when rate hikes fall short of 12-month expectations, and vice-versa. At present, the market is priced for 251 basis points of rate hikes during the next 12 months. Chart 11The Golden Rule's Track Record The Golden Rule's Track Record The Golden Rule's Track Record We can also use our Golden Rule framework to make 12-month total return and excess return forecasts for the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury index under different scenarios for the fed funds rate. Excess returns are relative to the Bloomberg Barclays Cash index. To forecast total returns we first calculate the 12-month fed funds rate surprise in each scenario by comparing the assumed change in the fed funds rate to the current value of our 12-month discounter. This rate hike surprise is then mapped to an expected change in the Treasury index yield using a regression based on the historical relationship between those two variables. Finally, we apply the expected change in index yield to the current characteristics (yield, duration and convexity) of the Treasury index to estimate total returns on a 12-month horizon. The below tables present those results, along with excess returns for a front-loaded and a back-loaded rate hike scenario. Excess returns are calculated by subtracting assumed cash returns in each scenario from our total return projections. The Case For A Soft Landing The Case For A Soft Landing Appendix B: Butterfly Strategy Valuations The following tables present the current read-outs from our butterfly spread models. We use these models to identify opportunities to take duration-neutral positions across the Treasury curve. The following two Special Reports explain the models in more detail: US Bond Strategy Special Report, “Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated July 25, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com US Bond Strategy Special Report, “More Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated May 15, 2018, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Table 4 shows the raw residuals from each model. A positive value indicates that the bullet is cheap relative to the duration-matched barbell. A negative value indicates that the barbell is cheap relative to the bullet. Table 4Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Raw Residuals In Basis Points (As Of May 31, 2022) The Case For A Soft Landing The Case For A Soft Landing Table 5 scales the raw residuals in Table 4 by their historical means and standard deviations. This facilitates comparison between the different butterfly spreads. Table 5Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals (As Of May 31, 2022) The Case For A Soft Landing The Case For A Soft Landing Table 6 flips the models on their heads. It shows the change in the slope between the two barbell maturities that must be realized during the next six months to make returns between the bullet and barbell equal. For example, a reading of -51 bps in the 5 over 2/10 cell means that we would expect the 5-year to outperform the 2/10 if the 2/10 slope flattens by less than 51 bps during the next six months. Otherwise, we would expect the 2/10 barbell to outperform the 5-year bullet. Table 6Discounted Slope Change During Next 6 Months (BPs) The Case For A Soft Landing The Case For A Soft Landing Appendix C: Excess Return Bond Map The Excess Return Bond Map is used to assess the relative risk/reward trade-off between different sectors of the US bond market. It is a purely computational exercise and does not impose any macroeconomic view. The Map’s vertical axis shows 12-month expected excess returns. These are proxied by each sector’s option-adjusted spread. Sectors plotting further toward the top of the Map have higher expected returns and vice-versa. Our novel risk measure called the “Risk Of Losing 100 bps” is shown on the Map’s horizontal axis. To calculate it, we first compute the spread widening required on a 12-month horizon for each sector to lose 100 bps or more relative to a duration-matched position in Treasury securities. Then, we divide that amount of spread widening by each sector’s historical spread volatility. The end result is the number of standard deviations of 12-month spread widening required for each sector to lose 100 bps or more versus a position in Treasuries. Lower risk sectors plot further to the right of the Map, and higher risk sectors plot further to the left. Chart 12Excess Return Bond Map (As Of May 31, 2022) The Case For A Soft Landing The Case For A Soft Landing Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/waller20220530a.htm 2 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds”, dated April 12, 2022. 3 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff”, dated May 31, 2022. 4  Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff”, dated May 31, 2022. 5 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Bond Market Implications Of A 5% Mortgage Rate”, dated April 26, 2022. 6 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Echoes Of 2018”, dated May 24, 2022. 7 Please see US Bond Strategy / US Investment Strategy / US Equity Strategy Special Report, “The Yield Curve As An Indicator”, dated March 29, 2022.       Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns

Executive Summary   Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks We remain in the bearish camp. While the market bottom is getting closer, there are still hurdles to overcome such as elevated economic and earnings growth expectations, which need to come down to prevent new disappointments. Notably, the market focus has shifted away from inflation and has turned towards worries about growth as is evident in the falling 10-year Treasury yield. The environment of slowing growth and falling rates is a tailwind for growth stocks, warranting an upgrade of Growth to at least a benchmark weight. Technicals also signal that Growth is oversold relative to Value. The valuation differential has also moderated. However, we are wary of upgrading Growth to an outright overweight and downgrading Value to underweight as there is still plenty of economic uncertainty. We also posit that in the next several months the markets will be “fat and flat”, i.e., a bear market punctuated by rallies and pullbacks. In this environment, a balanced allocation between Growth and Value will reduce portfolio volatility and result in higher compound returns. Bottom Line: In a commentary to our chart pack report, we upgrade the Growth/Value style preference to benchmark allocation. Feature This week we provide you with a style chart pack. In this accompanying note, we will make a case for upgrading Growth and downgrading Value, bringing these style allocations to equal weight. We are booking a profit of 13% since we established the position in January 2022. We are getting closer to upgrading Growth to overweight. Performance May started as another tough month for equities, but, as they say, all’s well that ends well. After pulling back 10% since the beginning of May, and briefly touching bear market territory of -20%, the S&P 500 rebounded in the last 10 days of the month bringing the index to where it ended April. As a result, the S&P 500 was flat, and the NASDAQ was down 2.4% in May. As expected, the rally brought about a change in leadership (Chart I-1), with Consumer Discretionary and Technology leading the pack. Energy and Utilities are the only sectors that avoided rotation. Since May 20, Growth has outperformed Value by 3%. Chart I-1Recent Performance Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Bear Market Rally Or The Real Thing? Since the start of the May rally, investors have been debating whether it has legs. Bulls argue that we are in the early innings of a sustainable rebound in equities – after all, much of the bad news is already priced in, 45% of NYSE and 70% of NASDAQ have recently hit new 12-month lows, screaming oversold conditions, and making bottom fishing tempting  (Chart I-2). Bears consider this surge in performance a garden-variety bear market rally: Growth is slowing and none of the problems that have been haunting the markets over the past five months, such as inflation, war, China, and a hawkish Fed, have yet been resolved. Our views are closer to the bearish camp: We believe that, even if the market bottom is getting closer, there are still hurdles to overcome, such as elevated economic and earnings growth expectations, which need to come down to prevent new disappointments. As we discussed in the recent “What Is Next For Equities: They Will Be Fat And Flat” report, we believe that equities are likely to be range-bound over the next several months: A turn in inflation and a downshift in growth may ignite rallies on hopes of a gentler, data-driven Fed, and a shallower trajectory for the rate-hiking cycle  (Chart I-3). However, we argue that the Fed “put” is no longer in play and the Fed will stay focused on inflation, inadvertently puncturing any budding rallies. In addition to a hawkish Fed, investors will have to process what may become a sharp economic growth slowdown and an earnings recession in the US on the back of rising costs, a stronger dollar, and slowing global demand for US goods. Chart I-2Is Much Of The Bad News Already Priced In? Is Much Of The Bad News Already Priced In? Is Much Of The Bad News Already Priced In? Chart I-3Many Hope For A Shallower Hiking Cycle Many Hope For A Shallower Hiking Cycle Many Hope For A Shallower Hiking Cycle Growth Vs. Value: Shifting Positioning To Equal Weight When Growth Is Harder To Find, Growth Stocks Shine As we argued in the “Fat and Flat” report, there are multiple signs that economic growth is slowing, and that earnings growth will disappoint. Our Business Cycle Indicator, which is a compilation of soft and hard data across production, consumer, and credit dimensions, is also signaling a slowdown  (Chart I-4). Here we would like to emphasize our view: As of now, US economic growth is strong, and it is only its second derivative, i.e. a deceleration of growth, that is the root of our concerns. In a world where growth is becoming scarcer, companies that can deliver growth will shine. These are “growth” companies, i.e. large, stable companies with strong balance sheets that are able to generate positive cash flow and churn out strong earnings even under economic duress  (Chart I-5). Quality growth outperforms during slowdowns  (Chart I-6). This reasoning does not apply to speculative, barely profitable, growth companies which will fight for survival in a slow-growth world. Chart I-4We Are In A Slowdown Stage Of The Business Cycle We Are In A Slowdown Stage Of The Business Cycle We Are In A Slowdown Stage Of The Business Cycle Chart I-5Large Cap Growth Is Synonymous With Quality Large Cap Growth Is Synonymous With Quality Large Cap Growth Is Synonymous With Quality Chart I-6Growth Outperforms During Economic Slowdowns Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Of course, one might argue that economic growth has been slowing for about a year, initially by returning towards the pre-pandemic trend and, lately, as a result of monetary tightening. Yet, over the past six months, Growth has underperformed Value by nearly 11%. What is different now? First, inflation, and the monetary tightening that inevitably follows it, are the mortal enemies of growth stocks: Higher discount rates deflate the present value of future cash flows. Rising inflation and sharply rising Treasury yields are behind the recent sell-off in Growth stocks. However, recently, the market focus has shifted away from inflation, and seems to finally be turning towards worries about growth. As a result, the 10-year Treasury yield decreased from 3.12% to 2.75%, and its relentless climb may now be behind us  (Chart I-7). Lower rates are a tailwind for Growth stocks which rebounded at the first whiff of rate stabilization  (Chart I-8). Chart I-7Investors Concerns Have Shifted From Inflation To Growth Investors Concerns Have Shifted From Inflation To Growth Investors Concerns Have Shifted From Inflation To Growth Further, our research on macroeconomic regimes