Bond Market Rout?

January 4th, 2017 12:44 pm

Via Bloomberg:

Harvard Academic Sees Debt Rout Worse Than 1994 ‘Bond Massacre’
2017-01-04 15:39:28.489 GMT

By Anchalee Worrachate
(Bloomberg) — If you thought you had already read the
gloomiest possible prognosis for bonds, wait until you read this
one.
Paul Schmelzing, a PhD candidate at Harvard University and
a visiting scholar at the Bank of England, said if the latest
bond market bubble bursts, it will be worse than in 1994 when
global government bonds suffered the biggest annual loss on
record.
“Looking back over eight centuries of data, I find that the
2016 bull market was indeed one of the largest ever recorded,”
wrote Schmelzing in an article posted on Bank Underground, which
is a blog run by Bank of England staff. “History suggests this
reversal will be driven by inflation fundamentals, and leave
investors worse off than the 1994 ‘bond massacre’”.
Schmelzing, whose research focuses on the history of
international financial systems, divided modern-day bond bear
markets into three major types: inflation reversal of 1967-1971,
the sharp reversal of 1994, and the value at risk shock in Japan
in 2003.
The Bank of America Merrill Lynch Global Government Index
of bonds fell 3.1 percent in its worst-ever annual loss in 1994
as then-Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan surprised investors by
almost doubling the benchmark rate. Treasury 10-year yields
surged from 5.6 percent in January to 8 percent in November.
The current bond market is facing the “perfect storm” of
potential steepening of the bond yield curve, monetary policy
tightening, and a multi-year period of sustained losses due to a
“structural” return of inflation resembling that of 1967, he
said. Last quarter was the worst for government bonds since
1987, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
“By historical standards, this implies sustained double-
digit losses on bond holdings, subpar growth in developed
markets, and balance sheet risks for banking systems with a
large home bias,” Schmelzing said.

FX

January 3rd, 2017 6:27 am

Via Marc Chandler at Brown Brothers Harriman:

Drivers for the Week Ahead

  • We expect the dollar’s uptrend to continue, driven by the divergence of monetary policy broadly understood and the political risks emanating from Europe
  • The highlight of the week is the US jobs report
  • Investors await the UK Supreme Court decision on the appeal from the government about its prerogative to trigger Article 50
  • We expect EM to remain broadly under pressure as the same major EM-negative investment themes remain in place over the medium-term
  • Country-specific EM risk remains in play as well

The dollar is mostly firmer against the majors.  The Aussie and the Loonie are outperforming, while the yen and euro are underperforming.  Sterling was supported by a stronger than expected manufacturing PMI, the highest since June 2014.  EM currencies are mostly weaker.  RUB and KRW are outperforming, while TRY and the CEE currencies are underperforming.  MSCI Asia Pacific ex-Japan was up 0.4%, as Japan markets were closed for holiday.  MSCI EM is up 0.1%, with Chinese markets rising 1%.  Euro Stoxx 600 is up 0.6% near midday, while S&P futures are pointing to a higher open.  The 10-year UST yield is up 7 bp at 2.51%.  Commodity prices are mostly higher, with oil up 2.2%, copper up 1.2%, and gold flat.

There are four things investors should know as the New Year begins.  First, it has already begun with several PMI reports already reported.  Second, in the last two weeks of December, the trends that dominated Q4 were retraced to some extent.  Third, there are several economic reports due from Europe in the coming days, but the highlight will be the US jobs data at the end of the week.  Fourth, uncertainty over the UK Supreme Court ruling regarding Article 50 and what policies the new US administration will pursue will linger for a while longer.  

China’s official December PMIs were reported.  Both the manufacturing and non-manufacturing slipped.  The former eased to 51.4 from 51.7 and the latter to 54.5 from 54.7.  The details of the non-manufacturing were a bit better than the headline, though the services component fell to 53.2 from 53.7.  The construction component rose to 61.9 from 60.4.  Also suggesting modest growth, new orders rose to 52.1 from 51.8.  Today, the Caixin manufacturing PMI was reported at 51.9 vs. expectations of a steady reading of 50.9.  

The eurozone manufacturing PMI matched the flash estimate of 54.9, which is the highest level in five and a half years.  It points to a modest acceleration in the manufacturing sector.  The PMI averaged 53.1 in Q4 after 52.0 in Q3.  The 12-month average is 52.5.  Prices also rose the most since the spring of 2011, as did new orders (to 55.9 from 54.4).   Germany’s 55.6 (flash 55.5) reading is a three-year high.  France’s 53.5 (same as flash) is a five-year high.  Recall that from March through September 2016, France’s manufacturing PMI was below the 50 boom/bust level.  

Spain saw new vigor.  The manufacturing PMI rose to 55.3 from 54.5.  It had fallen to 51 in July and August.  With December’s gains, it averaged 54.4 in Q4 and 51.4 in Q3.  The 12-month average is 53.2.  Italy too did well.  The manufacturing PMI rose to 53.2 from 52.2.  It is also well above its recent averages.  

