Keller Quarterly (October 2018)

Letter to Investors

Here we are just a little more than three-quarters of the way through 2018.  While many might regard this as a rather unusual year for the stock market, it really hasn’t been all that unusual.  This is true even though the market is now experiencing its second downturn of greater than 5% in 2018 (per the S&P 500 Index, as in the following discussion).  This is completely normal.  As we noted in our quarterly letter from six months ago: “Our firm’s Chief Market Strategist Bill O’Grady recently reported that over the last 90 years the stock market has averaged 3.4 corrections of 5% or greater per year.  Over the same time frame the market also averaged 1.1 corrections of 10% or greater per year.”  On January 26th of this year the market peaked and proceeded to fall just over 10% during the next couple of months.  After that the market recovered and then exceeded the January 26th high.  After peaking at a new high on September 20th the market then declined about 8%.  “What is happening here?”  Nothing strange at all.  In fact, this sort of market volatility is completely normal.  What was unusual was that for almost two-years prior to January 26th we had no sell-offs of even 5%!

As we’ve pointed out on numerous occasions, we welcome the return of normal volatility because it gives the opportunity to buy shares of great companies at discounted prices.  We play the long-game here at Confluence.  By that I mean we make investments on behalf of our clients that are intended to be in place for many years.  In some of our equity strategies we’ve held some stocks for a decade or two.  We believe that long-term investing is not only tax-efficient, but it just works better for investors whose time horizons are also long term.  Thus, day-to-day or even month-to-month volatility doesn’t cause us to change our long-term strategies; in fact, we expect the volatility and plan to take full advantage of it.

Many regard a “normal” bull market as one where all stocks appreciate together.  “A rising tide lifts all ships,” is a phrase you may have heard.  That is often the case in a new cyclical bull market emerging from a recession or in a world of low interest rate policy.  But, in the sort of world we’re in now, it’s not unusual to see the performance of many stocks and sectors diverge.  What is that world?  It’s a world of more rapid economic growth and rising interest rates.  In economic climates like this one, investors tend to chase stocks of fast-growing companies and eschew those with high dividends.  This is normal at this point in the cycle.

Well, then, shouldn’t an investor try to “move around” the market, selling what’s out of favor this year and buying what’s in vogue?  If only it were that easy.  It’s actually not only difficult but creates great risks to long-term performance.  But what if it were easy, and what’s out of favor this year were stocks of outstanding businesses owned for many years at low cost bases?  Would it make sense to sell those and pay the taxes for a fling with lesser businesses that are popular vehicles this year?  And what if you don’t get back into your outstanding long-term stocks soon enough and have to pay up for them?  You see where I’m going with this, I hope.  While some see investing as trading from one fast horse to the next fast horse at just the right time, we see good long-term investing as more of a marathon, won by the ownership of great companies for many years, even if they lag in some years.

This is a year when many of the best companies whose businesses are protected by some of the widest moats are lagging the market.  On the other hand, stocks of other great businesses are doing just fine this year.  That’s what divergence in the stock market means.  We’ve seen it before, and it doesn’t bother us at all because, as noted above, we take a long view of the business of investing.

We appreciate your confidence in us.

 

Gratefully,

Mark A. Keller, CFA
CEO and Chief Investment Officer

View the PDF

Daily Comment (October 17, 2018)

by Bill O’Grady and Thomas Wash

[Posted: 9:30 AM EDT] Markets are mixed this morning as strong earnings led to a surge in tech stocks but weaker earnings from automakers due to rising costs are likely weighing on investors.  Here are the stories we are following today:

Mueller to release key findings: Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to release a report providing an update on the Russia investigation after the November midterms.  In the report, Mueller is expected to discuss whether there is evidence of collusion between Russia and President Trump during the 2016 election, as well as whether the president was guilty of obstruction of justice following the firing of former FBI Director James Comey.  President Trump has claimed the investigation to be illegitimate and has been pushing for its conclusion or, at minimum, a limit in its scope.  The president’s legal team is currently mulling over whether to provide a written response to questions provided by Mueller as the president may not be willing to sit for a face-to-face interview.  Although the consequence of this report will likely depend on the outcome of the mid-term elections, the worst-case scenario would be a report suggesting there is evidence that President Trump is guilty of either allegation mentioned.  If the Democrats were to win a majority in both houses they will be pressured to push for impeachment, which would likely weigh on U.S. equities.  That being said, we believe a Democratic win in the Senate is unlikely.