suggests that a turn in inflation heralds a change in market leadership from Value to Quality and Growth  (Chart I-9). Chart I-8Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks Chart I-9Growth And Quality Will Lead Markets When Inflation Abates Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Growth Not Yet Cheap But Oversold This year’s sell-off is characterized by a multiple contraction. Growth is a poster child of this trend: Its forward multiple has decreased by 8 points, with the style currently trading at just under 20x forward earnings, which is the 61st percentile relative to its 10-year history (compare that to 28x and the 94th percentile back in January). As for Value, it also became cheaper, contracting from 16.8x in January to 14.9x (Table I-1). Table I-1Valuations And EPS Growth Expectations Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Chartbook: Style Chart Pack According to the BCA Valuations Indicator  (Chart I-10), the Growth/Value valuations spread has moderated but by itself, is not an impetus for a switch. However, looking at technicals, Growth is extremely oversold relative to Value and is at levels last seen in 2006. Why Neutral, Not Overweight? We hope we made a compelling case for shifting allocation from Value to Growth. Then why not go overweight, but just neutral? Mostly because many of the macroeconomic developments we have described are tentative and are just conjecture at this point – there is still plenty of uncertainty about inflation, rates, and the Fed monetary response. Second, while Growth stocks are supposed to grow faster than Value stocks, at the moment analysts expect them to grow at 8% and 11% respectively. We expect earnings growth expectations for Value stocks to be downgraded since they are dominated by cyclicals. However, until the new numbers are in for both styles, we need to be careful. Chart I-10Growth Is Getting Cheaper Relative To Value... It Also Appears Oversold Growth Is Getting Cheaper Relative To Value... It Also Appears Oversold Growth Is Getting Cheaper Relative To Value... It Also Appears Oversold Last, if we are right, and US equities are to test their bottom this summer in a “fat and flat” manner, there will be a frequent change in leadership, with Growth and Small outperforming during the rallies, and Value outperforming during pullbacks. Portfolios need exposure to both styles to achieve the highest compound returns as diversification reduces portfolio volatility. Once macroeconomic uncertainty dissipates, we will be able to pounce and shift Growth to overweight, and Value to underweight. For now, we are going to stay neutral out of an abundance of caution. Bottom Line Macroeconomic conditions are becoming more favorable for Growth as Treasury yields stabilize and economic growth slows, making the strong fundamentals and stable earnings of large-cap growth stocks more valuable. Growth is oversold relative to Value, and the relative performance differential of Growth vs. Value over the past six months has been staggering – it is time to book profits and prepare for the next chapter.   Irene Tunkel Chief Strategist, US Equity Strategy irene.tunkel@bcaresearch.com     S&P 500 Chart II-1Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-2Profitability Profitability Profitability Chart II-3Valuations And Technicals Valuations And Technicals Valuations And Technicals Chart II-4Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Cyclicals Vs Defensives Chart II-5Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-6Profitability Profitability Profitability Chart II-7Valuation And Technicals Valuation And Technicals Valuation And Technicals Chart II-8Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Growth Vs Value Chart II-9Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-10Profitability Profitability Profitability Chart II-11Valuations And Technicals Valuations And Technicals Valuations And Technicals Chart II-12Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Small Vs Large Chart II-13Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-14Profitability Profitability Profitability Chart II-15Valuations and Technicals Valuations and Technicals Valuations and Technicals Chart II-16Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Uses Of Cash Table A1Performance Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Table A2Valuations And Forward Earnings Growth Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Chartbook: Style Chart Pack   Footnotes Recommended Allocation Recommended Allocation: Addendum Chartbook: Style Chart Pack Chartbook: Style Chart Pack  

Executive Summary Investors face a dilemma. The faster that inflation comes down, the better it will be for valuations via a stronger rally in the bond price. But if a collapse in inflation requires a sharp deceleration in growth, the worse it will be for profits. Bond yields are likely in a peaking process, but the sharpest declines may come a few months down the road, after an unambiguous roll-over in food and energy inflation. The stock market’s valuation-driven sell-off is likely over, but the danger is that it morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. As such, the stock market will remain under pressure through 2022, though it is likely to be higher 12 months from now in June 2023. High conviction recommendation: Overweight healthcare versus basic resources. In other words, tilt towards sectors that benefit the most from rising bond prices and that suffer the least from contracting profits. New high conviction recommendation: Go long the Japanese yen. As bond yield differentials re-tighten, the yen will rally. Additionally, the yen will benefit from its haven status in a period of recessionary risk. Fractal trading watchlist: JPY/USD, GBP/USD, and Australian basic resources. If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market Bottom Line: The risk is that the valuation-driven sell-off morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. Feature In May, many stock markets reached the drawdown of 20 percent