Several emerging market economies reported their manufacturing PMIs.  Two caught our attention. First is India, where the PMI tumbled to 49.6, the low for the year, from 52.3 in November and 54.4 in October.  Modi’s cash experiment has proven disruptive, and with the end of the year, it has surpassed the 50 days the Prime Minister promised it would take.   Political tensions will likely intensify.  

Second is South Korea.  The manufacturing PMI rose to 49.4 from 48.0 in October and November, and 47.6 in September.  The new orders component rose to a five-month high. The Korean won fell 8.8% against the US dollar in Q4 16, making it the second worst performing emerging market currency behind the Turkish lira (-14.9%) in the last three months of 2016.   The Japanese yen experienced a greater depreciation (-13.5%) than the won in the quarter, but for the year as a whole, the yen appreciated 3% against the dollar, and the won fell about 3% against the dollar.  

There were several powerful trends in the capital markets in Q4.  The US dollar rose.  Yields rose, more in the US than other high income countries and curves steepened.  Flows left emerging markets, and after a five-month advance, the MSCI Emerging Market equity index fell in November and December.  The trends seemed to reverse in the second half of December.  Emerging market shares rallied, interest rates eased, and the dollar fell.

An important question is why the trends reversed in the last two weeks.  There appear to be two answers.  The first is “buy the rumor, sell the fact” type of activity following the Fed’s rate hike on December 14.   If this is the case, investors should expect a continued unwinding of those trends.  On the other hand, if it was just a short-term pause in trends as books were closed, then the underlying trend may be expected to reassert itself.  

Our understanding of the technical condition favors the first scenario, and look for the broader correction to continue.  Participants may be slow to return and may wait for the US employment data.  The holiday break may have also served to psychologically break the strong momentum that had built.  Given that the ECB and Fed moved in December, Q4 data may have lost some of its ability to impact investment decisions.  Psychology and positioning may be more important drivers than economic data as the New Year begins.  

In the big picture, we expect the dollar’s uptrend to continue, driven by the divergence of monetary policy broadly understood and the political risks emanating from Europe.  On different valuation calculus, the European equities may look relatively cheaper than the US or Japanese stocks.  There may be good macroeconomic reasons for this, but our point is that the interest rate differentials are such that one is paid for hedging the euro and yen (several other foreign exchange exposures) back into dollars.  Consider that in Q4 16; the Nikkei rallied 16.2% while the yen fell 13.4%.  

The eurozone economy is growing near trend, which is often estimated to be around 1.25%-1.50%.  The problem, we are told, is prices.  Assuming that the services PMI is in line with the flash reading, then the midweek’s CPI data are likely to be the most important of the week.  

Due primarily to the base effect from oil, headline Eurozone CPI is expected to rise to 1.0% from 0.6%.   It is not that high since September 2013.  Recall that from February through May it was in negative territory.  The core rate, on the other hand, is expected to be steady at 0.8%, where it has been since August.  It bottomed in the first part of 2015 at 0.6%.  There has yet to be any traction in the core prices, and this is one of the things that cannot set right with ECB’s Draghi.  

It is not ideal, but one way that the periphery of Europe can gain competitiveness on Germany is if they can experience lower inflation than Germany.  This was a problem when German CPI is near zero, as other countries either experienced deflation or lost competitiveness to Germany.  However, now German inflation is set to rise quicker than others.   German state CPI readings so far have come in higher.  The national reading will be reported later today and is expected to rise 1.3% y/y.  French CPI ticked higher to 0.8% y/y, lower than the 0.9% expected.

The highlight of the week is the US jobs report.  The consensus is for about the same as November or 178k.  We see scope for disappointment.  Over the last ten years, December has seen less job growth than November in seven times and for the last three years in a row.  This is not sufficient to refute the null hypothesis, but it may make one cautious.  Moreover, the US economy appears to have slowed down considerably after that heady 3.5% pace reported in Q3.  The NY Fed has the economy tracking 1.8% in Q4.  The Atlanta Fed’s tracker is likely to fall from the 2.5% pace seen on December 22 as subsequent data, including the preliminary merchandise trade figures in November.  

Many economists anticipate that the unemployment rate will tick up to 4.7% from 4.6%.  Recall that the unemployment rate had fallen sharply from 4.9% in October.  The underemployment rate fell from 9.5% to 9.3%, its lowest level since the spring of 2008.  The work week is important to track because of the output implications, given the size of the workforce.  

However, barring a major surprise, the most important aspect of the report may be the average hourly earnings.  It was a disappointing when it fell by 0.1% in November.  The year-over-year pace may recover to the recent high seen in October of 2.8%.  In December 2015, it was 2.6%.  In December 2014 it was 1.7% and 2.0% in 2013.  

Separately, the US reports December auto sales.  Sales remain elevated, and likely boosted by extra incentives.  However, sequentially improvement is proving difficult around 17.8-18.0 mln annualized pace.  We note that apparently due to inventory accumulation, GM has temporarily closed production at a few factories.