President Trump’s Middle East dilemma: The president continues to face pressure to take a tougher stance against Saudi Arabia following the suspected killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.  On Tuesday, President Trump came to the defense of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman (MBS) after members of his party refused to accept the Saudis’ claim that rogue agents were responsible for the killing.  In an interview with the Associated Press, President Trump compared allegations that MBS had knowledge of the murder to the sexual assault allegations Brett Kavanaugh faced earlier this month.  The president’s willingness to protect the crown prince is likely related to his desire to not backtrack on Iranian sanctions.  If the president wants to follow through on his plan to implement more sanctions on Iran, he will need Saudi Arabia’s help in offsetting the loss in oil supply.

Chinese debt bubble? Rising debt levels in China have sparked concerns of a possible infrastructure bubble developing within the region.[1]  According to an S&P report, local Chinese governments may have accumulated ¥40 trillion ($6 trillion) worth of hidden debt that is not reflected in official figures.  Although China has been pushing for more credit restrictions throughout the country, it appears rising trade tensions with the U.S. have led to lax enforcement of those restrictions.  The report suggests the local governments may have turned to local government financing vehicles (LGFV) to bypass restrictions in an attempt to stimulate regional growth.  This method allows the local governments to use land rights as collateral for loans; as a result, the credit-worthiness of the bonds are backed by land sales.  Furthermore, the relationship between debt and land values has encouraged local governments to build more infrastructure within their respective regions regardless of whether there is sufficient demand to support it.  The report is concerning because it suggests that financial markets may be more fragile than previously thought and also calls into question the CPC’s ability to stimulate growth throughout China amidst rising trade tensions with the U.S.  We will continue to monitor this situation.

U.S.-UK Brexit deal: UK Prime Minister Theresa May is facing growing pressure to secure a deal with the EU in order to start negotiations with other sovereign countries.  The UK’s bid to stay in the public procurement alliance has been stalled and is expected to lose access to the group following its exit from the European Union.  Although the WTO is likely to come to a provisional agreement following Britain’s exit, the suspense will still be a burden for PM May as she struggles to seal a Brexit agreement.  Meanwhile, the Trump administration has informed Congress that it would like to negotiate a new bilateral agreement with the UK following its departure from the EU, but the UK is forbidden to negotiate bilateral agreements while it is still part of the single-market.  The longer it takes PM May to secure a deal, the harder it will be for her to create smooth transitions following departure.

Trump attacks the Fed: President Trump has gone on the offensive against the Federal Reserve, claiming it is the biggest threat to the U.S. economy.  Over the past few weeks, the president has taken to Twitter and the press to attack the Fed’s decision to tighten monetary policy.  The market currently anticipates a fourth rate hike in December following strong economic growth, rising inflation and a tightening labor market.  The Fed minutes released later today will likely provide more insight into what the Fed might do in December.  That said, any perception that the Fed is prioritizing the president’s opinion on economic data will likely hurt the Fed’s credibility, which is important to its ability to anchor inflation expectations.[2]

View the complete PDF


[1] https://www.ft.com/content/adabd0ae-d0f3-11e8-a9f2-7574db66bcd5

[2] For further discussion on politicizing the Fed, see our most recent Asset Allocation Weekly published 10/12/18 (also found on p. 6 of this report).

Asset Allocation Quarterly (Fourth Quarter 2018)

  • The U.S. economy is stable and growing, with sentiment indicators remaining high. A recession is not included in our cyclical forecast.
  • The Fed’s tightening policy has thus far had modest effects. We expect a continuation of increases in the fed funds rate in tandem with a reduction of the Fed’s balance sheet.
  • Though unemployment is low, we find that the employment/population ratio indicates a continuance of slack in the labor force, thereby blunting the potential impact of wage growth on inflation.
  • Midterm elections in the U.S. hold the potential for a divided government, which dims the prospect for new legislation to be enacted.
  • The asset allocation portfolios retain their high relative weighting to equities given economic health and expectations for continued GDP growth. At this point in the economic cycle, our style bias remains in favor of growth at 60%/40%.

View the complete PDF

 

ECONOMIC VIEWPOINTS

The U.S. economy continues to be on sound footing. Real GDP, as exhibited in the accompanying chart, has been growing for over nine years, representing the second longest U.S. economic expansion on record. Sentiment, as measured by the NFIB Small Business Optimism Index and the University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index, remains high. Inflation is contained, with readings of CPI regularly registering below the 20-year average. Corporate earnings are strong, with the vast majority of firms reporting results in the second quarter in excess of expectations.

