United States

Highlights Duration: Investors should keep portfolio duration close to benchmark, but continue to hold yield curve steepeners (on both the nominal and real yield curves) as well as overweight TIPS positions versus nominal Treasuries. These tactical trades will profit from higher Treasury yields in the near-term. Healthcare: We recommend an overweight allocation to investment grade Healthcare bonds relative to the overall investment grade corporate index. But we also recommend an underweight allocation to high-yield Healthcare relative to the high-yield corporate index.  Pharmaceuticals: Investors should underweight Pharmaceutical bonds in both the investment grade and high-yield credit universes. How Much Higher For Bond Yields? Two weeks ago, we warned that bonds would struggle in the near-term as the re-opening of the US economy led to an improvement in economic data.1 However, we definitely didn’t anticipate the magnitude of the positive data surprise that has occurred since then. The US Economic Surprise Index was -55 one week ago and today it sits at +66 (Chart 1)! The bulk of that jump occurred after Friday’s employment report revealed that 2.5 million jobs were added in May when Bloomberg’s consensus estimate had called for a contraction of 7.5 million. Against this back-drop, it shouldn’t be too surprising that bond yields jumped sharply. The 30-year Treasury yield rose 27 bps last week to 1.68% and the 10-year yield rose 26 bps to 0.91% (Chart 2). The 2-year yield rose a more modest 6 bps to 0.22%, as the Fed maintains its tight grip on the front-end of the curve. Chart 1Back In Business Chart 2Yields Have Room To Move Higher For investors, the first relevant question is: How high can yields go? Our view is that if last week does indeed represent the cyclical economic trough, then forward rates at the long-end of the curve will revert to levels consistent with market expectations for the long-run neutral fed funds rate. The median estimate of that rate from the New York Fed’s most recent Survey of Market Participants is 2%, but with an unusually wide interquartile range of 1.3% to 2.5% (Chart 2, bottom panel). At the very least, we’d expect the 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields to re-test their respective 200-day moving averages of 1.38% and 1.91%, respectively. However, we are not ready to declare last week the economic trough for three reasons: First, we cannot rule out a re-acceleration in the number of confirmed COVID cases as the economy re-opens. This could lead to the re-imposition of lockdown measures come fall. Second, last week’s positive economic data might cause some members of Congress to question the need for further fiscal stimulus. This would be a mistake. In last week’s report we showed that fiscal measures have done a good job propping up household income so far, but these measures are temporary and will need to be renewed.2  Even after last week’s large drop, the unemployment rate is still 3.3% above its Great Recession peak (Chart 1, bottom panel). This is by no means a fully healed economy that can withstand policymakers taking their feet off the gas. Even after last week’s large drop, the unemployment rate is still 3.3% above its Great Recession peak. Finally, US political risks are heightened with anti-police protests occurring daily in most major cities. Added to that, President Trump is now the underdog heading into November’s election and he will need to develop a reelection bid that doesn’t hinge on the economy. Our geopolitical strategists think a doubling down on “America First” foreign and trade policies makes the most sense.3 A significant move in that direction would certainly send a flight to quality into US bonds. Investment Strategy As we advised two weeks ago, nimble investors should tactically reduce duration as yields still have more upside in the next month or two. However, we are not yet sufficiently confident in the sustainability of the economic rebound to recommend reducing portfolio duration on a 6-12 month horizon. Rather, we continue to recommend keeping portfolio duration close to benchmark while holding several less risky positions that will profit from higher yields. Specifically, investors should hold duration-neutral curve steepeners along the nominal Treasury curve. We advise going long the 5-year note and short a 2/10 barbell.4 We also like holding TIPS over nominal Treasuries and positioning for a steeper real Treasury curve.5 In terms of spread product, we also recommend staying the course. This entails overweighting corporate bonds rated Ba and higher, Aaa consumer ABS, Aaa CMBS (both agency and non-agency) and municipal bonds, while avoiding corporate bonds rated B and below and residential mortgage-backed securities. Appendix A at the end of this report shows how these positions have performed since the March 23 peak in spreads. The remainder of this report focuses on the Healthcare and Pharmaceutical sectors of both the investment grade and high-yield corporate bond markets. Investment Grade Healthcare & Pharma Risk Profile When assessing the risk profiles for investment grade-rated Healthcare and Pharmaceutical bonds, we first consider the credit rating distributions of both sectors relative to the overall Bloomberg Barclays corporate index (Chart 3). Chart 3Investment Grade Credit Rating Distribution* Immediately, we see that the Healthcare sector has a lower credit rating than the benchmark: 71% of the Healthcare index is rated Baa, compared to 48% for the corporate index. Meanwhile, the Pharmaceuticals sector has slightly higher credit quality than the corporate benchmark: 12% of the Pharmaceuticals index is rated Aa or Aaa, compared to 8% for the corporate index. Credit rating alone suggests that Healthcare should trade cyclically relative to the corporate index. That is, it should outperform during periods of spread tightening and underperform during periods of spread widening. However, this turns out to not be the case. Chart 4 shows that healthcare has outperformed the corporate benchmark during each of the last five major bouts of spread widening and underperformed during periods of spread tightening. Clearly, despite its low credit rating, Healthcare trades like a defensive corporate bond sector. Healthcare’s historically defensive nature is confirmed by its duration-times-spread (DTS) ratio, which has tended to be below 1.0 (Chart 4, top panel).6 Though recently, the DTS ratio climbed above 1.0 due to a lengthening of the sector’s duration (Chart 4, bottom panel). This suggests that Healthcare, while historically defensive, might trade more cyclically during the next 12 months. Neither the Healthcare nor Pharmaceuticals sectors offer a spread advantage over the corporate index. Pharmaceuticals, on the other hand, are a much more cut and dry defensive sector (Chart 5). The DTS ratio is almost always below 1.0 and the sector has a strong track record of outperforming the corporate index during periods of spread widening (Chart 5, panels 2 & 3) Chart 4IG Healthcare Risk Profile Chart 5IG Pharma Risk Profile   Valuation Turning to valuation, we find that neither sector offers a spread advantage compared to the corporate index or its comparable credit tier (Table 1). This is true whether we look at