Inflation ratios for spotting fed rate trend part 4Inflation ratios for spotting fed rate trend part 4
BAMLH0A3HYC trade ideas
Quality is back in focus, amidst the banking turmoilHistory never repeats itself, but it often does rhyme. The recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank in the US and the forced takeover of Credit Suisse by rival UBS have triggered concerns of contagion across the global financial system. The current stress in the banking sector is reminiscent of the 2008 financial crisis. However, unlike the 2008 financial crisis, uncertainty is not centred on the quality of assets on bank balance sheets but instead on the potential for deposit flight.
Tough ride for Banks ahead
US regional banks have witnessed significant deposit outflows which, combined with unrealised losses on their security holdings, have seen banks consuming their liquid assets as a very fast pace. In turn, sentiment towards European banks has deteriorated. This is evident in the widening of debt risk premia, making it more expensive for banks to fund their operations. It’s important to note that banks were already tightening lending standards prior to recent events. So, lending conditions are likely to tighten further as deposits shrink at small and regional US banks and regulators respond to the new risk environment. The turn of events in the banking sector have led to higher uncertainty which is likely to be reflected in higher volatility in credit markets. So far, the impact on other sectors has been fairly contained, but a further deterioration of bank credit quality could drag other industries lower as well. We are still in the early innings, so the range of repercussions remains wide.
Traditional defensive sectors offer more protection in prior weakening credit cycles
On analysing the impact of a further rise (by 200Bps) in credit spreads on US and European debt (highlighted by the dark blue bars) we found that not all equity sectors will be impacted equally on the downside. In fact, traditional defensive sectors like utilities, consumer staples and healthcare could offer some protection in comparison to cyclical sectors such as banks, energy and real estate.
Since March 8, 2023, the steepest price corrections have been centred around the banking and commodity related sectors such as energy and materials, while technology, healthcare, consumer staples and utilities have managed to escape the rout illustrated by the grey bars. The historical sector performance (in the light blue bars) during Eurozone debt crisis (the second half of 2011), confirm a similar pattern whereby the traditional defensive sectors tend to shield investors when spreads widen.
Europe earnings hold forth despite the banking turmoil
Interestingly despite the recent banking turmoil, the global earnings revision ratio continued to show resilience in March. Europe stood out as the only region with more upgrades than downgrades. Earnings remain the key driver of equity market performance. Europe has clearly gotten off to a strong start and it will be interesting to see if European earnings expectations can hold up as credit conditions deteriorate.
Within Europe we analysed the sectors that were most exposed to the banking stress. By observing the beta of the sectors in the EuroStoxx 600 Index relative to regional banking spreads, we found that real estate, financials, industrials, materials, and energy were most exposed on the downside to the high banking stress. On the contrary, consumer staples, information technology, utilities and healthcare showed more resilience.
When the going gets tough, quality gets going
Investors should focus on companies with strong balance sheets which we often tend to find within the quality factor. Quality stocks, characterised by a higher earnings yield compared to its dividend yield alongside higher return on equity (ROE) and return on assets (ROA), would offer a higher margin of safety in periods of higher volatility.
Conclusion
While central banks in US, Europe and UK continued their hawkish stance at their most recent policy-setting meetings, the evolving banking crisis could alter the path for monetary policy ahead. Chair Powell conceded that tightening financial conditions could have the same impact as another quarter point rate hike or more from the Fed.
Given the rising concerns on the risk of banking industry contagion, shrinking corporate profits and central bank policy ahead we continue to believe that positioning your equity exposure towards the quality factor would be prudent.
High consumer price inflation is good for borrowers, right? Err…Another Market Myth Exposed
The Nasdaq index has now declined by 10% from its November high , prompting the mainstream financial media to call it a “ correction ” whatever that means. I think they call it a bear market when it is down by 20% . Many stocks have already fallen by at least that amount, and realistically, it’s all semantics anyway.
It’s early days, but what is curious, though, is that high yield , or junk , bonds continue to hold up. To be fair, junk bonds, as measured by the U.S.$ CCC & Lower-rated yield spread reached peak outperformance in June last year and have underperformed since, but yet there have been no signs, as yet, of any rush out of the sector.
I heard an analyst on Bloomberg TV yesterday say that he was bullish of credit, particularly junk, because it does well in an accelerating consumer price inflation environment. The theory is that higher consumer price inflation means that companies can increase prices, thereby increasing revenue in nominal terms. At the same time, though, the amount the company owes via its bonds remains the same, thereby decreasing the debt’s real value and making it easier to service. It’s a win-win situation apparently, and that means junk bonds outperform.
The opposite should be true under consumer price deflation. Junk bonds should underperform because, with nominal corporate revenues declining, the value of debt goes up in real terms, making it harder for corporates to service it.
OK, I thought, channeling Mike Bloomberg’s mantra of, “ in God we trust, everyone else bring data ” let’s have a look at the evidence.
The chart above shows the U.S. dollar-denominated CCC & Lower-rated yield spread versus the annualized rate of consumer price inflation in the U.S . Apart from the period of 2004 to 2006, there’s hardly any evidence to suggest that accelerating consumer price inflation is good for the high-yield corporate debt market.
Junk bonds were only just being invented by Michael Milken in the 1970s, and didn’t come into popularity until the 1980s, but we can examine corporate bond performance by looking at the Moody’s Seasoned Aaa Corporate yield spread to U.S. Treasuries. Doing so, reveals that, in the first major consumer price inflation spike, between 1973 and 1975, corporate debt underperformed as the yield spread widened. In the second major consumer price inflation spike, from 1978 to 1980, corporate debt briefly outperformed but then underperformed dramatically, as annualized price inflation reached 13%.
It goes without saying, of course, that this analysis is just looking at the relative performance of corporate debt under accelerating consumer price inflation. The nominal performance is another matter. Borrowers and lenders ( bond investors ) both got savaged in the 1970s with the Moody’s Seasoned Aaa Corporate yield rising from 3% to close to 12%.
The conclusion we must reach is that the level of consumer price inflation does not matter to relative corporate bond performance. It does, however, matter for nominal performance . More semantics, some may say. What really matters is how it affects one’s wallet.