Although economic conditions are positive and appetites among U.S. businesses and consumers are healthy, we are cognizant that events can transpire to upset a field of roses and buttercups. Trade frictions have commanded the headlines since February. Though we readily admit that tariffs and other barriers to trade have the potential to increase costs, thus leading to lesser profits for businesses and/or the kindling of nascent inflationary pressures, we believe that new supply chains can be woven to circumvent the barriers, thereby mitigating the full economic consequences of tariffs and trade obstacles. Of greater consequence, we believe, are lagging effects of last year’s tax reform. One area we have identified as being potentially poignant is the oversight among many rank-and-file workers to adjust their withholding in light of the modified tax tables. Though they have enjoyed higher take-home pay each month, those who have previously basked in a fat refund check during past tax seasons may well find themselves with lesser refunds come next spring. Should this affect a substantial proportion of middle income taxpayers, the derivative effects may be a climb in aggregate credit card debt outstanding, reduced consumer expenditures on travel and dining and, more explicitly damaging to the broader economy and thereby GDP, lower demand for consumer durables. In and of itself, diminished tax refunds will not in all likelihood cripple the economy. Yet in concert with the impact of trade policies, albeit diminished, an overall decline in sentiment, wage pressures and perhaps an overzealous Fed, economic conditions may be less appealing by this time next year.

An antithetical example is probably more plausible. In the event of a divided government wrought by the Democrats wrenching the U.S. House and even the Senate from the Republicans during the midterm elections, the Trump administration and Congress may find common ground on infrastructure spending. Should this transpire, it may push what some consider to be an already giddy economy into pure economic ecstasy, thereby propelling the U.S. equity markets to even higher valuations in what we have described as a “melt-up” in prior publications. The other side of the coin in this scenario is a bond market sell-off stemming from either higher issuance of Treasuries and municipals or elevated inflation expectations, or both.

Note that the foregoing paragraphs are certainly not our base case, which is for steady normalization of rates by the Fed, continued economic growth, solid corporate profitability and healthy confidence. Rather, the preceding illustrations are intended to underscore the importance of continually monitoring data to ascertain whether our asset allocation facings are appropriate or are in need of adjustment.  Although diversification among asset classes is a hallmark of modern portfolio theory, allocations based on stagnant assumptions can produce spurious results. Accordingly, expected returns, risk and yields require regular updates to provide proper diversification among asset classes. This is the crux of our cyclical asset allocation process, assessing the expected returns, risk and yields over the ensuing economic cycle utilizing relevant data to ensure risk-appropriate positioning.

STOCK MARKET OUTLOOK

Our views on the U.S. equity markets remain favorable. Although the probability of increased volatility is resident, we view the economic landscape as constructive for equities. While tariffs and trade barriers are affecting certain companies unfavorably, we expect corporate profitability in the aggregate to continue its ascent, though at a lower rate than experienced thus far this year, which was aided by changes to the tax code. The repatriation of assets held abroad has already had positive influences on dividends, share repurchases and increased M&A activity, despite the levels of repatriation being lower than the markets originally forecasted. However, as the IRS finalizes its rules on repatriation, the level is likely to grow. Our analysis suggests that this should prove beneficial for prices of companies classified as mid-cap and small cap, as well as in the lower strata of large cap, by virtue of increased M&A activity. Accordingly, all of our asset allocation portfolios have historically high levels of equity exposure and there is a leaning toward mid-cap and small cap equities for the portfolios where it is risk appropriate.

With regard to style and sectors, we find that our existing 60% tilt toward growth remains appropriate at this juncture in the economic cycle. Equities traditionally characterized as growth are generally rewarded in the latter stages of expansions. An area of the growth style that encourages near-term caution include those securities that have been reclassified as part of last quarter’s configuration of the communication services sector. Even though the repositioning has already occurred, we expect some choppiness as an echo from the reclassification. Beyond the tilt to growth, we remain overweight to the energy, financials and materials sectors. Since these contain stocks that are classified mostly as value, the collective overweight to these sectors has the effect of reducing the growth tilt to roughly 55% in the large cap sleeve of the portfolios.

Beyond the U.S., we retain much of last quarter’s non-U.S. equity positioning. Valuations for non-U.S. companies relative to their U.S. counterparts remain compelling, yet returns for U.S.-based investors are obviously influenced by the value of the U.S. dollar. We also have exposures to emerging market equities in the portfolios where risk appropriate.