the raw option-adjusted spread or if we control for duration differences by looking at the 12-month breakeven spread.7  It is interesting to note that the Healthcare index offers a spread advantage compared to the A-rated corporate index. On the one hand, this is not surprising because the Healthcare index carries an average Baa rating. On the other hand, we have seen that Healthcare tends to trade more defensively than its average credit rating implies. This arguably makes its spread advantage over A-rated debt somewhat compelling. Table 1IG Healthcare & Pharma Valuation Balance Sheet Health Both the Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals sectors loaded up on debt during the last recovery. The amount of Healthcare debt in the corporate index grew 8.8 times since 2010. Meanwhile, total debt in the corporate index grew 2.4 times. The result is that Healthcare’s weight in the corporate index increased from 1.1% in 2010 to 4.3% today (Chart 6). The Pharma sector also increased its debt load at a faster pace than the overall corporate universe since 2010 (3.2 times versus 2.4 times), but the boom in Pharma debt has been much milder than in Healthcare. The weight of Pharmaceuticals in the corporate index increased from 4.1% in 2010 to 5.5% today (Chart 7). Chart 6IG Healthcare Debt Growth Chart 7IG Pharma Debt Growth Despite rapid debt growth during the past few years, credit quality in both the Healthcare and Pharma sectors appears quite solid. Appendix B lists the issuers in the Healthcare index, grouping them by credit tier and indicating whether they carry a positive, stable or negative ratings outlook from Moody’s. Of the 56 issuers in the Healthcare index, only six currently have a negative ratings outlook. The two largest issuers in the Healthcare index are Cigna and CVS Health. Both carry Baa ratings, but Moody’s just confirmed Cigna’s ratings outlook at stable in mid-May. CVS Health, on the other hand, has carried a negative ratings outlook since 2018. Appendix C lists issuers in the Pharmaceuticals index. Of the 17 issuers, only four carry a negative ratings outlook. None of the Baa-rated Pharmaceutical issuers currently has a negative ratings outlook. The two biggest issuers in the index are Bristol-Myers Squibb and Abbvie. Bristol-Myers Squibb is A-rated with a negative outlook, while Abbvie is Baa-rated with a stable outlook. Macro Considerations In a typical demand-driven recession, consumers tend to prioritize healthcare spending while they cut back on more discretionary outlays. This dynamic is probably what causes healthcare bonds to trade defensively relative to the overall corporate index. However, the unique nature of the COVID recession has thrown this traditional pattern into reverse. Consumer spending on health care services is down 40% since February while overall consumer spending is 19% lower (Chart 8). Oddly, healthcare bonds shrugged off this year’s massive drop in spending and continued to behave defensively – outperforming the corporate index when spreads widened and underperforming since the March 23 peak in spreads. Despite the plunge in spending, pricing power in the health care industry remains strong. Health care services prices continue to accelerate even as overall inflation has dropped sharply (Chart 8, bottom panel). Unlike healthcare, pharmaceutical spending has held firm during the past couple of months (Chart 9). Consumer spending on pharmaceuticals is only down 4% since February, while overall consumer spending is down 19%. But despite firm spending, medicinal drug prices have decelerated in concert with the overall headline CPI (Chart 9, bottom panel). Chart 8Healthcare Demand & Pricing Power Chart 9Pharmaceutical Demand & Pricing Power Investment Conclusions Putting everything together, we are inclined to recommend an underweight allocation to Pharmaceuticals and an overweight allocation to investment grade Healthcare. Pharmaceuticals are simply too expensive and too defensive for the current environment. Given our positive outlook on investment grade corporate bonds, we should target cyclical sectors with elevated spreads that have more room to compress. Healthcare is slightly more interesting. It has behaved like a typical defensive sector so far this year, but there are some indications that it is becoming more cyclical. The DTS ratio recently shot above 1.0 and consumer spending on healthcare services is poised for a rapid snapback. In terms of valuation, healthcare is expensive relative to other Baa-rated bonds but cheap versus the A-rated universe. This would seem to make healthcare a good risk-adjusted bet. Even if the sector continues to behave defensively, its spread advantage over A-rated bonds makes it an attractively priced defensive sector. High-Yield Healthcare & Pharma Risk Profile Considering the risk profile of high-yield Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals, we first notice that both sectors have significantly lower credit ratings than the overall junk index (Chart 10). Ba-rated credits account for 29% and 24% of the Healthcare and Pharma indexes, respectively, compared to 54% for the High-Yield index as a whole. Chart 10High-Yield Credit Rating Distribution* The fact that significant portions of the Healthcare and Pharmaceutical indexes are rated B and lower immediately raises alarm bells. This is because we do not expect that many B-rated or lower issuers will be able to take advantage of the Fed’s Main Street Lending Program. This lack of Fed support for the lower-rated junk tiers has led us to recommend underweighting junk bonds rated B & below.8 High-yield Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals sectors have significantly lower credit ratings than the overall junk index. Interestingly, despite low credit ratings, a look at both sectors’ DTS ratios and historical excess returns reveals that they tend to trade defensively relative to the high-yield benchmark index. Healthcare outperformed the high-yield index by 473 bps from the beginning of the year until the March 23 peak in spreads and has underperformed the index by 123 bps since (Chart 11). Similarly, Pharmaceuticals outperformed the junk index by 670 bps from the beginning of the year until March 23 and have since underperformed by 136 bps (Chart 12). Chart 11HY Healthcare Risk Profile Chart 12HY Pharma Risk Profile Valuation Turning to spreads, we would characterize both high-yield Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals as expensive (Table 2). Despite both sectors carrying average credit ratings of B, they offer spreads that are below both the overall junk index average and the average for other B-rated credits. Tight option-adjusted spreads are at least partially attributable to low average duration for both sectors. If we adjust for duration differences by looking at 12-month breakeven spreads, we see that Pharmaceuticals look somewhat cheap versus other B-rated credits while Healthcare remains expensive. Table 2HY Healthcare & Pharma Valuation Balance Sheet Health Healthcare debt has grown less quickly than overall high-yield index debt since 2010 (Chart 13). Healthcare debt has grown 1.7 times since 2010 while the overall index has grown 1.8 times. This has caused Healthcare’s weight in the index to fall from 6.2% to 