Author: admin

With economies weakening further near term and monetary policies on hold, will equities continue to suffer?

The outlook for equities hinges on how near we are to a trough in the economic cycle. Historical evidence suggests the best time to buy is six months before the low in global industrial output growth (table below). The previous 12 months usually sees losses, while waiting for the trough risks missing out on the upside. As explained, I think growth will start to recover by year-end, which implies equities should recover.

Assuming a later trough, how much more could they fall?

Valuations seem supportive. The world earnings yield is currently 7%, which is the highest since 1985 (first chart). However, this is misleading because earnings are above trend and are likely to fall significantly. Adjusting earnings for the cycle, the yield is about 5 ¾%, which is still well above the long-term average of 5%. The 2003 stock market bottom occurred at a yield of 6%, which would imply a further 5% fall in markets.

The dollar has been performing a bit better lately. Is this the beginning of a major turnaround?

The dollar may have bottomed but a rise in US interest rates is likely to be required for a major recovery. The dollar is certainly cheap, particularly against European currencies. And the US trade position has been improving, both in absolute terms and relative to trends elsewhere (second chart). However, the low level of US interest rates is a big obstacle to a recovery. US short rates are currently more than 2% lower than Eurozone rates, which is the mirror-image of the late 1990s, when they were over 2% higher (third chart). The dollar was then strong and only started to fall significantly after the rate gap closed. Similarly, it may take a convergence of US and Eurozone rates now before the dollar embarks on a sustained uptrend.

 

—–
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Vicente
EMAIL:
IP: 83.175.241.226
URL:
DATE: 08/15/2008 11:05:37 AM

Hi Simon,
do you think the ECB should lower interest rates this year?

—–
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Simon Ward
DATE: 08/15/2008 02:15:12 PM

Yes, assuming the slowdown in monetary growth continues, as seems likely, and the euro does not weaken dramatically further. I think annual M3 growth needs to fall below 8% (currently 9.5%) to be consistent with inflation returning to 2% over the medium term.

Will the global slowdown be reflected in lower inflation?

Headline inflation is peaking but the extent of any decline is unclear. Core rates – excluding food and energy – may continue to rise a while longer, reflecting lingering capacity pressures and the pass-through of earlier cost increases.

Why will headline inflation subside?

Mainly because of the oil effect. Oil started surging about a year ago so the annual rate of increase will start to fall sharply if prices now stabilise (first chart).

Will core inflation follow headline lower?

Core rates may continue to firm near term, particularly in emerging economies, where labour markets are tight and there is greater evidence of “second round” inflation effects. A rise in core inflation could temper relief at the fall in headline rates and block central banks from easing monetary policies.

Ultimately inflation is a monetary phenomenon – has money growth slowed in the wake of the credit crisis?

It has but not by much yet. Our global broad money measure is still rising at a 12-13% annual pace, which is above the average of recent years (second chart). This is consistent with some decline in underlying inflation in 2009-10 but possibly not by enough to satisfy central banks.

So hopes of significant monetary policy easing may be disappointed?

Policies are already quite loose. For example, G7 headline inflation is now well above a weighted average of short-term interest rates. This has disturbing echoes of the 1970s, when high inflation became entrenched (third chart). Central banks will want to restore positive real rates when credit conditions begin to normalise.

Could policies be tightened then?

US interest rates are particularly low relative to inflation and are likely to be raised if the economy recovers as I expect. However, there may be scope for modest cuts in Europe. So the most likely scenario is a convergence of rates within the G7 but with little change or even a slight rise in the average.

UK consumer price inflation climbed further to an annual 4.4% in July, well above the consensus forecast of 4.1%. While food was the largest contributor to the monthly increase, “core” inflation – excluding food, energy, alcohol and tobacco – also rose significantly, reaching an annual 1.9%.

Why does inflation keep overshooting MPC and consensus expectations?

Inflationary pressures often strengthen in the early stages of economic slowdowns, for at least four reasons. First, output is typically above its trend or potential level when the slowdown begins; a fall beneath trend is needed to stem inflation momentum. Secondly, productivity tends to slow along with output, as employers are initially reluctant to cut workforces, implying faster growth in unit labour costs. Thirdly, monetary expansion often remains strong well into an economic downswing; ample liquidity accommodates price increases and may boost inflation expectations. Fourthly, a slowing economy may be associated with a fall in the exchange rate, putting upward pressure on import prices.

All these factors have been at work recently but exchange rate weakness has played a particularly important role in pushing up core inflation and magnifying the domestic impact of rising global food and energy prices.