BOND MARKET OUTLOOK

Hand-wringing over the flattening of the yield curve that was so prominent during the summer months has been supplanted in just a few weeks by concerns of curve steepening caused by increases in inflation expectations. Comments about the bond market are typically filled with hyperbole, but the histrionics this year have seemed to become shrill.  Despite the angst expressed by many, we hold the opinion that in its current trajectory the Fed is moving toward a more sound and normalized footing. We recognize that there exists the potential for a misstep by the Fed, either through being overzealous in efforts to raise fed funds and reduce the size of the balance sheet or by becoming too docile in response to a Tweet storm. However, we believe the laddered positioning that we enacted at the beginning of the year is the appropriate positioning for this phase of the economic cycle. The duration posture of the portfolios tend to be shorter than the broader indices, mostly due to the quarterly erosion effected by the use of the ladders. The portfolios remain heavily exposed to investment-grade credit through the laddered ETFs and the exposure to longer dated Treasuries has been reduced. We continue to harbor some trepidation regarding speculative-grade bonds given their tight spreads to maturity-equivalent Treasuries and the necessity of refinancing nearly $1 trillion of high-yield bonds set to mature between 2019 and 2022. As a result, the exposure to speculative grade bonds is at historically low levels in our portfolios.

OTHER MARKETS

We retain an allocation to REITs in the more income-oriented portfolios due to attractive and improving dividend yields and the diversified income stream they afford. Relative to speculative-grade bonds, we find the potential risk/reward to be superior in REITs.

The modest allocation to gold is maintained owing to the combination of its ability to offer a hedge against geopolitical risk and the safe haven it can offer during an uncertain climate for the U.S. dollar.

View the complete PDF

Daily Comment (October 16, 2018)

by Bill O’Grady and Thomas Wash

[Posted: 9:30 AM EDT] Equities have rebounded this morning due to expectations of strong earnings, and Treasury yields are also trending upward as it appears tensions are easing with Saudi Arabia and China.  Below are the stories we will be following throughout the day:

Khashoggi death: On Monday, CNN reported that Saudi Arabia was preparing to backtrack on claims that it had nothing to do with Khashoggi’s disappearance.  According to the report, the kingdom is willing to admit that Khashoggi was killed by rogue agents looking to interrogate him, echoing a claim from President Trump earlier that day.[1]  If this report were true, the statement would allow for a bit of face-saving by all three parties involved—Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and Turkey.  Saudi Arabia would avoid condemnation from the West, the U.S. would not feel pressure to punish Saudi Arabia and the Turkish government would not be perceived as weak for backing down from Saudi Arabia.  Prior to this report, Saudi Arabia faced backlash from businesses in the form of withdrawals from its flag-post convention nicknamed “Davos in the Desert.”  Meanwhile, the U.S. and Turkish economies could be strained if Saudi Arabia decides to lower its oil production in response to being reprimanded for the suspected killing.  At the moment, it is unclear whether the president will take action in the event that Saudi Arabia publicly admits Khashoggi died in its custody, although it is rumored that Treasury Secretary Mnunchin may soon withdraw from the summit.  Oil prices fell in response to a possible de-escalation of tensions with Saudi Arabia.

Chinese de-escalation: It appears the U.S. may be softening its tone with China prior to the G20 summit, where the two sides are expected to meet.  A currency report to be released by the Treasury Department is expected to contradict the president’s claim that China is a currency manipulator.  In addition, Defense Secretary Mattis contradicted claims that the U.S. is trying to contain China.  That being said, we do not believe either assertion made by the Treasury Department or the defense secretary is a genuine reflection of the beliefs of the president or members of his administration.  Secretary Mattis was reportedly on a plane to Southeast Asia when he made the comments; the trip to Southeast Asia is widely perceived as the U.S. cozying up to countries within the region to counter China’s military assertiveness in the South China Sea.  We do believe the softer rhetoric could serve as an olive branch but we would not be surprised if the tone switches days prior to or on the day of the summit.  President Trump has been known to stir up controversy prior to trade meetings to keep his opponents off balance and create a more favorable negotiating environment for his team.  We will continue to monitor the situation.

Italian budget:  The Italian government was able to submit its budget to the EU prior to Monday’s midnight deadline.  It now awaits approval from the European Commission.  If the deal is approved, which many have speculated that it won’t be, it would ease worries of a possible clash between Italian populists and the EU.  A more likely scenario would be that the budget is rejected due to Italy breaking its commitment to reduce its deficit, at which point the EU and Italy would be at a standoff.  There have been fears that a hawkish response from Brussels could embolden populists to push for a Eurozone exit, but those concerns were calmed after Italian Deputy Prime Minister Luigi Di Maio ruled out the possibility.  Yields on Italian 10-year bonds have fallen following the budget submission, suggesting the market expects a reasonable compromise between the EU and Rome.  The two sides are due to meet on Thursday.

(Source: Bloomberg)

View the complete PDF


[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-politics-dissident-report/saudi-arabia-preparing-to-admit-khashoggi-was-killed-cnn-idUSKCN1MP2DD

Daily Comment (October 15, 2018)

by Bill O’Grady and Thomas Wash

[Posted: 9:30 AM EDT] The equity sell-off has returned as U.S. tensions with Saudi Arabia and China escalated over the weekend.  Growing concerns of market uncertainty have led to a rise in oil prices, gold and Treasuries, as well as a drop in the dollar.  Below are the stories we will be following throughout the day:

Saudi Arabia hits back: Saudi Arabia responded to threats from President Trump by vowing to strike back if any actions are taken against the kingdom.  Over the weekend, the president suggested there will be consequences for Saudi Arabia if it was responsible for the suspected killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.  In response to the allegations, businesses have begun to distance themselves from the kingdom by withdrawing from the Saudi conference nicknamed “Davos in the Desert,” with the most notable withdrawals being Ford Motor (F, $8.64) Chairman Bill Ford and JP Morgan (JPM, $106.95) Chief Executive Jamie Dimon.  Equity markets in Saudi Arabia also took a hit.  As mentioned last week, in the event of escalating tensions between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia we expect the kingdom to reduce oil production in an attempt to raise oil prices.  Although the U.S. could use some of its strategic supplies to offset some of the reduction in production, it will likely do little to change the world price of oil.  Therefore, we expect global equities to suffer as a result of tit-for-tat responses between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.

Pastor Brunson’s return: On Friday, Turkey released Pastor Andrew Brunson who was detained on terrorism charges following the failed coup in 2016.  Pastor Brunson’s release will likely lead to a de-escalation of tensions between Turkey and the U.S.  Earlier this year, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on Turkey to pressure the country to release Pastor Brunson with no conditions attached.  Although there have been rumors of Pastor Brunson’s release being linked to President Trump’s decision to take a tougher stance against Saudi Arabia, the Trump administration has denied any such deal.  As a result of Pastor Brunson’s release the Turkish lira strengthened against the dollar due to the possibility of a lift in U.S. sanctions.

(Source: Bloomberg)

Another round of tariffs: On Sunday, President Trump threatened to impose another round of tariffs on Chinese goods on the grounds that it has interfered with American elections.  The president appears to be alluding to a newspaper ad in Iowa designed to sway voters in the midterm elections.  Although this does seem like an unorthodox reason for implementing new tariffs, the president may have broad protections under the “Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917” if he decides to follow through on this threat.  This law is meant to be enacted during times of war, but the U.S. involvement in Syria may be enough justification.  China’s decision to aid Iran in avoiding U.S. sanctions could be interpreted as an act to aid an enemy of the state.  While there isn’t direct conflict between the U.S. and Iran within Syria, the two are strategic foes in the region.  That being said, if the president were to proceed down this route he will likely meet stiff opposition from Congress, especially from congressmen whose states will be impacted in the event of retaliation.  We do not expect there to be much criticism from members of the Republican Party until after the midterm elections as tariffs appear to be popular with their base.

Brexit deal in trouble: The prospect of an imminent Brexit deal seems to have hit a snag after UK Prime Minister Theresa May stated she is not ready to agree to the deal in its currents state. This shift comes two days after a report suggesting PM May told her inner cabinet that a potential deal was close.  It appears that backlash from members of the Tory party and coalition partners DUP could have swayed her position over the weekend.  On Friday, the DUP categorically ruled out supporting the deal in its current state after reports suggested Northern Ireland would be treated differently from other members of the United Kingdom.  It is becoming increasingly clear that the UK parliament in its current form will not be able to agree to a Brexit deal prior to the March deadline.  The possibility of a UK exit from the EU without a deal will spark more uncertainty throughout the region; therefore, we wouldn’t be surprised if there is a push for snap elections before the end of the year.  Following the report, the pound weakened against the dollar.  We will continue to monitor this situation.