We trace the big portfolio adjustment to the beginning of Q4 but recognize it having been accelerated by the US election results. There is a range of opinions held on trade and economic issues in the incoming administration.  It is not immediately clear which voices win and the priorities. Another dimension to the unknown is the administration’s relationship with Congress.  The visibility on these issues is unlikely to improve much over the next couple of weeks.  The flash point in the days ahead will be the president-elect’s response to the President Obama’s sanctions on Russia hacking.  Many in Congress do not think Obama were sufficient, while Trump appears to be pulling in the opposite direction.  

On a nominal trade-weighted basis, the US dollar appreciated by almost 2% in December for a 4.6% advance in Q4.  The last time this Fed measure of the dollar rose for three consecutive months was November 2015-January 2016, when it rose 4.5%.  Investors will be sensitive to how Fed officials talk about it in the weeks ahead.

Investors await the UK Supreme Court decision on the appeal from the government about its prerogative to trigger Article 50.  The decision is expected toward the middle of January.  There are 11 judges.  Initially, reports suggested only one would side with the government, but subsequent reports suggest a sizable minority are with the government. Some suggest decision as tight as 7-4.   A narrow loss for Prime Minister May is thought to improve her negotiating position within UK politics.  

EM FX was a mixed bag over the past week.  Dollar softness vs. the majors allowed some in EM to gain traction, with ZAR and PEN the biggest gainers since Christmas.  On the other hand, ARS TRY, and INR were the biggest losers.  Though the near-term may favor a further correction lower for the dollar, we expect EM to remain broadly under pressure as the same major EM-negative investment themes remain in place over the medium-term.

Country-specific risk remains in play as well, and it’s mostly political.  The Turkish lira traded at a new all-time low of 3.6 today after the New Year’s attack and higher than expected CPI data, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is being investigated for corruption, and

Some Corporate Bond Stuff

January 3rd, 2017 5:59 am

Via Bloomberg:

IG CREDIT: Trading Expected to Bulk-Up; Issuance Has Quick Start
2017-01-03 10:53:50.48 GMT

By Robert Elson
(Bloomberg) — Secondary IG trading ended with a Trace
count of $2.5b Friday vs $4.1b Thursday, $2.2b last Friday.

* 10-DMA $7.8b vs $18.6b Dec 9; 10-Friday moving avg $10.3b vs
$12.3b Dec. 9
* 144a trading added $169m of IG volume Friday vs $299m
Thursday, $229m last Friday

* Trading Factoid: 2016 saw the top 3 and 7 of the top 10 most
active trading days on record back to Jan. 2006
* Nov. 30 was highest with $25.2b
* Dec. 1 was next at $23.3b

* The top 7 Trace most active issues were 2017 maturities
* The next 2 were 2019s from GS, WFC
* The 10th was JPM 4.125% 2026 with 2-way client flows
accounting for 100% of volume
* PEMEX 6.50% 2027 was the most active non-2017 144a issue
with client and affiliate flows taking 74% of volume

* Bloomberg Barclays US IG Corporate Bond Index OAS at +123 vs
+122, the tight for the year and tying the lowest level of
2015
* 2016 wide/tight: 215 (a new wide since Jan. 2012)/122
* 2015 wide/tight: 171/122
* 2014 wide/tight: 137/97
* All time wide/tight back to 1989: 555 (Dec. 2008)/54
(March 1997)

* BofAML US Corporate IG Index unchanged at +129 vs +128, the
tight for the year and tightest level since Oct. 2014

* Standard & Poor’s Global Fixed Income Research IG Index at
+169 vs +168; +167, the tightest spread YTD, was seen Dec.
23

* Current markets vs early Friday:
* 2Y 1.222% vs 1.218%
* 10Y 2.501% vs 2.483%
* DOW futures +120 vs +33
* Oil $54.93 vs $53.94
* ¥en 118.19 vs 116.81

* No IG issuance last week
* December totals $46.075b; YTD $1.6T, YTD sans SAS $1.3T

* Pipeline: WSTP, BNP to price; Korea mandate added to list
* Is filled with factoids for early 2017 issuance,
including expected names; M&A deals expected in 2017

Earnings Set to Rebound

January 3rd, 2017 5:55 am

Via WSJ:

Earnings, Not Donald Trump, Are Stocks’ Best Friend in 2017

Continued rebound in corporate profits should prop up share prices regardless of Washington policies

Here’s one simple thing set to help sustain stocks’ march in 2017: corporate earnings.

While Donald Trump’s election supercharged investors’ hopes for business-friendly policies, corporate earnings quietly climbed out of a five-quarter slump.

It’s a long-awaited improvement. Stock performance was tepid in 2015 and early 2016, with many investors and analysts citing the lack of earnings growth as a main culprit. The S&P 500 gained 1.9% from the end of 2014 through the first half of 2016.

The 6.7% rally since then, much of it since Election Day, has largely been attributed to the potential for tax cuts, looser regulation and fiscal spending under the president-elect. But the rise has also coincided with a fundamental improvement: U.S. companies’ return to earnings growth.