It is too late for the MPC to influence coming high inflation outcomes, which reflect past policy mistakes. Monetary growth has slowed to a level consistent with inflation returning to target over the medium term, while the effective exchange has stabilised since April. Barring a monetary reacceleration or renewed sterling weakness, the MPC should hold to a stable course despite the obvious damage to its credibility from the current overshoot.

The following is an edited transcript of the first part of a recent interview on the global outlook. The second and third sections of the interview, discussing inflation and markets, will be posted later this week.

How has the global economy performed so far this year?

Better than might have been expected given the credit crisis and soaring commodity prices. Globally, annual industrial output growth has fallen from 5% last year to 3% in mid-2008 (first chart). So far at least, weakness in the G7 economies has been offset by continued strength in emerging markets. Output growth in the seven largest emerging economies – the E7 – was still running at 9% in mid-2008.

What is your forecast?

I expect global industrial output growth to slow further to 1-2% over coming months as G7 numbers move into negative territory and emerging economies moderate. However, this would still represent a relatively moderate downswing by historical standards – much less severe than 2001, for example. And I think growth will start to recover in late 2008 and into early 2009.

What factors will support global activity?

The US economy is probably past its low point. Last year our probability indicator suggested an evens chance of a recession (second chart). Now it’s saying the risks have receded. The change mainly reflects the Fed’s aggressive policy easing in late 2007 and early 2008. The impact of this policy change should be feeding in by late this year.

What will drive any US recovery?

The stocks cycle – initially at least. Companies have cut stocks to very low levels (third chart), which has been a major drag on the economy. I doubt they will fall further. Even if they simply stabilise, there will be a significant positive impact on growth.

How will that affect other economies?

As US firms stop cutting stocks, import demand will rise, helping to support foreign activity. There is a significant positive correlation between global industrial output growth and the US stocks cycle (fourth chart).

Could high oil prices lead to a harder economic landing?

My forecast assumes they stabilise below the recent peak. The supply / demand balance seems to be shifting as the decline in OECD consumption accelerates. Weaker OECD demand should accommodate rising emerging world consumption, barring any supply shock.

What about emerging economies?

The indicators suggest only a modest slowdown. One reason is that external finances remain strong. Emerging countries continue to pile up foreign exchange reserves. This tends to be associated with loose domestic monetary conditions, which in turn support domestic demand (fifth chart). My forecast assumes E7 industrial output growth eases from 9% to 6-7% by early 2009.

What is the main risk to your forecast?

European weakness. Europe seems to be about a year behind the US in the cycle and is turning down even as the US finds it feet. Recession risk is rising – not just in the UK but in Euroland too. Unlike the US, there is no policy stimulus in the pipeline. Globally, the risk is that a recession in Europe outweighs improvement in the US and emerging market resilience.

The CB Richard Ellis measure of prime commercial property yields rose further to 6.2% in the second quarter, up from 4.8% a year before and close to the 6.4% average over 1972-2007.

Using the raw yield to assess valuation is problematic because rents fluctuate significantly with the economic cycle. A high yield may not indicate that property is cheap if rents have been boosted above a sustainable level by a buoyant economy. Conversely, it may be right to invest when yields are low if rents are below trend and likely to benefit from future strong economic growth.

Based on their long-term relationship with GDP, I estimate rents are about 5% above trend currently – see first chart. There were much greater deviations in the early 1970s and late 1980s, when rents overshot by 30-40%. This implies a normalised or cyclically-adjusted yield of 5.9%.

Any judgement about valuation should also take account of returns on competing assets. The rental yield is often compared with yields on conventional gilts but this is invalid because bond interest is fixed while rents rise with inflation over the long run. In other words, the rental yield should be compared with real not nominal interest rates.

The second chart below updates my comparison of the normalised rental yield with real yields on long-term index-linked gilts. The gap between the two has surged from 3.1% in last year’s second quarter to 5.1% currently – the highest since 1994 and well above a long-term average of 3.6%.

Tight credit conditions and a weakening economy should lead to a further fall in demand for property space and rents are likely to undershoot their trend level over coming quarters. Current valuations already discount much gloom, however.

Like its MPC counterpart, my ECB-ometer has shifted in a dovish direction over the last month. The model suggests a 33% probability of a cut in rates at tomorrow’s meeting, compared with a 55% chance of a hike last month – see chart.

The swing reflects a combination of: very weak business and consumer surveys; slower M3 growth; a fall in short-term bond yields; and the less hawkish policy statement issued after last month’s meeting. These factors have offset a further slight deterioration in inflation indicators.