5.7%. In contrast, the high-yield Pharmaceuticals sector has grown rapidly during the past decade (Chart 14). Pharma debt has increased 10.3 times since 2010 compared to 1.8 times for the overall index. This has brought the sector’s weight in the index up to 2.3% from 0.4% Chart 13HY Healthcare Debt Growth Chart 14HY Pharma Debt Growth Looking beyond debt growth, in the current environment we are mostly concerned with the number of issuers in each index that will be able to access Fed support through the Main Street Lending facilities. In this regard, neither sector fares particularly well. Appendix D lists all high-yield Healthcare issuers along with their ratings outlooks, number of employees, 2019 revenues and total debt-to-EBITDA ratios. To qualify for the Fed’s Main Street Lending facilities, issuers must have either less than 15000 employees or less than $5 billion in 2019 revenues. Additionally, they must be able to keep their Debt-to-EBITDA ratios below 6.0. We estimate that all but three of the Ba-rated Healthcare issuers are eligible for the Main Street program, but only one of the B-rated issuers is eligible. High-yield Pharmaceuticals issuers are listed in Appendix E. Here, we once again find that only one of the B-rated issuers is likely to qualify for the Main Street lending facilities. Of the two Ba-rated issuers, one is likely to qualify. The other is Bausch Health, a Canadian firm that is by far the largest issuer in the Pharma index. It would need to turn to the Canadian authorities for help in an emergency lending situation. Investment Conclusions We recommend underweight allocations to both the high-yield Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals sectors. In the current environment we prefer to focus our high-yield credit exposure on the Ba-rated credit tier where issuers are more likely to have access to Fed support. The large concentration of B-rated and lower issuers in both the Healthcare and Pharma sectors, along with their generally expensive valuations, makes us wary about both sectors. Appendix A: Buy What The Fed Is Buying The Fed rolled out a number of aggressive lending facilities on March 23. These facilities focused on different specific sectors of the US bond market. The fact that the Fed has decided to support some parts of the market and not others has caused some traditional bond market correlations to break down. It has also led us to adopt of a strategy of “Buy What The Fed Is Buying”. That is, we favor those sectors that offer attractive spreads and that benefit from Fed support. The below Table tracks the performance of different bond sectors since the March 23 announcement. We will use this to monitor bond market correlations and evaluate our strategy’s success. Table 3Performance Since March 23 Announcement Of Emergency Fed Facilities Appendix B Table 4Investment Grade Healthcare Issuers Appendix C Table 5Investment Grade Pharmaceuticals Issuers Appendix D Table 6High-Yield Healthcare Issuers Appendix E Table 7High-Yield Pharmaceuticals Issuers   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Bonds Vulnerable As North America Re-Opens”, dated May 26, 2020, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see US Bond Strategy Portfolio Allocation Summary, “Filling The Income Gap”, dated June 2, 2020, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, “Spheres Of Influence (GeoRisk Update)”, dated May 29, 2020, available at gps.bcaresearch.com 4 For more details on this recommended yield curve position please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Life At The Zero Bound”, dated March 24, 2020, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 5 For more details on these recommendations please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Negative Oil, The Zero Lower Bound And The Fisher Equation”, dated April 28, 2020, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 6 Duration-Times-Spread (DTS) is a simple measure that is highly correlated with excess return volatility for corporate bonds. The DTS ratio is the ratio of a sector’s DTS to that of the benchmark index. It can be thought of like the beta of a stock. A DTS ratio above 1.0 signals that the sector is cyclical (or “high beta”), a DTS ratio below 1.0 signals that the sector is defensive or (“low beta”). For more details on the DTS measure please see: Arik Ben Dor, Lev Dynkin, Jay Hyman, Patrick Houweling, Erik van Leeuwen & Olaf Penninga, “DTS (Duration-Times-Spread)”, Journal of Portfolio Management 33(2), January 2007. 7 The 12-month breakeven spread represents the spread widening that must occur for a sector to underperform a duration-matched position in Treasury securities during the next 12 months. It can be proxied by option-adjusted spread divided by duration. 8 For more details please see US Investment Strategy/US Bond Strategy Special Report, “Alphabet Soup: A Summary Of The Fed’s Anti-Virus Measures”, dated April 14, 2020, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification

Dear client, Along with an abbreviated report this week we are sending you this Geopolitical Strategy service report written by my colleague Matt Gertken, BCA’s Geopolitical Strategist. Matt argues that US social unrest is structural and therefore can still cause volatility, while the market’s recognition that Trump is an underdog is also a risk. I hope you will find this report both interesting and informative. Kind Regards, Anastasios   Portfolio Strategy While we remain constructive on the prospects in the broad equity market over the coming 9-12 month time horizon, a flare up in geopolitical risks and uncertainty around the upcoming election could serve as catalysts for a much needed breather in equities. Recent Changes Last week our rolling stop was triggered and we downgraded the S&P biotech index to neutral and booked gains of 5% since inception.1 Table 1 The SPX catapulted to fresh recovery highs last week, on the back of optimism surrounding the successful reopening of the economy along with the ongoing support of easy fiscal and monetary policies. Sentiment is not as extended as in February or during previous SPX tops in the past few years, as we highlighted in recent research.2 However, greed is slowly showing up on our radar screens as investors that have missed out on the rally are chasing performance. Additionally, the market action has an element of a short squeeze. Equity market internals signal that there is likely a bit more gas left in the tank, despite the roughly 1000 point rise since the March 23 lows. While the S&P transports index has neither made new all-time highs nor outperformed the SPX year-to-date, one economically hypersensitive sub-group, trucking, has been revving its engines. The S&P 1500 trucking index has stealthily joined the “new all-time highs” club. The highly fragmented trucking industry has an excellent track record in leading the S&P 500 and the current message is that the path of least resistance remains higher for the SPX (Chart 1). As large parts of the economy are reopening, this index seems to have priced in a full recovery and a return to normal in the back half of the year. The jury is still out on the economic recovery’s shape and the risk of a second viral wave is significant, but stocks continue to climb the proverbial "wall