“It’s earnings growth that drives stocks over the long term,” said Tom Cassidy, chief investment officer at Univest Wealth Management Division. While “we won’t know if any of these policies will actually be implemented until later next year,” a continued rebound in earnings should nevertheless prop up stocks for additional gains, Mr. Cassidy said.

Earnings for companies in the S&P 500 grew 3.1% in the third quarter from a year earlier, according to FactSet, entering positive territory for the first time since the first quarter of 2015, when they grew 0.5%. Analysts polled by FactSet expect the rebound to continue, and are estimating a 3.2% growth rate in the fourth quarter of 2016.

An end to the longest earnings slump since the financial crisis also comes against a backdrop of improving economic data. U.S. gross domestic product, a broad measure of the goods and services produced across the economy, posted its strongest quarterly pace of growth in two years in the third quarter, according to data released by the Commerce Department in December.

The S&P 500 climbed 9.5% in 2016, its biggest gain since 2014.

While it’s only one quarter of earnings data, the return to growth is giving investors more reason to believe the stock market will keep climbing in 2017.

The improved outlook for financial companies also bodes well. The S&P 500 financials sector was up 20% in 2016 and was responsible for nearly half of the total earnings growth for the S&P 500 in the third quarter, according to FactSet data.

Financials posted 8% year-over-year earnings growth, according to FactSet. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., Bank of America Corp., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley all beat analysts’ estimates on an earnings-per-share basis.

Several lenders, including J.P. Morgan, the largest U.S. bank by assets, reported a rebound in their trading businesses. While low interest rates have for years cut into banks’ net interest margins–a key measure of lending profitability–events like the U.K.’s surprise vote to leave the European Union or uncertainty around the Fed’s next steps on interest rates have helped boost trading revenues, some of the banks said.

Many of the banks expect trading gains to continue. Executives at Citigroup, Bank of America and J.P. Morgan said at a banking conference in early December that they expect key fourth-quarter trading metrics to grow by double-digit percentages from the year-earlier period.

ENLARGE

But risks remain.

Industrials—which have helped lead the recent stock-market rally with a 7% gain in the S&P 500 since Election Day—are expected to report an earnings decline of more than 8% in the fourth quarter from the year-earlier period, according to analysts polled by FactSet.

Caterpillar is projected to be among the biggest drags on the sector’s earnings in the fourth quarter. Shares of the maker of construction and mining equipment—whose results are closely watched as a barometer for global manufacturing activity—gained 36% in 2016. But for the fourth quarter, the company is expected to report earnings of 66 cents a share, down from $1.02 a share at the start of the quarter, according to FactSet estimates. The company said in October that it could report a loss for the year, and it predicted another tough year for 2017.

A strengthening U.S. dollar could also hamper the earnings of multinational companies. While a stronger dollar increases U.S. buyers’ purchasing power abroad, it also makes U.S. exports more expensive to foreign buyers, putting pressure on the bottom lines of companies that receive a significant chunk of their revenue from abroad. Roughly 31% of S&P 500 revenues come from outside the U.S., according to FactSet estimates.

The dollar has rallied since Election Day on prospects of a higher-growth, higher-rate environment, which makes it more attractive to yield-seeking investors. The WSJ Dollar Index, which measures the dollar against a basket of 16 other currencies, gained about 3% in 2016.

The prolonged S&P 500 earnings slump has also helped make stocks more expensive than their historical averages. The S&P 500 was trading at around 21 times its past 12 months of earnings last week, according to FactSet. Its 10-year price/earnings average is 16.

“People are very inclined to ignore P/E values going up,” said Bret Chesney, senior portfolio manager at Alpine Global, who added that he thinks stocks are too expensive relative to how companies have performed over the past several quarters. “I wouldn’t be too gung-ho to invest at these levels.”

Still, many analysts believe there is reason to be optimistic about the coming year.

Corporate earnings are projected to grow by double digits through 2017. Analysts polled by FactSet expect earnings to grow 11% in the first quarter, 11% in the second quarter, 9.1% in the third quarter and 14% in the fourth.

“There’s some meat to the rally,” said Karyn Cavanaugh, senior market strategist at Voya investment Management. “I think 2017 is shaping up to be a good year.”

Animal Spirit on the Rise

January 3rd, 2017 5:36 am

Via WSJ:

Businesses Ramp Up Investment Despite Rising Rates

After years of hoarding cash and buying back stock, U.S. companies are ready to spend money on equipment, buildings

U.S. companies are preparing to invest again after years on the sidelines, and rising interest rates are unlikely to impede them.

Executives have grown more optimistic about growth, in part anticipating that President-elect Donald Trump’s administration and Republican congressional majorities will bring regulatory rollbacks, corporate tax breaks and increased infrastructure spending.

The Federal Reserve last month signaled interest rates would rise at a faster pace than previously projected, showing increasing optimism about the U.S. economy as it unanimously approved its second rate increase in a decade.

Despite years of near-zero interest rates that made borrowing cheap, many big U.S. corporations have been hoarding cash or plowing money into safer pursuits in the wake of the recession. Some, like General Motors Co. and railroad CSX Corp., borrowed to prop up pension plans. Others, including Home Depot Inc. and Yum Brands Inc., used cheap debt to repurchase shares. Meanwhile, overall spending on building new factories or upgrading aging equipment languished.