The model is consistent with a peak in official rates but it will take several more months of data to confirm this scenario.

 

The £9.4 billion reduction to £17.5 billion in net borrowing from the Bank of England during the first half is consistent with projections made here in March (see Northern Rock: BoE payback could occur sooner than expected ) and reflects the huge scale of mortgage repayments by Rock’s borrowers.

During the first half of 2007, Rock accounted for £10 billion of the £54 billion increase in UK net residential mortgage lending. During the first half of this year, UK lending slumped to £30 billion, while Rock borrowers repaid £13 billion. In other words, Rock’s U-turn accounts for £23 billion of the £24 billion fall in UK-wide lending between the first halves of 2007 and 2008.

Rock’s rapid shrinkage has exacerbated the wider mortgage market squeeze, with negative macroeconomic implications. (See Northern Rock: should Sandler slow down?)

Barring a change in policy, Rock’s loan (to be switched to the Treasury from the Bank of England) should continue to fall rapidly during the second half, ending the year well below £10 billion. Mortgage repayments should remain high: documentation on loans within the Granite pool suggests the number of fixed-rate agreements expiring during the second half will be similar to the first six months. Retail deposit inflows should slow but Rock may repay less non-official wholesale borrowing than in the first half.

With the Treasury planning to swap £3 billion of the Bank of England debt for equity, the loan portion of the outstanding balance could be down to £5 billion by year-end.

The transfer of the Rock loan from the Bank of England to the Treasury will have an initial negative impact on the money supply, to the extent that additional gilts issued to finance the transfer are purchased by the UK non-bank private sector, with payment made from existing bank or building society deposits. A £17.5 billion reduction in such deposits would cut broad money M4 by 1.0%.

My MPC-ometer suggests several MPC members will join David Blanchflower in seeking a cut in rates this month but will be outvoted by a slim majority in favour of no change.

The model results are consistent with either 5-4 (four votes for a 25 bp cut) or 6-3 (two votes for 25 bp with DB seeking a 50 bp cut).

The forecast is more dovish than market expectations and reflects recent very weak economic news, which has counterbalanced adverse inflationary indicators.

Interestingly, the Sunday Times Shadow MPC result was also dovish this month, with three members voting for an immediate cut and four others with an easing bias.

Meanwhile, annual growth in the Bank of England’s adjusted M4 measure – which excludes money holdings of certain financial corporations that act mainly as a conduit for interbank business – fell further from 8.8% in March to 8.0% in June, according to figures released this morning. This is the lowest since 2004 and compares with an 11.4% annual increase in headline M4 – see chart. Monetary trends now appear to be consistent with inflation returning to target over the medium term. (Post-ERM experience suggests adjusted M4 growth of 6-8% pa is consistent with 2% CPI inflation – see here.)

The Bank of England may have increased its foreign currency lending to banks, judging from the latest weekly Bank Return.

The Bank’s Annual Report, published on 14 July, revealed a rise of £8.2 billion in its foreign currency lending to banks in the year to the end of February, financed by borrowing from other central banks – see here for more details. This may have reflected a “covert” support operation similar to the swap arrangements between the Fed and the ECB and Swiss National Bank, under which the latter have borrowed dollars for onlending to banks in Europe.

According to the weekly Return, the Bank’s “other assets” – comprising mainly foreign currency assets and the loan to Northern Rock – jumped by £2.9 billion in the week to Wednesday, reaching their highest level for seven weeks. With Rock repaying its debt as its mortgage borrowers refinance their loans elsewhere, the increase may reflect an expansion of the Bank’s foreign currency lending.

The various additional liquidity support measures announced by the Fed this week included a temporary increase in the ECB’s swap facility from $50 billion to $55 billion to accommodate an extension of the term of loans offered to banks in Europe from 28 to 84 days. This suggests demand for dollars by European banks remains strong, partly reflecting a need to fund dollar assets transferred from off-balance-sheet conduits and SIVs.

Recent monetary developments have been worrying, with underlying M4 growth (i.e. excluding money holdings of certain financial intermediaries) slowing sharply and the corporate liquidity ratio falling to a 17-year low. However, some comfort can be drawn from stable household sector money trends.

The chart shows annual growth rates of consumer spending and two measures of household real money – overall M4 and non-interest-bearing M1 (i.e. currency holdings plus interest-free sight deposits). The consumer recessions of the mid 1970s, early 1980s and early 1990s were associated with annual falls in one or other measure. However, both are still growing solidly currently.

This resilience may not persist but household money trends are not yet consistent with a sustained contraction in consumer spending.