of worry". Chart 1Trucking As A Leading Indicator Importantly, another extremely pro-cyclical equity market indicator, the S&P deep cyclicals/defensives share price ratio, has also led the broad equity market bottom and continues to herald additional gains for the SPX (Chart 2). Deep cyclicals include tech stocks, but even if IT were excluded, the cyclicals ex-tech/defensives ratio still troughed prior to the SPX and is gaining steam. Chart 3 shows the GICS1 sector returns since the March lows and technology is similar to the overall market’s return. The deep cyclical trio (energy, industrials and materials) have outperformed the tech sector, and bested defensives by a wide margin. Chart 2Cyclicals Are Besting Defensives Chart 3GICS1 Sector (%) Returns Since The March Lows Our Global Trade Activity Indicator corroborates the message that the cyclicals/defensives ratio is emitting (Chart 4). The recent breakout in the JPM EM currency index along with budding evidence of China’s economic recovery and likelihood of a stimulus package (not as large as the GFC, but bigger than the early-2016 manufacturing recession one) suggest that global growth is slated to recover in the back half of the year. Chart 4Looming Global Growth Recovery Nevertheless, it is quite unnerving that the SPX has broken out to fresh recovery highs despite bleak economic fundamentals and rising political and geopolitical risks. One potential negative catalyst that could cause a healthy reset is the rise in the polls of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden ahead of the November elections. Chart 5 shows that over the past year, the S&P 500 has moved in lockstep with the relative odds of a Republican versus a Democrat getting elected President. But recently, a wide gap has opened warning that the SPX is vulnerable to a pullback. In truth, the online gambling community has been slow to react to the erosion of President Trump’s platform due to pandemic and recession – so his odds could fall further in the near term. At the margin, a Biden win should be negative for the stock market because his party is perceived as more hostile to businesses and the specter of higher taxes could trip up the SPX. Our Geopolitical Strategy service has highlighted this risk in recent reports, including on May 15.3 Tack on the persistently high reading in the Baker, Bloom and Davis Policy Uncertainty Index and the risk/reward tradeoff for the overall market tilts further to the downside at the current juncture (Chart 6). Chart 5Do Not Neglect (Geo)Political Risks Chart 6High Policy Uncertainty Is A Red Flag Bottom Line: While we remain constructive on the SPX over the coming 9-12 month time horizon, a flare up in geopolitical risks and uncertainty around the upcoming election could serve as catalysts for a much needed breather in equities.   Anastasios Avgeriou US Equity Strategist anastasios@bcaresearch.com   Geopolitical Strategy Social Unrest Can Still Cause Volatility Highlights Social unrest in the US is driven by structural and cyclical factors as well as election-year opportunism. It can still cause volatility. Unrest will weigh on consumer and business confidence – adding to already ugly fundamentals. The market has come around to our view that Trump is an underdog in the election. This is a risk to equities since a Democratic victory will bring full control of government. President Trump has low legal or political constraints to deploying the military if violence gets worse in the streets. This increases tail risks of a civilian death that amplifies the unrest. A “silent majority” of voters could give Trump a polling boost as a “law and order” candidate later this year. This could require us to upgrade his odds of reelection. The US dollar faces long-term headwinds but we are unlikely to reinitiate our long EUR-USD trade until the US election cycle is complete. Feature Chart 1Markets Skyrocket On Stimulus & Reopening Economic reopening and stimulus are winning the day as investors continue to look forward to a time when growth and corporate earnings recover yet inflation and risk-free rates remain suppressed. Judging by the breakout of cyclical versus defensive stocks and risk-on versus risk-off currencies, the rally could continue and the gap between stock markets and macro fundamentals could widen further for some time (Chart 1). The market is looking through the most widespread social unrest since 1968 in the United States, which emerged due to the death in police custody of a black man, George Floyd, in Minneapolis. History suggests that over a one-year horizon, social unrest can be ignored – but in the near term it could yet provoke volatility. This risk is underrated because the market already believes that the unrest is a known quantity without material impact, yet this report shows otherwise. We see four new risks, the first three negative for the market. Chart 2US Consumer Sentiment Is Vulnerable Consumer confidence and activity could worsen in the face of historic national unrest. The slight uptick in improving consumer expectations could reverse (Chart 2). President Trump’s odds of reelection could fall permanently, triggering a downgrading of long-run earnings expectations. A mistake could cause unrest to reach an unknown critical threshold that strikes fear into investors about US stability. The US debate has moved on from racism to “fascism” as Trump’s opponents criticize him for his authoritarian rhetoric and deployment of military forces to secure parts of Washington, DC. Structural factors are driving the riots which means they may smolder and additional incidents could cause them to flare up throughout summer and fall. The deployment of troops to quell civil unrest – as in any country at any time – could easily lead to bloody mistakes. The upside risk is that Republican senators will capitulate even sooner on fiscal spending measures, seeing that their corporate power base is likely to feel more concerned about the collapse of society. The House Democrats and President Trump already share an interest in larding up the spending, so it was only a matter of time till the senate caved in anyway. If the next $2 trillion arrives without the June-July hiccup that we expect, then the market could power higher (Chart 3). Chart 3Global Fiscal Stimulus Continues To Grow In this report we show why US social unrest is structural and how it can still bring equity volatility. Also, the online betting market has caught up to our view that Trump is the underdog in the election. The prospect of full Democratic Party control could start to weigh on US equities. The upside risk to this view would be markets cheer Biden – which is unlikely for long – or if the violent protests create a “silent majority” that helps Trump win the swing states. If his polling improves in the wake of the riots – and the stock rally continues unabated – then we may upgrade his reelection odds from 35% to 50% or higher. Bottom Line: A pullback would be a buying opportunity, but a 10% correction could easily transpire given that a falling market reduces Trump’s odds greatly and could kill the market’s faith in Trump reflation policy from 2021-24. How Social Unrest Came To The United States The US was ripe for a major bout of unrest, as we have highlighted in past