That is likely to change soon.

“We could be in store for a significant [capital-expenditure] boom,” said Charles Mulford, an accounting professor at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta.

ENLARGE

In 2010, videogame retailer GameStop Corp. committed to spend $300 million on share repurchases and $200 million on new stores and other investments. The company had built up cash on its balance sheet and executives felt they needed to return some to shareholders in the absence of better alternatives. “The interest-rate environment wasn’t giving you anything for parked cash,” said Robert Lloyd, GameStop’s finance chief.

More recently, the company has shifted tactics. GameStop has boosted capital spending to roughly $160 million in 2016 from $125 million in 2013 for store refurbishments and expansion into new categories like collectibles. Last year, it cut its buyback in half.

Steel company Klöckner & Co., which generates about 40% of its sales from its 50 sites in the U.S., expects to increase spending on steel-shaping machinery here in the coming year. The German company delayed such U.S. investments when demand slowed from industrial customers that make everything from railcars to storage tanks for oil producers.

Rising interest rates won’t interfere with the planned investments, said Gisbert Rühl, chairman of Klöckner’s management board. “If we have to pay 100 basis points more, that’s not an issue for us,” Mr. Rühl said. “Even 200 basis points is not an issue…It’s still cheap.” Fed officials have signaled that they expect to raise rates by another 0.75 percentage point—or 75 basis points—this year, likely in three moves.

The new optimism could mean the U.S. is poised to emerge from a pattern that has frustrated the usual business investment cycle. During downturns, businesses typically cut capital investment—spending that increases or improves physical assets like buildings, equipment and computers. As the economy picks up, they rapidly ramp up spending, or risk being overtaken by more aggressive competitors.

Business investment dropped sharply during the financial crisis, falling more than 17% for S&P 500 companies in the 12 months after Lehman Brothers’ September 2008 collapse. But even as the economy recovered, total expenditures took three years to regain the precrisis level, according to data from S&P Dow Jones Indices.

Companies saw little reason to invest when U.S. economic growth was sluggish. Quarterly gross domestic product has averaged an annualized 1.5% growth since the Lehman collapse, compared with a decadeslong average—going back to 1930—of more than 3%.

Another culprit was a resistance among corporate leaders to lower the minimum rate of return on investment—known as a hurdle rate—they would accept from new spending, largely out of fear of disappointing shareholders.

“If returns are down and your hurdle rate hasn’t changed, you’ll stop investing,” said William Plummer, finance chief at construction rental firm United Rentals Inc.

Instead, many businesses pursued safer alternatives. In 2015 alone, companies in the Russell 3000 index bought back nearly $700 billion of their own shares, the most since 2007, according to research firm Birinyi Associates Inc. Last year through November, those firms spent another $488 billion on buybacks.

Companies in the S&P 1500 pumped $550 billion into their pensions between 2008 and Nov. 30 last year, according to Mercer Investment Consulting LLC.

“Businesses simply haven’t adjusted to a world of low interest rates,” said Paul Ashworth, chief North American economist for Capital Economics Ltd., a research firm. “They’re still looking for 5% or 6% returns, or 10% returns, on investment projects, and not realizing the cost of borrowing is actually much lower.”

Some companies continue to promise returns echoing those common before the financial crisis. General Electric Co., for example, in 2016 tied pay for its executives to a 16% to 18% benchmark for return on capital, in addition to measures of profitability and growth in cash and earnings.

A GE spokeswoman said investors expect returns in that range.

Many executives believed the Fed would raise interest rates relatively soon after the recession ended, said Aldo Pagliari, chief financial officer at toolmaker Snap-On Inc. That led companies to put off lowering their estimates of what it would cost to raise money to fund upgrades or new projects.

“If you look at 2009, 2010, or 2011, no one thought rates would stay that low,” he said. Snap-On now estimates cost of capital at roughly 9.2%, down just slightly from the 10% it assumed before the financial crisis.

 

Mighty Greenback and the US Economy

January 3rd, 2017 5:31 am

Via Bloomberg:

Dollar Rally Adds to Uncertainty as Fed Weighs 2017 Rate Hikes

  • Greenback’s rise caused by anticipation of fiscal boost
  • Appreciation will harm economy if Trump can’t deliver

The dollar’s appreciation may represent the U.S. economy’s biggest speed bump in 2017, and that could be good or bad, depending on whether President-elect Donald Trump follows through on measures aimed at accelerating growth.

The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index, which tracks the greenback against 10 global currencies, has gained 5.7 percent since the Nov. 8 election, largely on expectations for lower taxes, higher government spending and looser regulations under Trump. All these could goose growth and pose questions for the Federal Reserve.