that defines a technical bear market. Yet what has caught many people off guard is that the bear market in stocks has happened during a bull market in profits. Since the start of 2022, US profits are up by 5 percent.1 The bear market in stocks has happened during a bull market in profits… so far. This shatters the shibboleth that bear markets only happen when there is a profits recession. The 2022 bear market has been a valuation-driven bear market. US profits rose 5 percent, but the multiple paid for those profits collapsed by 25 percent, taking the market into bear territory. None of this should come as any surprise to our regular readers. As we have pointed out many times, a stock market can be likened to a bond with a variable rather than a fixed income. So, just as with a bond, every stock market has a ‘duration’ which establishes which bond it most behaves like. It turns out that that long-duration US stock market has the same duration as a 30-year bond. This means that: The US stock market = (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (US profits) It follows that if the 30-year bond price falls by more than profits rise, then the stock market will sell off. And if the 30-year bond price falls by much more than profits rise, then the stock market will enter a valuation-driven bear market. Therein lies the story of 2022 so far (Chart I-1). Chart I-1The Bear Market Is Valuation-Driven. Profits Are Up... For Now The Bear Market Is Valuation-Driven. Profits Are Up... For Now The Bear Market Is Valuation-Driven. Profits Are Up... For Now Just As In 1981-82, Will The Sell-Off Morph From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven? In Markets Echo 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession, we argued that a good template for what happens to the economy and the markets in 2022-23 is the experience of 1981-82. Does 2022-23 = 1981-82? Then, just as now, the world’s central banks were obsessed with ‘breaking the back’ of inflation, and piloting the economy to a ‘soft landing’. Then, just as now, the central banks were desperate to repair their badly damaged credibility in managing the economy. And then, just as now, an invasion-led war between two major commodity producers – Iran and Iraq – was disrupting commodity supplies and adding to inflationary pressures. In 1981, just as now, the equity market sell-off started as a valuation sell-off, driven by a declining 30-year T-bond price. Profits held up through most of 1981, just as they have so far in 2022. In September 1981, US core inflation finally peaked, with bond yields following soon after. In the current experience, March 2022 appears to have marked the equivalent peak in US core inflation (Chart I-2 and Chart I-3). Chart I-2Does September 1981... Does September 1981... Does September 1981... Chart I-3...Equal March 2022? ...Equal March 2022? ...Equal March 2022? In late 1981, when the 30-year T-bond price rebounded, the good news was that beaten-down equity valuations also reached their low point. The bad news was that just as the valuation-driven sell-off ended, profits keeled over, and the valuation-driven sell-off morphed into a profits-driven sell-off (Chart I-4). In 2022-23, could history repeat? Chart I-4In September 1981, The Sell-Off Morphed From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven In September 1981, The Sell-Off Morphed From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven In September 1981, The Sell-Off Morphed From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven Recession Or No Recession? That Is Not The Question History rhymes, it rarely repeats exactly. What if the 2022-23 experience can avoid the outright economic recession of the 1981-82 experience? This brings us to another shibboleth that needs to be shattered. You don’t need the economy to go into recession for profits to go into recession. To understand why, we need to visit the concept of operational leverage. Profits is a small number that comes from the difference of two large numbers: sales and the costs of generating those sales. As any company will tell you, sales can be volatile, but costs – which are dominated by wages – are sticky and much slower to change. The upshot is that if sales growth exceeds costs growth, there is a massively leveraged impact on profits growth. This is the magic of operational leverage. But if sales growth falls below sticky cost growth, the magic turns into a curse. The operational leverage goes into reverse, and profits collapse. Using US stock market profits as an example, the magic turns into a curse at real GDP growth of 1.25 percent, above which profits grow at six times the difference, and below which profits shrink at six times the difference (Chart I-5). Chart I-5A Model For US Profits Growth: (Real GDP Growth - 1.25) Times 6 A Model For US Profits Growth: (Real GDP Growth - 1.25) Times 6 A Model For US Profits Growth: (Real GDP Growth - 1.25) Times 6 Strictly speaking, we should compare US profits growth with world GDP growth because multinationals generate their sales globally rather than domestically. But to the extent that the US has both the world’s largest stock market and the world’s largest economy, it is a reasonable comparison. We should also compare both profits and sales in either nominal or real terms, rather than a mixture. But even with these tweaks, we would still find that the dominant driver of profit growth is operational leverage. ‘Recession or no recession?’ is a somewhat moot question, because even non-recessionary low growth is enough to tip profits into contraction. Therefore, the conclusion still stands – ‘recession or no recession?’ is a somewhat moot question, because even non-recessionary low growth is enough to tip profits into contraction. Such a period of low growth is now likely. If 2022-23 = 1981-82, What Happens Next? To repeat: The US stock market = (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (US profits) This means that investors face a dilemma. The faster that inflation comes down, the better it will be for valuations via a stronger rally in the bond price. But if a collapse in inflation requires a sharp deceleration in growth, the worse it will be for profits. This was the precise set-up in December 1981, the equivalent of June 2022 in our historical template. In which case, what can we expect next? 1. Bond yields are likely in a peaking process, but the sharpest declines may come a few months down the road, after an unambiguous roll-over in food and energy inflation (Chart I-6). Chart I-6If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Bond Yield If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Bond Yield If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Bond Yield 2. The stock market’s valuation-driven sell-off is likely over, but the danger is that it morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. As such, the stock market will remain under pressure through 2022, though it is likely to be higher 12 months from now in June 2023 (Chart I-7). Chart I-7If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market 3. Long-duration defensive sectors will outperform short-duration cyclical sectors. In other words, tilt towards sectors that benefit the most from rising bond prices and suffer the least from contracting profits. As such, a high conviction recommendation is to overweight healthcare versus basic resources (Chart I-8). Chart I-8If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To Healthcare Versus Resources If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To Healthcare Versus Resources If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To Healthcare Versus Resources 4. In foreign exchange, the setup is very bullish for the Japanese yen through the next 12 months. The yen’s recent sell-off is explained by bond yields rising outside Japan. As these bond yield differentials re-tighten, the yen will rally. Additionally, the yen will benefit from its haven status in a period of recessionary risk. A new high conviction recommendation is to go long the Japanese yen (Chart I-9). Chart I-9The Yen's Sell-Off Is Due To Bond Yields Rising Outside Japan The Yen's Sell-Off Is Due To Bond Yields Rising Outside Japan The Yen's Sell-Off Is Due To Bond Yields Rising Outside Japan Fractal Trading Watchlist Supporting our bullish fundamental case for the Japanese yen, the sell-off in JPY/USD has reached the point of fragility on its 260-day fractal structure that marked previous major turning points in 2013 and 2015 (Chart 10). Hence, a first new trade is long JPY/USD, setting the trade length at 6 months, and the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 5 percent. Chart I-10The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point Supporting our bearish fundamental case for resources stocks, the outperformance of Australian basic resources has reached the point of fragility on its 130-day fractal structure that marked previous turning points in 2013, 2015, and 2021 (Chart I-11). Hence, a second new trade is short Australian basic resources versus the world market, setting the trade length at 6 months, and the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 10 percent. Chart I-11The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal Finally, we are adding GBP/USD to our watchlist, given that its 260-day fractal structure is close to the point of fragility that marked major turns in 2014, 2015, and 2016. Our full watchlist of 29 investments that are at, or approaching turning points, is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point Chart 1AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal   Chart 2Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Chart 3Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 4US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 5BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 6Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 7CNY/USD Has Reversed CNY/USD Has Reversed CNY/USD Has Reversed Chart 8CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 9Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 10The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 11The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 12FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing Chart 13Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Chart 14The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 15The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 16Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Chart 17The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 18The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 19A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 20Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 21Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 22Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Chart 23Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 24The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended Chart 25The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 26A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 27Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart 28US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 29GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1 Defined as 12-month forward earnings per share. Fractal Trading System More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Executive Summary European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads Corporate bond spreads in the US and Europe have widened since early April, with European credit taking a bigger hit because of worsening growth and inflation momentum. European corporate bond valuations look fairly cheap, both for investment grade and high-yield.  This is true in absolute terms but also relative to the US, where spread valuations are more mixed.  