View the complete PDF

Asset Allocation Weekly (October 12, 2018)

by Asset Allocation Committee

Politics is usually an uncomfortable topic for financial market analysts.  The subject is fraught with high emotion, and being overly concerned about a specific political outcome can sometimes cloud judgement.  At the same time, political trends offer insight into future policy changes that can affect financial market performance.  For example, we have documented the growing trend of populism and its potential impact on economic and market performance.[1]

One of the more disturbing trends we have noted in recent years is the growing division among Americans that is being reflected in our political system.  Race and gender concerns in marriage have become less of a concern, but marrying across political lines has become increasingly frowned upon.[2]   The level of partisanship has increased steadily over the past two decades.

(Source: Rosenthal and Poole)

This data measures the difference between the party voting patterns in Congress.  The higher the number, the greater the degree of difference, meaning a higher level of partisanship.  A similar measure that estimates the percentage of overlapping members (likelihood of voting across party lines) has diminished as well.

(Source: Rosenthal and Poole)

This deepening polarization, coupled with the widespread use of social media, is leading to increasingly aggressive behavior and threats.[3]  More American institutions are progressively being viewed under the lens of partisanship; the courts, regulatory agencies and law enforcement are all facing scrutiny for their decisions.  Reaching an agreement on the impact of seemingly objective facts is becoming increasingly difficult.

The reasons for polarization are beyond the scope of this report.  Our concern is the impact of polarization and partisanship on financial markets.  So far, the Federal Reserve has mostly avoided the worst of this trend.  However, it would seem naïve to believe that the U.S. central bank can remain above the partisan fray indefinitely.  Already, President Trump has undermined protocol with regard to monetary policy established by Robert Rubin in the mid-1990s.  That protocol meant the White House would refrain from commenting on monetary policy, with the concept being that the less political pressure the Federal Reserve faced, the more confidence investors would have in the central bank maintaining anchored inflation expectations.  President Trump has been openly critical of monetary tightening.  So far, we have not seen political pundits frame monetary policy in a partisan fashion.  But, the risks of such events are rising.  If monetary policy actions are increasingly viewed through the parameters of partisan politics, we would expect the following market effects:

  1. Long-duration interest rates will rise. These rates are sensitive to inflation expectations.  Undermining Federal Reserve independence will tend to raise fears that policymakers won’t increase rates for fear of criticism, leading the central bank to tolerate higher inflation.
  2. The dollar will weaken. If the central bank won’t act against inflation impulses, then the attractiveness of the dollar will be diminished.
  3. Gold prices will rise. Gold will be seen as a store of value instrument, which will become more appealing in a rising inflation environment.
  4. Equity markets will suffer through falling multiples. Price/earnings multiples are partly a function of inflation expectations.  If prices are rising, earnings become suspect and investors lower the price at which they will purchase those earnings.

To date, there is no evidence that monetary policy has been affected by White House criticism.  However, that condition may not endure.  We continue to closely monitor developments but we will take appropriate action if the Federal Reserve finds its independence compromised. 

View the PDF


[1] See Weekly Geopolitical Reports, Reflections on Politics and Populism: Part I (7/16/18) and Part II (7/23/18); and European Populism (1/12/15).

[2] https://www.voanews.com/a/mixed-political-marriages-an-issue-on-rise/3705468.html

[3] https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/348014-threats-of-political-violence-rise-in-polarized-trump-era

Daily Comment (October 12, 2018)

by Bill O’Grady and Thomas Wash

[Posted: 9:30 AM EDT] Good morning! It appears the market has finally recovered after a two-day sell-off in global equities.  The yuan has also retreated following reports that the IMF and U.S. Treasury have concluded that China isn’t manipulating its exchange rate.  Here are the stories we are following today:

Brexit deal close? On Thursday, British Prime Minister Theresa May is rumored to have briefed members of her inner circle that a Brexit deal is imminent.[1]  The primary roadblock to negotiations was ensuring that there is no hard border separating Northern Ireland.  The compromise, nicknamed the “back-drop plan,” has come under scrutiny by Tory Eurosceptics and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).  In this proposed plan, the UK would remain in the customs union “temporarily” but without a determined end date and Northern Ireland would remain part of the single market.  Tory Eurosceptics, who have been arguing for a clean break from the European Union, fear that the arrangement will keep Britain in the EU forever, whereas the DUP, a party from Northern Ireland whose support allowed the conservative party to form a government, fear that the deal could place their region at a disadvantage.  As a result, the party has threatened to not support the Brexit deal.  The controversy surrounding Brexit raises the likelihood of snap elections in the UK in the near future.  We continue to monitor this situation.