The potential for stimulus comes with unemployment already at a post-recession low of 4.6 percent and inflation creeping closer to the Fed’s 2 percent target. Even without fully factoring in Trump’s fiscal plans, central bank officials in December raised the number of rate hikes they foresee in 2017, from two to three, as they signaled greater confidence in the economy. Chair Janet Yellen even warned members of Congress on Nov. 17 that new fiscal stimulus could have “inflationary consequences” that the Fed would have to take into account.

In that environment, a strengthening dollar will help the Fed keep the economy from overheating by dampening exports and inflation should Trump deliver on his growth-boosting agenda. If, however, the Trump bump never quite happens, or takes longer to make itself felt in economic activity, the dollar’s appreciation could prove premature and problematic.

“The market is priced for perfection in the U.S. next year,” said Lee Ferridge, senior macro strategist at State Street Corp. in Boston, referring to the dollar’s recent spike. “If parts of the fiscal policy get delayed or watered down, or don’t have the growth impact that everyone seems to expect, it could be that growth next year ends up lower because of the impact of the dollar and the impact of higher rates.”

Weakness Abroad

To be sure, part of the dollar’s appreciation reflects the international outlook. Economists surveyed by Bloomberg expect growth in gross domestic product in the U.S. to reach 2.2 percent in 2017. That compares to 1.4 percent forecast for the euro zone and 1 percent in Japan.

Higher growth and correspondingly higher interest rates relative to other large economies create more dollar demand as foreign companies expand in the U.S. and investors buy dollar-denominated securities. As the dollar gains, that hurts growth by making U.S. exports less competitive and suppresses inflation by making imports cheaper.

Typically, the currency headwind has a marginal impact against the greater gains of a growing overall economy. But the dollar’s recent swing is big enough put a real crimp on growth.

In a July 2015 blog post, Mary Amiti and Tyler Bodine-Smith, economists at the New York Fed, estimated that a 10 percent appreciation of the dollar within a quarter would drag down growth over one year by 0.5 percentage point, assuming the stronger exchange rate persisted. Including appreciation before the election, the dollar has strengthened 7.1 percent in the fourth quarter, the largest gain in a quarter since 2008.Ferridge noted that economic growth is already at historically weak levels.

“GDP growth was just 1.7 percent in the third quarter year-on-year,” he said. “If you’re taking half a percentage point off that because of the dollar, that’s meaningful.”

The dollar could, of course, quickly weaken if Trump does not or cannot deliver fiscal stimulus, or other policies for boosting growth. Congress controls the purse strings and while his Republican party commands both chambers, some of its members may be reluctant to back measures that boost the U.S. deficit. As a result, it could take much of 2017 for the policy outlook to clear, and every month at current dollar levels will take a toll.

“You’re getting some tightening in financial conditions now, but if fiscal stimulus is not delivered you might just get the downside of financial conditions without the upside,” said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at JPMorgan Chase & Co. in New York.

That makes life more complicated for the Fed. It forces them to consider not only the upside risk to growth and inflation should fiscal stimulus arrive in force, but a downside risk in the event it does not.

“If nothing happens in the fiscal territory the Fed will be more cautious, and the three rate hikes probably won’t happen,” said Roberto Perli, a partner at Cornerstone Macro LLC in Washington. “It’ll be more like one or two.”

On the other side of the equation, if Trump does push through measures that succeed in perking up growth, Perli said he’s not that worried the Fed will have to speed up to prevent overheating.

“You have to take into account the global outlook,” he said. “Global growth will not be exuberant and that’s going to filter back to the U.S. and calm things down a little bit.”

That’s a sentiment that Fed officials appear already to have in mind. Fed Governor Jerome Powell, speaking in Indianapolis in late November, discussed the challenges of raising rates when growth and inflation around the world are so low.

“You can really export demand through the mechanism of your exchange rate if you’re the only one raising rates,” he said. “It just urges caution.”

Credit Pipeline

January 3rd, 2017 5:27 am

Via Robert Elson at Bloomberg:

IG CREDIT PIPELINE: 2 Expected to Price, Beginning 2017 Issuance
2017-01-03 10:22:45.197 GMT

By Robert Elson
(Bloomberg) — Expected to price today:

* Westpac Banking (WSTP) Aa2/AA-, to price 2-part deal, via
managers BAML/HSBC
* 5Y, IPT +105 area
* 5Y FRN, IPT equiv

* BNP Paribas (BNP) Baa2/A-, to price $benchmark Non-Pfd
Senior 7Y; IPT +170-175
* Also in London with EUR benchmark 2023 deal

* Added today
* Republic of Korea (KOREA) Aa2/AA, mandates
BAML/C/GS/HSBC/KDB/Samsung for investor meetings Jan.
9-11; USD deal may follow
* Has not priced a new USD issue since June 2014

* Names That Historically Issue in First Days of January

* January Issuance Again Expected to Be Sizeable

* M&A deals expected in 2017; adds JNJ

* Recent updates:
* Credit Agricole S.A. (ACAFP) Baa2/BBB+, in mandate, said
it would launch in the near future a 5Y and/or 10Y
senior non-Pfd self-led transaction
* Apple (AAPL) Aa1/AA+, added as possible early 2017
issuers based on history
* United Technologies (UTX) A3/A-, said in Dec. 14
guidance call it will tap the debt markets in early 2017
to complete its share buyback program
* Mosaic (MOS) Baa2/BBB; $2.5b purchase of Vale fertilizer
ops
* To fund purchase via $1.25b cash, plans debt
issuance
* Fairfax Financial (FFHCN) Baa3/BBB-; $4.9b Allied World
Assurance acq
* May fund $30/shr price via debt issuance, equity,
third party
* 3M (MMM) A1/AA-, plans to add up to $2.8b of debt in
2017, suggesting another yr of incrementally higher
leverage: BI

MANDATES/MEETINGS

* Scentre Group (SCGAU) A1/A; mtgs Dec. 5-8
* ACWA Power; mtgs from Nov. 23
* Adani Ports (ADSEZ) Baa3/BBB-; mtgs from Nov. 13
* Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KOHNPW) Aa2/AA; mtgs Oct. 18-20

SHELF FILINGS

* Mercury General (MCY) files debt shelf; last seen in 2001
* Puget Sound Energy (PSD) A2/A-; $800m debt shelf (Nov. 8)
* Dow Chemical (DOW) Baa2/BBB; debt shelf; last issued in
Sept. 2014 (Oct. 28)
* Darden Restaurants (DRI) Baa3/BBB; debt shelf, last seen in
2012 (Oct. 6)
* Western Union (WU) Baa2/BBB; debt shelf; last issued Nov.
2013 following Oct. 2013 filing (Oct. 3)

OTHER

* European Stability Mechanism (ESM) Aa1/–; mandates for
advisement on inaugural USD issuance (Oct. 21)
* ConAgra (CAG) Baa2/BBB-; could borrow up to $2.5b for
acquisitions, BI says (Oct. 19)

New Year and New Yuan Basket

January 3rd, 2017 5:16 am

Via Bloomberg:

Analysts Can’t Seem to Agree on Whether China’s New Yuan Basket Will Be More or Less Volatile

A-tisket, a-tasket, a new currency basket.

It’s a new year and a new yuan.

Days after announcing a revamp of its trade-weighted foreign-exchange basket, China’s decision to downgrade the importance of the U.S. dollar is sparking debate among yuan-watchers over whether Beijing can project an image of stability in its currency after a year of depreciation.

Analysts from Barclays Plc to Citigroup Inc. to Societe Generale SA have differing opinions over whether the new currency basket will prove less volatile than its older version. Effective from Jan. 1, the weighting of the greenback has fallen to 22.4 percent from 26.4 percent in the basket set by the China Foreign Exchange System, while 11 new units — including South Korea’s won, Turkey’s lira and Poland’s zloty — have been added to the group.

The move comes at a time when outflows have been accelerating, the country’s foreign-exchange reserves have been sliding, and the dollar — the dominant reference currency for the yuan from the perspective of financial markets — has staged a sharp appreciation.

“Chinese capital outflows haunted the beginning of 2016 — and are now haunting the end of the year as well,” according to CreditSights Inc. analysts. Meanwhile, Macquarie Group Ltd. analysts argue that China’s reserves may drop below $3 trillion when data for December is published on 7. Jan, putting fresh pressure on the currency.

To Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the expansion of the benchmark index appears effective as it “appears to have mitigated the market’s concern about a sharp one-off [yuan] devaluation risk.” The new basket “would have shown somewhat less depreciation, falling 2.4 percent in 2016 vs. 3.7 percent actual performance, and it would also have shown less volatility,” Goldman analysts including MK Tang and Yu Song said in the research note.

gs
Source: Goldman Sachs

Analysts at Barclays agreed that while the new basket is “not markedly different” compared to the 2016 version, the dilution of the dollar’s role, by virtue of the addition of new entrants, does mean that the yuan is “less volatile.”

“We estimate that the revised index is currently around 1 percent higher than the existing CFETS index and also has been relatively stable over [the second half of 2016] — but in an even narrower 1.25-point range,” the analysts led by Mitul Kotecha and Dennis Tan wrote in a note.

barc
Source: Barclays

Others hold a different view, with Siddharth Mathur at Citigroup arguing that the revision will have “a negligible market impact” as the overall performance of the 2017 index is “nearly identical” to the old version and that “the effective compositional change is smaller than it appears.”

Rather, the fact that the relatively volatile Korean won now accounts for 10.77 percent — or almost half of the greenback’s weight — will make the refreshed yuan “somewhat more volatile,” he argued.

citi
Source: Citigroup

Jason Daw at Societe Generale agrees that the impact of the new basket will be “inconsequential,” affirming that the update won’t change his forecast that the yuan will depreciate to as low as 7.3 against the U.S. dollar by the end of 2017.

sg
Source: Société Général SA

“If the authorities want to keep the basket stable, a stronger U.S. dollar mechanically requires a modestly weaker [yuan] in the new basket, but the difference is minuscule,” Daw wrote in a note to his clients. “The volatility pattern of the old and new index is very similar over time,” he added.

Early FX

January 3rd, 2017 5:08 am

Via Kit Juckes at SocGen:

FOMC Rotation: Non Economists Join the Mix

December 29th, 2016 7:18 am

Via WSJ:

New Fed Voters Bring Wide Range of Experience to Rate-Setting Panel

First-time FOMC voters include a former university president and a onetime gubernatorial candidate

Three of the four officials who gain votes next year on the Federal Reserve’s rate-setting committee are from a minority group in the central bank’s leadership: They aren’t economists.

They draw from a mix of experience in banking, engineering and academia. The three also bring relatively fresh perspectives because they all joined the Fed within the past two years and have never before voted on the Federal Open Market Committee.

The three regional Fed bank presidents getting votes for the first time are Philadelphia’s Patrick Harker, Minneapolis’ Neel Kashkari and Dallas’ Robert Kaplan. Chicago Fed chief Charles Evans—a veteran of the central bank, an economist and longtime supporter of keeping interest rates low—also becomes a voter in 2017.

The FOMC normally has 12 voting members, with the seven Washington-based governors—where there are now two vacancies—and the New York Fed chief having permanent spots. Four voting seats rotate annually among the 11 other regional Fed bank presidents.

The FOMC vacancies give President-elect Donald Trump an opportunity to quickly influence the makeup of the rate-setting panel when he takes office by nominating two governors, who then must be confirmed by the Senate. In addition to the current empty seats, some expect governor Daniel Tarullo to depart not long after the new administration takes over.

On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump accused the central bank and Chairwoman Janet Yellen of keeping rates low to help President Barack Obama. The president-elect has said he probably wouldn’t nominate Ms. Yellen to continue as Fed chief after her term expires in early 2018, and would instead prefer to tap a Republican for the job. Since he has criticized Ms. Yellen for holding rates low, investors might expect his central-bank picks to raise rates more aggressively.

The officials who voted in 2016 and won’t in 2017 are St. Louis Fed President James Bullard, Kansas City’s Esther George, Cleveland’s Loretta Mester and Boston’s Eric Rosengren. All but Ms. George are economists.

The FOMC’s December decision to raise short-term interest rates was unanimous, but Ms. George, Ms. Mester and Mr. Rosengren all dissented at times in 2016 to decisions to keep rates steady, preferring instead an increase.

Regional bank presidents without votes still participate in the committee’s policy meetings, so the voting rotation may not change the likelihood that the Fed will raise short-term interest rates in the year ahead. But the new voters’ views are likely to draw more market attention.

The switch comes as Fed critics are pushing for more diversity at the central bank. They often focus on increasing gender and ethnic diversity, but some have said a broader range of educational and professional backgrounds also would widen the central bank’s perspective. Of the 17 governors and presidents, 16 are white, 13 are men and 10 have a Ph.D. in economics.

“If you rely entirely on theory, you are not going to conduct the right policy, because policies have consequences” that in many cases people with real-world experience are particularly well-suited to spot, said former Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher.

Mr. Harker, who has a Ph.D. in civil engineering and a master’s degree in economics, joined the Fed in July 2015 from a perch as president of the University of Delaware. He has shown a willingness to disagree with the consensus, saying in October that he advocated raising short-term interest rates then, even though his colleagues had voted against the idea in September. He also has touted the economic benefits of immigration and free trade, relatively unusual topics for a Fed official to discuss publicly.

“You come into this understanding that while we have a deep bench of theorists and empiricists that need to inform policy, at the end of the day you need to base your judgment not on an ideology, but on the facts on the ground, right, as best we know them,” Mr. Harker said in an October interview.

Mr. Kashkari is a former aerospace engineer who served as a top Treasury Department official during the financial crisis and ran unsuccessfully for governor of California in 2009. He has voiced support for maintaining low interest rates as long as inflation is running below the Fed’s 2% target. But he hasn’t spoken extensively about monetary policy and the economy. Since joining the Fed in January 2016, he has focused on exploring ways to end the problem of banks being so big that their failure could leave taxpayers on the hook in another financial crisis.

He often eschews speeches in favor of town-hall-style question-and-answer sessions open to residents of his district, where economic inequality and “too big to fail” banking issues are often the focus.

There is “great value in having a diversity of backgrounds” for FOMC voters, he said in a statement. “A variety of perspectives, including academic, public-service and private-sector experience, provides a richer understanding of the real economy.”

Mr. Kaplan, who took office in September 2015, previously was a professor and a senior associate dean at Harvard Business School. He also was an investment banker, having spent 23 years at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., and has sought to position himself at the Fed as an expert on financial markets.

Mr. Kaplan, in an interview with the Journal earlier this year, presented himself as a centrist on monetary policy, willing to raise rates but aligned with his colleagues’ desire to move cautiously.

He said in a recent interview he doesn’t think his impact on Fed policy will change when he becomes an FOMC voter. “I’ve learned the degree of influence you have around the table is not necessarily correlated to whether you’re voting or not; it’s correlated to the strength of your research, the strength of your insight,” he said.

Write to Michael S. Derby at [email protected] and Shayndi Raice at [email protected]