An easing of stagflation fears in Europe is a necessary condition for a valuation convergence with the US. The US investment grade credit curve is steep relative to the overall level of credit spreads, making longer-maturity corporates more attractive. Energy bonds offer the most compelling combination of valuation and fundamental support (from high oil prices) within US investment grade. Within US high-yield, Energy valuations look much less compelling after the recent outperformance. The best medium-term industry values in European credit are in investment grade Financials and high-yield Consumer Cyclicals & Non-Cyclicals. Bottom Line: Continue to favor both US high-yield and European investment grade corporates versus US investment grade.  Stay neutral high-yield exposure on both sides of the Atlantic.  Within Europe, stay up in quality within both investment grade and high-yield until near-term macro risks on growth & inflation subside. Feature Corporate bonds in the US and Europe have gone through a rough patch in recent weeks, underperforming government bonds in response to the “triple threat” of high inflation, tightening monetary policy and slowing growth momentum.  European credit has taken the more severe hit compared to the US, with markets pricing in greater risk premia because of additional regional threats to growth (and inflation) from the Ukraine war. In this Special Report, jointly presented by BCA Research US Bond Strategy and Global Fixed Income Strategy, we assess credit spread valuations in US and European corporates after the latest selloff, across credit tiers, maturities and industry groups.  Stay Cautious On US Corporate Bonds Chart 1US Credit Spreads US Credit Spreads US Credit Spreads In a recent Special Report, we argued in favor of a relatively defensive allocation to US corporate bonds. Specifically, we advised investors to adopt an underweight (2 out of 5) allocation to US investment grade corporates and a neutral (3 out of 5) allocation to US high-yield. Our rationale was that a flat US Treasury curve signaled that we were in the middle-to-late stages of the economic recovery. Additionally, at the time, corporate bond spreads weren’t all that attractive compared to the average levels seen during the last Fed tightening cycle (Chart 1). Spreads have widened somewhat since we downgraded our allocation and, as such, we see some scope for spread tightening during the next few months as inflation rolls over and the Fed lifts rates by no more than what is already priced in the curve. That said, with the Fed in the midst of a tightening cycle, we think it’s unlikely that spreads can stay below average 2017-19 levels for any meaningful length of time. As a result, we maintain our current cautious allocation to US corporate bonds. US High-Yield Versus US Investment Grade The recent period of US corporate bond underperformance can be split into two stages based on the relative performance of investment grade and high-yield. US investment grade underperformed junk in the early stages of the selloff (between September and mid-March), as spread widening was driven by the Fed’s shift toward a more restrictive policy stance and not a meaningful uptick in the perceived risk of a recession and/or default wave (Chart 2A). Chart 2ACorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: September 27, 2021 To March 14, 2022 Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff But recession and default fears started to ramp up in mid-March, and this caused high-yield to join the selloff (Chart 2B). In fact, US investment grade corporates managed to recoup some of their earlier losses while lower-rated junk bonds struggled to keep pace. Chart 2BCorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: March 14, 2022 To Present Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff We contend that the risk of a meaningful uptick in corporate defaults during the next 12 months is low. In fact, we estimate that the US high-yield default rate will fall to between 2.7% and 3.7% during the next year, well below the 5.2% currently priced into junk spreads. Going forward, we expect the US corporate bond landscape to be defined by increasingly restrictive monetary policy and a benign default outlook. As we noted in the aforementioned Special Report, this environment is reminiscent of the 2004-06 Fed tightening cycle when high-yield bonds performed much better than investment grade. Investors should maintain a preference for high-yield over investment grade within an otherwise defensive allocation to US corporate bonds. US Industry Groups Chart 3A shows the performance of US corporate bonds in the early stages of the recent selloff, but this time split by industry group. High-yield Energy sticks out as a strong outperformer, though we also notice that every high-yield sector performed better than its investment grade counterpart. Chart 3ACorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: September 27, 2021 To March 14, 2022 Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 3B once again shows how the relative performance between investment grade and high-yield has flipped since mid-March, though we see that high-yield Energy, Transportation and Utilities have performed better than the rest of the index.  Chart 3BCorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: March 14, 2022 To Present Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Interestingly, despite the strong outperformance of high-yield Energy bonds, investment grade Energy credits performed mostly in line with other investment grade sectors. We believe this presents an excellent opportunity.  