China isn’t manipulating yuan: On Thursday, it was reported the staff of the Treasury Department informed Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin that the Chinese government is not manipulating its currency.[2]  This report is also in line with findings from the IMF, which stated that the yuan is “broadly in line” with China’s economic fundamentals. [3]  If this conclusion is accepted by Mnuchin, it will likely reduce tensions between the two countries prior to their meeting at the G20 summit.  President Trump has consistently labeled China a currency manipulator, therefore we do not expect him to agree with the findings.  Nevertheless, this report reduces the likelihood that currency manipulation will be a sticking point in trade negotiations as Treasury Mnuchin suggested it would earlier in the week.[4]

The chart above shows the fair value of the yuan based on our purchase parity model.  Currently, the yuan is valued at ¥6.92 to the dollar compared to our model forecast of ¥7.51.  Although there has been some devaluation of the yuan over the past several months, the model suggests the yuan is currently trading within its normal range.  The dollar strengthened against the yuan following the release of this report.  The chart below shows the overnight change in the yuan.

(Source: Bloomberg)

Khashoggi disappearance: The disappearance of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi has led to diplomatic tensions between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.  There are rumors that the journalist, who was known to be a staunch critic of the kingdom, was killed inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul earlier this month.  The alleged killing has left members of Congress uneasy; as a result, a group of senators have begun pushing for the halt of a proposed arms deal between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.  President Trump has stated he is currently investigating the disappearance of the journalist but does not support suspending the arms deal.  Saudi Arabia has denied any involvement in the journalist’s disappearance but Turkey claims to have video and audio evidence suggesting otherwise.  Saudi Arabia has been known to have little appetite for Western criticism as Canada has learned firsthand earlier this year.  Accordingly, there is growing speculation that Saudi Arabia could turn toward Russia and China for arms deals in the event that Congress does not approve this one.

View the complete PDF


[1] https://www.ft.com/content/30fbcb64-cd73-11e8-9fe5-24ad351828ab

[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-11/u-s-treasury-staff-said-to-find-china-isn-t-manipulating-yuan?srnd=premium

[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-12/imf-says-yuan-is-fairly-valued-as-u-s-compiles-currency-review?srnd=premium

[4] https://www.ft.com/content/cd325c24-cc32-11e8-b276-b9069bde0956

Daily Comment (October 11, 2018)

by Bill O’Grady and Thomas Wash

[Posted: 9:30 AM EDT]

[BREAKING: President Trump agreed to a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping to discuss ongoing trade tensions during the G20 Summit.  Earlier this week, U.S. officials had warned China that trade discussions would only take place if it provided a detailed list of trade concessions.  This meeting signals a slight de-escalation of tensions between the two nations.  The story is still developing.]

Good morning all!  There was a sharp sell-off in equities worldwide after a higher than expected core PPI report sparked concerns about ongoing trade tensions; at this time, bonds and currencies remain relatively stable.  Here are the news events we are following today:

Market jitters: The equity sell-off that started in U.S. markets yesterday spread into European and Asian markets overnight.  The sharp sell-off prompted the president to initially conclude that the Federal Reserve had “gone crazy” with monetary tightening, and then later attributed the sell-off to market correction.  Although there were likely multiple causes that contributed to the stock market sell-off, the prospect of a fourth rate hike being one of them, the most prominent cause appears to be fears of escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and China.  Yesterday’s PPI report looks to have sparked the sell-off.  The chart below shows the VIX index, most commonly known as the fear gauge.

(Source: Bloomberg)

As you can see, the rise in the VIX coincided with the release of the report.  Higher than expected core PPI has sparked concerns that profit margins might suffer due to either rising costs or inflation.  Although there have been whispers that this event is possibly a signal of the economy losing steam, at this moment, we remain optimistic as there is no clear sign of a downturn happening in the foreseeable future, but we continue to monitor the situation.