reports such as “Populism Blues” (2017), “Civil War Lite” (2019), and “Peak Polarization” (2020), as well as in our top five “Black Swans” report for this year. Our updated “Great Gatsby Curve” shows countries with high levels of income inequality and social immobility. The US is right in the danger zone, joined by other countries that have had unrest or political disruptions (Argentina, Chile, UK, Italy) or will soon (China) (Chart 4). African Americans suffer the worst of these ills and also have long-running grievances with the criminal justice system. Chart 4The US Is In The Danger Zone For Populism, Unrest Unrest was an easy prediction even before the pandemic and recession, which made matters worse. The US ranks last, among developed markets, just below Greece, in our COVID-19 Unrest Index (Table 1). This index combines four factors – economic fundamentals, vulnerability to COVID-19, household grievances, and governance indicators – to rank countries according to their susceptibility to social unrest. US unemployment has soared higher than that of other countries as it has less generous automatic stabilizers. Table 1US Ranks Worst In Our COVID-19 Social Unrest Rankings When it comes to the virus, the US is not any harder hit than most of its European peers (Chart 5). And the black community is not much harder hit than whites, although both have suffered more than their population share would imply, and more than the Hispanic community (Chart 6). Chart 5US No Different Than Western Europe On COVID-19 Deaths   Chart 6COVID-19 Least Deadly For Hispanics However, the lockdowns have caused the unemployment rate to soar and exacted a greater toll on the least educated and lowest paid members of society. The election is enflaming the situation. President Trump’s economy has now performed little better for households than President Obama’s economy, assuming they suffer an income and wealth shock at least equal to that of 2008-09 (Chart 7). Chart 7Households Suffer Massive Income Shock Given the collapsing economy, Trump is doubling down on “law and order,” taking an aggressive stance against rioting and looting and thus provoking a backlash. The media is also in a feeding frenzy as the pandemic and economic reopening narratives lose traction and yet Trump perseveres. Polarization is intensifying as a result. Trump’s rhetoric has been egregious as always. His threat to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 is not. President George Bush Sr invoked the act to suppress the LA riots in 1992. The act’s provisions, as well as the specific exceptions to the posse comitatus laws and norms, give the president broad discretion in matters precisely like these. The real constraint is not legal but political: any popular backlash from Trump and his advisers in trying to “dominate the battlespace” when it comes to civilians at home. Rioting and looting are also unpopular, so a larger crackdown could easily happen if more unrest takes place. Since the riots are driven by structural factors, they could still escalate, especially if another incident of police brutality occurs. Bottom Line: US unrest is driven by structural and cyclical factors and thus we are in for another “long, hot summer” like 1967. Negative surprises should be expected. The larger risks have to do with the impact on the election and sentiment. Trump’s Polling Was Dropping Even Before The Riots Trump’s approval rating has fallen to the lowest level this year and diverged from the historic average (Chart 8). This increases the risk that the market experiences volatility either in expectation of “regime change” in November or in reaction to Trump’s attempts to regain the initiative. Trump’s deviation from President Obama’s approval at this stage in 2012 is a warning sign (Chart 9). Chart 8Trump’s Polling Drops Below Average Chart 9Trump Falls Off Obama’s Pathway To Reelection Chart 10Trump’s Pandemic Bounce Turns Negative, Unlike Others Trump and the Republican Party received a smaller polling bounce from the pandemic – and year-to-date the bounce is not only gone but has turned negative, comparable only to Vladimir Putin and United Russia (Chart 10). At its peak it was smaller than that of previous US presidents in crisis situations (Table 2, see Appendix). These data come from before the George Floyd incident which will make matters worse for Trump, given that initial polls suggest 35% approve and 52% disapprove of his response to it. The presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is narrowly leading in all major swing states (Chart 11A). Trump has dropped off in critical swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, and Arizona (Chart 11B). Biden is closer to Trump than he should be in states like Ohio and even Texas. Chart 11ATrump Trailing Biden In Swing States Chart 11BTrump Loses Critical Support In FL, WI, AZ Chart 12Biden Polling Better Than Clinton Did Against Trump Biden is tentatively outperforming Hillary Clinton’s showing in 2016 in head-to-head polls against Trump, including in swing states (Chart 12). He has not been on voters’ minds much during the crises. But he has strong support among African American voters, who primarily handed him the party’s nomination, so he may be able to exploit the unrest. Voters indicate they favor him on race relations as well as the coronavirus, though they still favor Trump on the economy. Bottom Line: Trump’s polling was deteriorating before the social unrest. It will suffer more in the near term. But there are still five months until the election. The Market Now Recognizes That Trump Is An Underdog Now, with the country’s biggest cities ablaze, the market is waking up to the fact that Trump and the Republicans have a much greater chance of entirely losing control of the government in just five months. Online gamblers have recently upgraded Biden and the Democrats substantially (Chart 13). Opinion polling has shown weakness but now it is likely to seep into the financial industry’s consciousness that US domestic political risks could still go higher. Policy uncertainty will not fall as sharply as otherwise expected during the economic reopening. Unrest typically reflects negatively on the ruling party, suggesting the status quo is unacceptable and driving voters to vote for change. This is one of the 13 keys to the presidency under the scheme of Professor Allan J. Lichtman, at American University, who has predicted every popular vote outcome since 1984. If one accepts this thesis, then at least five of the keys have now turned against Trump and the GOP. If the economy somehow continues to shrink in the third quarter, or if GDP per capita falls harder than estimated in Chart 7 above, Lichtman’s model will turn against Trump (Table 3, see Appendix). Our own argument has been that a health crisis and surge in unemployment alone are enough to undercut him given his thin margins of victory four years ago and low approval rating. The George Floyd incident reinforces this logic. Not only is voter turnout correlated with the change in unemployment over the president’s term in office, but the correlation holds in swing states and among African Americans. Here is where the devastating impact of COVID-19 among blacks may be relevant (Chart 14). Chart 13Online Bookies Now See Trump Is Underdog Chart 14Hardship For Blacks In Swing States Chart 15Unemployment Pushes Up Voter Turnout (For Blacks And All) If the pandemic and unemployment did not already provide sufficient motivation, then the George Floyd incident might rally this core Democratic Party constituency to turn up at the ballot box (Chart 15). That is a threat to President Trump given that Barack Obama is not on the ballot, so black turnout is unlikely to reach 2008 or 2012 levels. Bottom Line: An increase in African American voter turnout due to unemployment and poor race relations would broaden the electoral pathway to a Democratic victory in November. A Risk To The View: The Silent Majority Could the unrest help Trump? Possibly. Once the peaceful protests turned violent, the possibility emerged that Trump could benefit. The Democrats are not in a strong position whenever they link themselves to economic lockdowns and rioting and looting. It is clear from the police killings and unrest of 2014-15 that more and more people have lost confidence in police treating blacks and whites equally (Chart 16), but they do not make up a majority. Chart 16Over Time, Voters Losing Confidence In Police Fairness Chart 17Majority Sees Racism As Individual, Not Institutional Moreover, two-thirds of citizens, two-thirds of Hispanics, and almost half of blacks believed at that time that racism and discrimination stem from individual actions rather than institutional factors (Chart 17). Confidence and institutional trust will fall during today’s crisis moments but the above polls suggest limits to the protest movement. Generally Americans are satisfied with the work of their local police departments (Chart 18). This includes 72% of blacks. Only about a quarter of Americans report being harassed by the police at any time, according to a Monmouth University poll. Chart 18Silent Majority? Most Americans Satisfied With Local Police Almost 80% of people believe police funds should be increased or kept the same, versus 21% who agree with defunding the police. Only 39% of blacks support such a proposal (Chart 19). If House Democrats pass legislation characterized as taking funds away from police it will hurt them. Chart 19Silent Majority? Americans Don’t Want To Cut Police Funding Finally, regarding the use of the military, 58% of Americans approve of the US military supplementing city police forces, while 30% oppose (Chart 20). George Bush Sr deployed troops in a similar predicament, the LA riots of 1992, albeit with an invitation from the California governor. Chart 20Silent Majority? Americans Mostly Support Military Aid To Police Amid Unrest Legal constraints on Trump’s use of the military are low. Given that the political constraint is also low, a resurgence in violence will likely lead to a crackdown. Trump could benefit if it is managed successfully, but the risk of a bloody mistake that harms or kills civilians would also go up. Bottom Line: Trump could benefit from his pitch as the candidate of law and order if unrest continues, violence worsens, and his actions are deemed to restore order. We will upgrade Trump’s reelection odds if his polling improves and the stock market and economy continue to rebound. Investment Takeaways Historic bouts of unrest show that market volatility occurred in the wake of the 1965-69 disturbances, the 1992 LA riots, the breakdown of order in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and the protests and riots against police brutality in 2014-15. Unrest did not prevent the market from rallying in all of these cases, but it did in some, and pullbacks also followed unrest periods. In every case presidential approval suffered – and in 1968, 1992, 2006, and 2014 the ruling party suffered losses in the election (Charts 21 A-D). Chart 21AThe ‘Long, Hot Summer’ Saw Inflation, Volatility Chart 21BLA Riots Saw Unemployment, Volatility Chart 21CKatrina Saw Volatility, Presidential Approval Drop Chart 21DFerguson Saw Volatility Amid Falling Unemployment Chart 22Confidence Suffers Amid Social Unrest Furthermore, consumer and business confidence generally suffered in these periods (Chart 22). Trump’s reelection bid could fail to recover, which would make him a lame duck and heighten political risks dramatically. Our longstanding view that the party that wins the White House will also win the senate is reinforced by this year’s polls. The market is reacting to stimulus now but policies look to turn a lot tougher on business. The election puts a self-limiting factor into the equity rally. Either the market sells off in the short run to register the currently likely victory of Joe Biden, who will hike taxes, wages, and regulation, or the market rallies all the way till the election, increasing the chances of President Trump’s reelection, which would revolutionize the global system, especially on trade, and would require a selloff around December. The US dollar faces near-term headwinds as global growth recovers and uncertainty related to COVID-19 abates, but the near term is murky, whereas the major headwinds are over a cyclical time horizon. Our theme of “peak polarization” in the US contrasts starkly with our theme of “European integration” and implies that the euro can continue to advance. However, we are unlikely to reinitiate our long EUR-USD trade until the US election cycle is complete. The risk of a Trump victory is still substantial and we view Europe as a marginal loser in that scenario. We still expect investors to flee to the dollar in the event of any global crisis, even if it originates in the United States.   Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Appendix Table 2Trump’s Crisis Polling Bounce Compared To Previous Presidential Bounces Table 3Lichtman’s 13 Keys To The Presidency Likely Turning Against Trump … Economy Critical   Footnotes 1     Please see BCA US Equity Strategy Insight Report, “Housekeeping” dated June 4, 2020, available at uses.bcaresearch.com. 2    Please see BCA US Equity Strategy Weekly Report, “There’s No Limit” dated May 26, 2020, available at uses.bcaresearch.com. 3    Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, “Michelle, Amash, Trump, Biden” dated May 15, 2020, available at gps.bcaresearch.com

Highlights If policymakers can neutralize default pressures arising from the lockdowns, the lasting impacts of this recession may not be so bad: As Jay Powell put it on 60 Minutes several weeks ago, policymakers just have to keep people and businesses out of insolvency until health professionals can gain the upper hand over the virus. Fiscal spending caused income and savings to spike, … : Generous transfer payments have left the majority of the unemployed better off than they were when they were working, and April household income and savings soared accordingly. … allowing consumers to meet nearly all of their obligations … : April’s income and savings gains showed up in reduced delinquencies across all categories of consumer loans and in solid April and May rent collections. May’s employment gains suggest that the private sector may not be too far away from taking the baton from Congress: The May employment report blew away expectations and sent risk assets surging, but the positive surprise may derail plans for further fiscal support. Feature Since March, investors have been presented with a simple choice: believe their eyes or believe in the government. They could either focus on horrendous economic data illustrating the crippling effects of widespread lockdowns, or they could trust in policymakers’ ability to shield most citizens and businesses from lasting damage. Our base case has been that policymakers would succeed, for the most part, provided they didn’t have to contend with acute COVID-19 pressures for more than six months. There are as many guesses about the virus’ future path as there are commentators, but it seems reasonably conservative to estimate that the most onerous restrictions will be eased by October. Chart 1DC To The Rescue In our view, preventing defaults is the key to mitigating the effects of the virus. If newly vulnerable debtors can be kept from defaulting until the economy can return to something resembling normal, a negatively self-reinforcing dynamic will not take hold, the infection will not spread to the financial system and creditworthy individuals’ and viable businesses’ temporary liquidity issues will not morph into solvency issues. Banking system data to confirm or disprove our thesis will not be available until August, however, as Fed and FDIC data are quarterly, and the shutdowns only began in late March. The unemployment safety net has turned into a trampoline; ... In this report, we have turned to a range of other sources for higher-frequency insights into what is happening in real time. We start with an academic paper showing that most laid-off workers are eligible for benefits comfortably exceeding their previous income, a conclusion reinforced by the April personal income data (Chart 1). We then look at April delinquency data from TransUnion, one of the major credit reporting agencies, and April and May rent-collection data from an apartment trade organization and large-cap publicly traded apartment REITs. We also review the Fed’s Survey of Consumer Finances to get a sense of household indebtedness across the income and wealth spectrums. For now, the data support the conclusion that policymakers have successfully defused credit distress pressures. What Comes In … Unemployment benefits typically fall far short of workers’ regular compensation, averaging about 40% of the median worker’s wage. To cushion the blow of unemployment from COVID-19, the CARES Act included a federal supplement to unemployment benefit payments distributed by the individual states. Added onto the average $400 weekly state benefit, the $600 federal supplement would make the average worker whole (mean earnings are a little less than $1,000 a week). As income inequality has intensified, the compensation distribution for all American workers has come to exhibit a pronounced rightward skew. That skew has pulled mean compensation (the average of all Americans’ earnings) well above median compensation (the earnings of the worker at the exact middle of the earnings distribution).1 By targeting mean compensation, the CARES Act opened the door for a lot of lower-income workers to make more money in unemployment than they did when they were working. According to a recent paper from three Chicago professors, 68% of unemployed workers are eligible to receive benefits that exceed their previous income, while 20% of unemployed workers are eligible for benefits that will at least double it. Overall, they calculate that the median worker is eligible to receive benefits amounting to 134% of his/her previous income.2 ... instead of keeping laid-off employees' incomes from falling below 40 cents on the dollar, it's launched them to $1.30. We offer no judgments about the policy merits of a 134% median replacement rate, but unusually generous benefits should help reduce the drag from unemployment that would otherwise ensue with a 40% replacement rate. Thanks to lower-income households’ higher marginal propensity to consume, consumption should rise at the margin (once activity resumes). Thanks to increased income, lower-income households should be better positioned to meet their financial obligations. We suspect the marginal consumption boost may be hard to see with the naked eye, but auto, credit card and mortgage delinquencies should be appreciably lower than any regression model not adjusted to reflect record replacement rates would predict. … And What Goes Out The Personal Income and Outlays data for April reflected the significant impact on household income of the up-to-$1,200 stimulus checks (economic impact payments) and the supplemental unemployment benefits. Despite an annualized $900 billion decline in employee compensation, personal income rose by nearly $2 trillion in April, thanks to a $3 trillion increase in transfer payments. De-annualizing the components, $250 billion in transfer payments offset a $75 billion decrease in compensation. At about $220 billion, the economic impact payments accounted for the bulk of the transfer payments, and they will fall sharply in May. The IRS did not disclose the amount of economic impact payments it had disbursed by April 30, but it appears that around 80% of the distributions have been made, leaving approximately $55 billion yet to be disbursed. Unemployment insurance receipts will rise in May on an extra week of benefits and an increase in the weekly sums of initial and continuing unemployment claims. We project that employee compensation rose about 3% in May, based on a 2% gain in employment and a 1% increase in average weekly earnings. Aggregating the February-to-May changes, it appears that May personal income ought to exceed February (Table 1). Absent another round of stimulus checks, however, personal income will slide below its pre-shutdown level beginning in June. Table 1May Personal Income Should Exceed Its Pre-Pandemic Level Income is not the sole driver of households’ capacity to service their debt, however. Assets matter, too, and even if the surge in cash flow was a one-off event, it left behind an elevated stock of cash as households slashed consumption in both March and April. Real personal consumption expenditures have fallen 19% from February’s all-time high and are now back to a level they breached in January 2012 (Chart 2). Households saved 33% of their April disposable income, and on a level basis, April savings were up nearly fivefold from their 2019 average. They were a whopping 20 times April interest payments, ex-mortgages (Chart 3). Chart 2Eight Years Of Spending Undone In Two Months Chart 3Consumers' Interest Coverage Ratios Have Soared Household Borrowers Are Staying Current … Table 2Consumer Borrowers Are Hanging In There It is possible to make too much of the April income and outlays data. We had been expecting another round of stimulus checks, but lawmakers’ comments even before the blockbuster employment report suggested one may not be forthcoming. Some of the savings activity was forced on homebound consumers, and some pent-up demand will surely be unleashed as the economy re-opens. Households amassed a mighty savings war chest across March and April, however, and it has left them better-positioned to service their debt obligations going forward. Despite an unemployment rate not seen since FDR, households made their scheduled payments in April. According to TransUnion, delinquency rates fell month-over-month