Judging by the latest virus numbers in Europe, and government announcements to contain it, markets may soon have to read up on the math of lockdown economics. Before we get to that, though, investors have been locked in deep thought over the impact of the U.S. presidential elections, which seems to converge on trying to price in the consequences of a Biden victory and a “blue wave”. As I explained last week, investors seem to have concluded that this is good outcome for risk assets, though as I argued at the time, this isn’t entirely clear to me. To illuminate this further, it’s useful to consider how markets perceive a Blue wave in the context of the dollar and the U.S. bond market. As it turns out, the consensus position isn’t entirely clear, which is a hint. If markets can’t figure out how a Democratic sweep will impact the dollar and bonds, it’s difficult to have any view on how it would impact equities. The dollar is particularly interesting. It seems to me that analysts initially pinned recent weakness—effectively since April—on the inherent political risks associated with a Biden presidency, though it has since morphed into a bullish catalyst in the context of the expectation of surge in fiscal stimulus, funded by a benevolent and compliant Fed. Why this latter should necessarily be bearish for the dollar isn’t clear to me, especially not if it led to stronger growth in the U.S. compared to the rest of the world. By contrast, the idea, voiced in some corners of the market, that the U.S. is on its way to print away its exorbitant privilege—in effect losing its reserve currency status—seems even more ludicrous to me, even in world where China is now emerging as a potential adversary.
Read MoreI have a lot of sympathy for pen-wielding strategists at the moment. Every day the empty white sheet of digital paper is staring at them, the little cursor tauntingly flickering in the top-left corner. The most obvious course of action, to copy-paste their previous note, is just about the only thing they can’t do. We economists at least have a steady flow of new data, however mundane and useless, to write about. In other words, the main questions remain the same, and they remain largely unanswered. Economic activity has collapsed, and is now staging what appears to be a painfully slow rebound. Even in the best of worlds, however, it’s difficult to escape the notion that significant damage has been wrought in on both the demand and supply-side. This puts equities on the spot. A reflexive rebound from the nadir in March was always coming, but could it be sustained, and would we re-test the lows? In a normal recession the answer to those questions would be “no” and “yes”, but there is nothing normal about this recession. U.S. equities have roared higher, and the ubiquitous growth stocks, which outperformed before, are leading the charge again. The S&P 500 growth index is up a cool 32% from its March lows, and is now flat year-to-date. By contrast, the S&P value index is up “just” 21% from the lows, and are still carrying a 20% loss year-to-date.
Read MoreThe Q1 earnings numbers have kicked up a lot of dust across sectors and individual companies, which is good news for stock-pickers eager to prove their worth. For markets as a whole, though, I see little change in the underlying narrative relative to what I have been talking about recently. Equity investors remain focused on what policymakers are saying rather than what they’re doing, sticking with the idea that central banks, and perhaps even politicians at large, have their backs. Bond markets are nodding in agreement. Solid labour market data in the U.S., and a robust Q1 GDP print, have not dented market-implied expectations that the next move by the Fed will be a cut. And in the Eurozone, markets have priced out an adjustment in the deposit rate through 2021. Blackrock’s Rick Rieder summed it up neatly last week by referring to the asymmetric outlook for policy. I am paraphrasing, but the idea goes something like this: “If central banks raise rates, they will do so slowly and hesitantly. If they have to cut, due to tightening financial conditions and a slowing economy, they will do so fast and aggressively.” I would even wrap in fiscal policy here, though this admittedly tends to operate more slowly, and over a longer timeframe than monetary policy.
Read More