Adjusted sanctions: China, Russia and North Korea have called on the U.N. Security Council to adjust current sanctions against Pyongyang.[1]  South Korea is also rumored to be considering a reduction in unilateral sanctions against the regime.[2]  The push for a reduction in sanctions is in stark contrast to the Trump administration’s position of maintaining sanctions until North Korea is completely denuclearized.  Although South Korea’s interest in reducing sanctions is likely due to its goal of creating a more stable Korean peninsula, China and Russia’s interests appear to be more strategic.  Although it is unclear, it seems that sanctions and trade tensions have forced Russia and China into a strategic partnership to undermine the U.S.  We see their united push to adjust sanctions as a way of demonstrating their importance to the U.S. in achieving its diplomatic agenda.

New reserves in the Gulf: On Wednesday, Mexican state-owned oil company, Pemex, stated it has discovered new oil reserves in the southeast basin of the Gulf of Mexico.  The discovery provided a sigh of relief to oil market skeptics that feared the Iranian sanctions – which are due to be put in place on November 4 – will force up oil prices.  It is unclear whether this will impact the U.S. decision to provide sanction waivers to countries that would like to keep importing Iranian oil, but we will continue to monitor this situation.

View the complete PDF


[1] https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/10/china-russia-north-korea-sanctions-891640

[2] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/10/south-korea-eyes-lifting-sanctions-north-korea-181010194334831.html

Daily Comment (October 10, 2018)

by Bill O’Grady and Thomas Wash

[Posted: 9:30 AM EDT] U.S. equity futures have weakened on an unexpected jump in core PPI (see below).  Here is what we are following:

China: There were a few items of interest this morning.  First, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin warned China not to use a weaker currency to offset U.S. trade tariffs.[1]  So far, China has denied that it is considering a forced depreciation of the CNY.  However, the dollar/yuan exchange rate has weakened toward the CNY 7.0 level, which would be psychologically important.  For China, the exchange rate is a dual-edged sword.  An obvious retaliation against tariffs would be a weaker currency, which would offset higher costs on Chinese goods.  However, currency weakness in the past has triggered capital flight and any hint that the Xi regime is going to use a weaker currency could lead to outflows that would be hard to control.  We would expect a slow depreciation of the currency but most of the offset to tariffs is probably going to come from increased domestic investment, which will exacerbate China’s debt problem.  Second, during the just completed “Golden Week” in China, holiday purchases were said to be “soft.”[2]  Consumer spending during the holiday rose about 6.7% over the week, the first single-digit growth rate in post-reform history.  As the Chinese economy slows, we would expect the government to increase stimulus to avoid a slump.  Finally, Andrew Ross Sorkin has a report in the NYT[3] raising the age-old concern about China deploying the “nuclear option” and dumping Treasuries.  We discussed this issue from the Chinese side in a recent series of Weekly Geopolitical Reports.[4]  This is really not an issue.  As we noted in our reports, China has no real alternative to Treasuries.  If it decides to dump its holdings, not only would it suffer significant losses, but it would lose an outlet for its exports (which is how the reserves are generated in the first place).  However, there is another issue we didn’t delve into in the aforementioned reports—the Fed could simply execute a form of QE and purchase all the Treasuries the Chinese wanted to sell.

Trump and the Fed: President Trump criticized the Federal Reserve again yesterday.[5]  This Friday’s Asset Allocation Weekly will discuss the dangers of politicizing monetary policy.  There is a potential danger with White House criticism of the FOMC; the Fed really doesn’t control inflation (that’s a function of the intersection of aggregate supply and aggregate demand, meaning there are many factors affecting inflation with monetary policy being a minor one), but it does control inflation expectations.  If financial markets conclude that policymakers are “pulling their punches” to avoid disapproval, it would raise fears that policy won’t tighten enough in the face of inflationary pressures and un-anchor expectations.  We note that NY FRB President Williams suggested the Fed will likely reach a neutral policy level in “a year or so.”[6]

View the complete PDF


[1] https://www.ft.com/content/cd325c24-cc32-11e8-b276-b9069bde0956

[2] https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/2167700/are-chinese-consumers-losing-power-soft-spending-golden-week

[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/business/dealbook/china-trade-war-nuclear-option.html

[4] See WGRs, China’s Foreign Reserves: Part I (6/4/18); Part II (6/11/18); and Part III (6/18/18).

[5] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fed-trump/trump-renews-fed-criticism-says-raising-rates-too-fast-idUSKCN1MJ2JW

[6] https://www.wsj.com/articles/feds-williams-more-gradual-rate-increases-will-keep-expansion-moving-1539133800