across every major consumer loan category and delinquency rates for mortgages and unsecured personal loans declined on a year-over-year basis (Table 2). The TransUnion data comes from its inaugural Monthly Industry Snapshot, intended to provide a higher-frequency read on headline consumer credit metrics than its typical quarterly releases. In addition to crunching the delinquency numbers, the report noted that forbearance programs have helped ease consumer liquidity pressures, consumers have reduced their outstanding credit card balances and credit scores have slightly improved. None of the factors is decisive on its own, but they contribute to a marginally improved consumer credit outlook. … And Apartment Tenants Are Paying Their Rent It is more common for households in the lower half of the income and net worth distributions to rent their residence than own it. Just one in every five households in the bottom two quintiles of the income distribution (Chart 4, top panel), and one in four in the bottom half of the net worth distribution (Chart 4, bottom panel), have a mortgage. Rent is the single largest recurring expense for these households and the shutdowns made paying it a concern. Several newspaper stories have highlighted the plight of distressed renters while discussing grassroots rent-strike movements, but the National Multifamily Housing Council’s (NMHC) Rent Payment Tracker tells a different story.3 Chart 4Households In The Lower Half Of The Income And Wealth Distributions Rent Their Homes The Rent Payment Tracker distills the results of a national survey covering over 11 million professionally managed apartment units. Through May 27th, it reported that 93.3% of renters had made full or partial payments for the month of May. The share of paying tenants was down just 150 basis points year-over-year, and up 160 basis points month-over-month. The six apartment REITs in the S&P 500 reported April and May rent collections that were better than the NMHC data. By the end of May, the REITs had collected 94-99% of the April rent they were due, and 93-96% of their May rents (Table 3). (Equity Residential (EQR) reported its April collections through April 7th and did not provide an end-of-month update; on June 1st, it reported that its May collections through May 7th were in line with April’s.) Essex Property Trust (ESS), which owns a portfolio of apartments in southern California, the Bay Area and greater Seattle, provided a table showing how the economic impact payments and the supplemental unemployment benefit would affect the income of unemployed California and Washington state couples without children. Table 4 expands it to cover four income scenarios, illustrating just how far up the income distribution CARES Act relief stretches. Table 3Residential Tenants Are Paying Their Rent Table 4The CARES Act For Essex Property Trust Renters Who Borrows: Evidence From The Survey Of Consumer Finances Helping the households in the bottom half of the income distribution won’t materially limit credit distress across the economy if those households don’t have access to credit. The latest edition of the Fed’s triennial Survey of Consumer Finances, published in 2017, makes it clear that they do. Those households may be much less likely to carry mortgage debt (Chart 5), but they make up for it by borrowing via other channels. 64% of households in the bottom two quintiles have some debt, and the share grows to 70% when the middle quintile, which qualified for the full $1,200 economic impact payment, is included (Chart 6). Chart 5The Homeownership Income Divide Chart 6Households In The Lower Two Quintiles Have Debt To Service, Too Investment Implications The discussion above focused solely on the consumer, as we discussed the Fed’s efforts to assist lenders and business borrowers in a joint Special Report with our US Bond Strategy colleagues in April.4 Record corporate bond issuance in March and April – before the Fed bought a single corporate bond – testifies to the effectiveness of the Fed’s measures. Its corporate credit facilities bazooka was so large that it was able to soothe the roiled corporate issuance market without firing a single shot. Spreads have narrowed across the spread product spectrum and the primary and secondary markets are once again able to function normally. Too much economic improvement could be self-limiting, and the S&P 500 is trading at an ambitious multiple. We remain equal weight equities over the tactical three-month timeframe. The foregoing review of consumer performance reinforces our view that the SIFI banks should be overweighted relative to the S&P 500. The ongoing data indicate that the SIFI banks will not have to build up their reserves for loan losses as much as investors feared. Our conviction that the SIFI banks are unlikely to face material book value declines has only increased. It has become possible that second- and third-quarter reserve builds may be even less than our optimistic two-times-the-first-quarter view, but the virus will have the final say. The SIFI banks remain our favorite long idea. At the asset allocation level, we remain equal weight equities over the tactical three-month timeframe. We are encouraged by the green shoots visible in the employment report, but stocks are generously valued and the virus outlook is still unclear. The improvement on the ground could prove to be self-limiting if it kills the momentum for further fiscal assistance, or if it encourages officials and individuals to let their guard down regarding the social distancing measures that have been effective in lowering COVID-19 infection rates.   Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 According to the Census Department’s annual Current Population Survey, mean household income ($90,000) exceeded median household income ($63,000) by 42% in 2018. 2 Ganong, Peter, Noel, Pascal J., Vavra, Joseph S. "US Unemployment Insurance Replacement Rates During the Pandemic," NBER Working Paper No. 27216. 3https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/nmhc-rent-payment-tracker/ Accessed June 1. 4 Please see the April 14, 2020 US Investment Strategy/US Bond Strategy Special Report, "Alphabet Soup: A Summary Of The Fed’s Anti-Virus Measures," available at usis.bcaresearch.com.

Our reinstated long S&P oil & gas exploration & production (E&P)/short global gold miners pair trade is up again near the 20% mark. This parabolic rise compels us to re-institute a 10% rolling stop in order to protect gains. Importantly, neither the macro backdrop nor relative profit fundamentals have changed. A rising number of states and countries are setting the groundwork to reopen their economies. This should absorb some of the excess oil supply and help to further steepen the yield curve. Taken together, this will cement the handoff from liquidity to growth and thus further propel the pair trade (see chart). In addition, the Fed’s determination to quash volatility was another reason underpinning this intra-commodity pair trade. The lower the VIX falls, the higher the share price ratio goes. Bottom Line: Institute a 10% rolling stop in the reinstated long S&P oil & E&P/short global gold miners pair trade, today. For a full discussion on the rationale behind the trade, please refer to the following Weekly Report.