The vertical axis of Chart 4A shows our measure of the risk-adjusted spread available in each investment grade industry group. Our risk-adjusted spread is the residual after adjusting for each sector’s credit rating and duration. The horizontal axis shows each sector’s Duration-Times-Spread as a simple measure of risk. Our model shows that Financials, Technology, Energy, Utilities, Communications and Basic Industry all stand out as attractive within the investment grade corporate bond universe. We identify the investment grade Energy sector as a particularly compelling buy. Chart 4AUS Investment Grade Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff In a prior report, we demonstrated, unsurprisingly, that the oil price is an important determinant of whether Energy bonds perform better or worse than the rest of the corporate index. With our commodity strategists calling for the Brent crude oil price to average $122/bbl next year, this will provide strong support to Energy bond returns. Cheap starting valuations for investment grade Energy bonds make them look even more compelling. Chart 4B repeats our valuation exercise but for high-yield industry groups. Within high-yield, we find that Financials, Transportation, Communications and Consumer sectors stand out as attractive. Interestingly, high-yield Energy bonds now look slightly expensive compared to the rest of the junk bond universe, a result of the sector’s recent incredibly strong performance. Chart 4BUS High-Yield Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff US Credit Curve We define the credit curve as the difference in option-adjusted spread between the “Long Maturity” and “Intermediate Maturity” sub-indexes for each investment grade credit tier, as defined by Bloomberg. We exclude high-yield from this analysis because very few high-yield bonds are classified as “Long Maturity”. To analyze the credit curve, we observe that credit curves tend to be steeper when credit spreads are tight, and vice-versa. This is because tight spreads indicate that the perceived near-term risk of default is low. As a result, short-maturity spreads tend to be lower than spreads at the long-end of the curve. Conversely, a wide spread environment indicates that the perceived near-term risk of default is high, and this risk will be more reflected in shorter maturity credits. Charts 5A, 5B and 5C show the slopes of the credit curves for Aa, A and Baa-rated securities. Immediately we notice that credit curves are positively sloped in each case, and also that each credit curve is somewhat steeper than would be predicted based on the average spread for the overall credit tier. Chart 5AAa-Rated Credit Curve Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 5BA-Rated Credit Curve Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 5CBaa-Rated Credit Curve Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff This strongly suggests that investors should favor long-maturity over short-maturity US investment grade corporate bonds. European Corporates Look Cheap Vs. US Equivalents – For Patient Investors Chart 6European Credit Spreads At Past 'Non-Crisis' Peaks European Credit Spreads At Past 'Non-Crisis' Peaks European Credit Spreads At Past 'Non-Crisis' Peaks Turning to the euro area, the Bloomberg investment grade OAS and high-yield OAS currently sit at 167bps and 490bps, respectively (Chart 6). These levels are well below the peaks seen during the 2020 COVID recession and the 2011/12 European debt crisis, but are in line with the spread widening episodes in 2014/15 and 2018. Our preferred measure of credit spread valuation, 12-month breakeven spreads, show that European investment grade and high-yield spreads are in the 75th and 67th percentile of outcomes, respectively, dating back to the inception of the euro in 1998 (Chart 7).1 These are both higher compared to the breakeven percentile rankings for US investment grade (48%) and US high-yield (52%). The gap between the breakeven percentile rankings for investment grade bonds in the euro area versus the US is the widest seen over the past two decades.  That gap reflects the fact that European economic growth has softened versus the US according to the S&P Global manufacturing PMIs, while European inflation has accelerated towards very elevated US levels (Chart 8).  Chart 7European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads Chart 8European Corporate Underperformance Reflects Relative Growth & Inflation European Corporate Underperformance Reflects Relative Growth & Inflation European Corporate Underperformance Reflects Relative Growth & Inflation Both of those trends are a product of the Ukraine war, which has led to a massive spike in European energy costs given the region's huge reliance on Russian energy supplies, particularly for natural gas. While the US has also suffered a massive increase in its own energy bills, the inflation spike has been higher in Europe, leading to a bigger drag on economic confidence and growth. Thus, the widening spread differential between corporate bonds in Europe relative to the US likely reflects a growth-related risk premium. Chart 9A Turning Point For European Corporate Bond Performance? A Turning Point For European Corporate Bond Performance? A Turning Point For European Corporate Bond Performance? As euro area inflation has ratcheted higher, so have expectations of ECB monetary tightening. The euro area overnight index swap (OIS) curve now discounts 172bps over the next 12 months, a huge swing from the start of 2022 when markets were expecting the European Central Bank (ECB) to stand pat on the interest rate front. In comparison, markets are pricing in another 224bps of Fed tightening over the next 12 months, even after the Fed has already delivered 75bps of tightening since March. Importantly, the gap between our 12-month discounters, which measure one-year-ahead interest rate changes discounted into OIS curves, for the US and Europe has proven to be a reliable leading indicator – by around nine months - of the relative year-over-year excess returns (on a USD-hedged basis) of European and US corporate bonds, especially for investment grade (Chart 9). The fact that this is a leading relationship suggests that the upward repricing of ECB rate expectations seen so far in 2022 is not yet a reason to turn more cyclically negative on European corporate bonds versus the US. The earlier upward repricing of expected Fed tightening is the more relevant factor, and is signaling that both US investment grade and high-yield corporates should underperform European equivalents over at least the rest of 2022.  BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy already has a recommended allocation along those lines, with an overweight to euro area investment grade and an underweight to US investment grade. While the trade has underperformed of late, the combined messages from the relative 12-month breakeven spread rankings (cheaper European valuations) and 12-month discounters (the Fed is further ahead in the tightening cycle) leads us to stick with that relative cross-Atlantic tilt. The main risk to that stance is any deterioration of the flow of energy supplies from Russia to Europe that results in a stagflationary outcome of a bigger growth slowdown with even faster inflation. That is a scenario that would make it difficult for the ECB to back down from its recent hawkish forward guidance, resulting in European corporate spreads incorporating an even wider risk premium.  Given that near-term uncertainty, we are advocating that investors maintain no relative tilt on more growth-sensitive, and riskier, European high-yield relative to the US – stay neutral on both. Stay Up In Quality On European Corporates Looking at euro area corporate debt across credit ratings and maturity buckets, there are few compelling immediate valuation stories in absolute terms, although there are potential opportunities unfolding on a relative basis.  Within investment grade, credit quality curves have steepened during the recent selloff, with lower-rated credit seeing larger spread widening (Chart 10). The gap between Baa-rated and A-rated European corporate spreads now sits at 52bps, right in the middle of the 25-75bps range since 2014. In high-yield, the gap between Ba-rated and B-rated credit spreads is 222bps, and the gap between B-rated and Caa-rated spreads is 370bps (Chart 11) – both are still below the previous peaks in those relationships seen in 2012, 2015 and 2020. Chart 10European IG Credit Quality Curve Can Steepen ##br##More European IG Credit Quality Curve Can Steepen More European IG Credit Quality Curve Can Steepen More Chart 11European HY Credit Quality Curve Still Below Previous Peaks European HY Credit Quality Curve Still Below Previous Peaks European HY Credit Quality Curve Still Below Previous Peaks For both investment grade and high-yield, there is still room for credit curves to steepen if European growth expectations continue to deteriorate. However, when looking at spread valuations across the credit quality spectrum, and across maturity buckets, euro area corporate spreads look much cheaper than US equivalents. In Chart 12, we show a snapshot of the current 12-month breakeven percentile rankings for individual credit quality tiers and maturity groups, for investment grade and high-yield in the euro area and US.  The relative attractiveness of European credit relative to the US is evident, with European spreads now at higher percentile rankings across all quality tiers and maturity buckets. The largest gaps between 12-month breakeven percentile rankings are in the +10 year maturity bucket, the AAA-rated and AA-rated investment grade credit tiers, and the Ba-rated high-yield credit tier. This suggests any trades favoring European corporates versus the US should stay up in credit quality. Chart 12Corporate Spread Valuations By Maturity & Credit Rating Favor Europe Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Comparing European & US Industry Spread Valuations When looking at the industry composition of the euro area and US corporate bond indices, there are a few major notable differences. Within investment grade, there is a greater concentration of Energy and Technology names in the US, while Financials are more represented in the European index (Chart 13).  Those same three industries also have the largest relative weightings in the high-yield indices (Chart 14), although there is also a slightly larger weighting of high-yield Transportation companies in Europe compared to the US.  This means that a bet on European credit versus the US is essentially a bet on European Financials versus US Energy and Technology. Chart 13Investment Grade Corporate Bond Market Cap Weights Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 14High-Yield Corporate Bond Market Cap Weights Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff When looking at the same sector metrics that were shown earlier in this report for the US – comparing risk-adjusted spreads to Duration-Times-Spread – we find some interesting cross-Atlantic valuation differentials. For investment grade in Europe (Chart 15), only Energy and Financials have positive risk-adjusted spread valuations (after controlling for duration and credit quality), while having the highest level of risk expressed via Duration-Times-Spread. This contrasts to the US where more sectors have positive risk-adjusted spreads - Energy, Financials, Utilities, Basic Industry and Communications. Investors should favor the latter three industries in the US relative to Europe. Chart 15Euro Area Investment Grade Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Within high-yield in Europe, Energy and Financials also offer positive risk-adjusted valuations, but so do Consumer Cyclicals and Consumer Non-Cyclicals (Chart 16). This lines up similarly to US high-yield valuations. The notable valuation gaps exist in Transportation and Communications, which look cheap in the US and expensive in Europe, creating potential cross-Atlantic relative value trade opportunities between those sectors (and within an overall neutral allocation to junk in both regions). Chart 16Euro Area High-Yield Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 12-month breakeven spreads measure the amount of spread widening that would be necessary to make the return on corporate bonds equal to that of duration-matched government bonds over a one-year horizon.  The spread is calculated as a ratio of the index OAS and index duration for the relevant credit market. We look at the historical percentile ranking of that ratio to make a more “apples for apples” comparison of spreads that factors in index duration changes over time. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns