Macro and Credit - Easy Come, Easy Go

"There are many harsh lessons to be learned from the gambling experience, but the harshest one of all is the difference between having Fun and being Smart." - Hunter S. Thompson

Looking at the return of the "D" trade, "D" for "Deflation" that is with the return of the strong "bid" for bonds, marking the return of the duration trade on the back of "goldilocks" for "Investment Grade" which we foresaw, pushing more inflows into fixed income relative to equities, when it came to selecting our title analogy, we decided to go for a cinematic analogy "Easy Come, Easy Go". It is a 1947 movie directed by John Farrow, who won the Academy Award for Best Writing/Best Screenplay for Around the World in Eighty Days and in 1942, and was nominated as Best Director for Wake Island. "Easy Come, Easy Go" is the story about Martin Donovan, a compulsive gambler. His gambling habits leave him constantly broke and under arrest from a gambling-house raid. He places bets as well for the tenants of his boardinghouse, who lose their money and ability to pay the rent. Martin, came upon a sunken treasure but his philosophy is "easy come, easy go," promptly squanders all the loot. Looking at the various iterations of QE and the return to more dovishness from central bankers around the world, which lead no doubt to rise of so called "populism" with the asset owners having a field day, particularly the renters through the bond markets, over "Main Street", it is clear to us that the "treasured" support provided by central bankers to politicians has been all but "squandered". For example, French politicians have done meaningless structural reforms leading to unsustainable taxation creating the rise of the "yellow jackets" movement hence our pre-revolutionary stance. As we say in France, c'est la vie.  As in the move, with Martin's daughter Connie not knowing what else to do, she tries to solve her dad's debts by taking bets on a horse race. In similar fashion, central bankers have decided to add more dovishness on more debt, resulting in even more debt being created. Caveat creditor but we ramble again...

In this week's conversation, we would like to look at the return of Bondzilla the NIRP monster made in Japan given Japan's Government Pension Investment Fund GPIF is likely to come back strongly to the Fixed Income party.

Synopsis:

• Macro and Credit -  Once again the money is flowing "uphill" where all the "fun" is namely the bond market.
• Final charts - The deflation play is back in town

• Macro and Credit -  Once again the money is flowing "uphill" where all the "fun" is namely the bond market.

In our most recent conversation we pointed out again that we advocated our readers to go for quality (Investment Grade) rather than quantity high yield given rising dispersion. To repeat ourselves, we continue to view rising dispersion as a sign of cracks in credit markets and not as a sign of overall strength. You have to become much more selective we think in the issuer profile selection process.

"Bondzilla" the NIRP monster which we indicated on numerous occasions has been "made in Japan" as we pointed out again in our most recent conversation. We also indicated as well:

Back in July 2016 in our conversation "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" we indicated that "Bondzilla" the NIRP monster was more and more made in Japan due to the important allocations to foreign bonds from the Government Pension Investment Fund (GPIF) as well as other Lifers in conjunction with Mrs Watanabe through Uridashi and Toshin funds (Double Deckers) being an important carry player. In the global reach for "yield" and in terms of "dollar" allocation, Japanese investors have been very significant hence the importance of monitoring the flows from an allocation perspective.

Not only Japanese Lifers have a strong appetite for US credit, but retail investors such as Mrs Watanabe, in the popular Toshin funds, which are foreign currency denominated and as well as Uridashi bonds (Double Deckers), the US dollar has been a growing allocation currency wise in recent years so watch also that space.

For Japanese investors increasing purchases in foreign credit markets has been an option. Like in 2004-2006 Fed rate hiking cycle, Japanese investors had the option of either increasing exposure to lower rated credit instruments outside Japan or taking on currency risk. During that last cycle they lowered the ratio of currency hedged investments to take on more credit risk. " - source Macronomics, March 2019

"Bondzilla" the NIRP monster should not be underestimated in our macro allocation book. On this particular point we read with interest Nomura's FX Insights note from the 29th of March entitled "GPIF: sustained aggressive foreign buying more likely":

"Annual plan for new FY unveiled

The Government Pension Investment Fund’s (GPIF) annual plan for the new fiscal year suggests the fund can manage its portfolio more flexibly. This should allow the fund to continue purchasing foreign bonds aggressively, while reducing exposure to negative yielding domestic bonds. This shift is also likely to lead a higher share of foreign bonds in the updated target portfolio, which will be announced by end-March 2020. Given the significant size of the GPIF’s AUM, this flexible stance will be crucial for Japan’s financial market and yen-crosses. We expect pension funds’ foreign bond purchases to support yen-crosses during the new fiscal year.

The GPIF announced its annual plan for the new fiscal year. In the annual plan, the GPIF noted that it will manage its portfolio according to the basic portfolio, as usual. However, the GPIF added two important points for its portfolio strategy in the new fiscal year, in relation to the allowable range of the target portfolio.

First, the GPIF repeated that automatically reinvesting redemptions from exposure to domestic bonds may not be appropriate in the current market environment. Thus, for now, the fund will manage its domestic bond portfolio more flexibly in relation to the allowable range. The fund will maintain the total amount of domestic bonds and cash within the allowable range of domestic bonds (25-45%). The GPIF has already announced the temporary deviation in domestic bond exposures from the allowable range last September and thus, this point is not entirely new (see “Equity flows supporting yen-crosses”, 26 September 2018). However, flexibility has now been extended into the new fiscal year that commences next week, and the fund can continue to reduce exposure to domestic bonds for a longer amount of time.

Second, the GPIF added a new sentence, stating: “the fund will examine the application of allowable range for asset classes as necessary, as the fund is formulating its new target portfolio (Figure 1).

In April 2014, the GPIF stated that it would flexibly manage its portfolio in relation to the allowance rage, as it started reviewing its target portfolio for the next medium-term plan (see “GPIF: Time for whale-watching”, 4 December 2018). Owing to the increased flexibility, the fund could begin investing in equities and foreign bonds before it announced the new target portfolio in October 2014. Although the communique this year differs from five years ago, this additional comment could provide the fund with more opportunity to manage the portfolio more flexibly in the new fiscal year.

We think these statements are significant for Japan’s financial market and yen-crosses this year. As of end-December, the share of domestic bonds had declined to 28.2%, closer to the lower bound of the current allowable range (25%, Figure 2).

In contrast, the share of foreign bonds increased to 17.4%, closer to the upper range of the current allowable range (19%). The fund has recently been purchasing foreign bonds aggressively, as it likely judges negative-yielding domestic bonds as unattractive (Figure 3). Historically, the pace of foreign bond purchases in Q4 last year was at the highest pace (see “Three important JPY flow stories”, 1 March 2019). Without the two additional points above, the GPIF would need to start liquidating foreign bonds, while accumulating exposures to domestic bonds again.

However, as the fund can manage its portfolio more flexibly in the new fiscal year, it should be able to continue purchasing foreign bonds, even if the share exceeds the upper limit (19%).

As the BOJ’s negative rate policy will be extended further, in our view, we think it would be reasonable for the GPIF to continue reducing the fund’s exposure to domestic bonds, while shifting into foreign bonds. At the moment, both domestic and foreign equity shares central of the GPIF’s target portfolio are at 25%, but the central target for foreign bonds is just 15%. Thus, there is room for the fund to further shift from domestic bonds into foreign bonds.

The GPIF will release its new basic portfolio by end-March 2020, while the announcement could take place by end-2019. We see a strong probability that the GPIF would raise the share of foreign bonds then, and its flow could lead to JPY selling.

As of end-December, total AUM managed by the GPIF was at JPY151.4trn (USD1.4trn), and 5% portfolio shift into foreign bonds could generate JPY7.6trn (USD65-70bn) of JPY selling.
In comparison with 2014, market interest in the GPIF portfolio change seems much lower (Figure 4).

Nonetheless, we believe the annual plan released today shows the fund’s investment in foreign bonds will remain significant this year, and the diversification should support cross-yens well (Figure 5).

- source Nomura

So, from an allocation perspective, you probably want to "front run" the GPIF and its lifers friend, given they play "Easy come, Easy Go" particularly well in adding US dollar credit exposure we think.

When it comes to flows, and all the "fun" going into the bond market, it is already happening as per Bank of America Merrill Lynch's note from the 29th of March entitled "Bonds over stocks":

"Dovish central banks revive the bond market

As global central banks continue on their dovish path, more money is flowing into credit and fixed income funds more broadly.

It feels that this trend is here to stay amid low inflation and lack of growth in Europe, and continued political headwinds (Brexit, trade wars). As macroeconomic data trends are bottoming out and central banks continue to remain dovish, we think that credit gap wider risks are limited.

Over the past week…

High grade funds recorded an inflow for the fourth week in a row, albeit at a slower pace than last week. However we note that one fund suffered an outflow of almost $1bn. Should we adjust for that the inflow would have been more than $2.7bn.

High yield funds enjoyed their fifth consecutive week of inflow. Looking into the domicile breakdown, Global-focused funds gathered half of the inflows, with the other half favouring US-focused funds more than European-focused funds.

Government bond funds saw inflows for a second straight week, while the pace has been ticking up over the past couple of weeks. Money Market funds recorded an outflow last week, the strongest over the last five weeks. All in all, Fixed Income funds enjoyed another week of strong inflows.

European equity funds continued to record outflows; the seventh in a row. Note that the pace of outflows shows no sign of slowing down.

Global EM debt funds recorded their fifth consecutive week of inflows. Note that last weekly inflow was the largest in seven weeks. Commodity funds saw another inflow last week, the fourteenth over the past sixteen weeks.

On the duration front, short-term IG funds underperformed whilst mid and long-term IG funds recorded strong inflows amid a broader reach for yield trend." - source Bank of America Merrill Lynch

Follow the flow as they say, but follow Japan when it comes to credit markets exposure, given that they are no small players when it comes to global allocation.

So should you play "defense" allocation wise or continue to go "all in"? On that very subject we read with interest Morgan Stanley's Cross Asset Dispatches note from the 31st of March entitled "Improving the Cycle Indicator – Countdown to Downturn":

"Cycle inflection argues for more cautious portfolio tilt – pare back exposure in US stocks and HY, add allocation to US duration, RoW stocks

But just because a shift in our cycle indicator is imminent, it doesn't mean that broad asset rotation needs to occur now:

Looking at the optimal allocation for the ACWI/USD Agg porfolio, we find that weighting between global equities and bonds doesn't really change materially until a downturn starts. However, rotation within asset classes occurs throughout expansion and into the cycle turn – for example, US equities see weighting fall throughout expansion in favour of RoW stocks, and fixed income portfolios rotate towards long-duration away from intermediate maturities over the same time. In other words, downturn may trigger the broad cross asset allocation, but investors should still look to tilt more defensive within asset classes throughout expansion.

What would this defensive tilt look like? Examining the optimal allocations for: i) USD Agg/ACWI; ii) Multi-asset; and iii) USD Agg portfolios through various cycles over the past 30 years, using realised next one-year returns, these shifts need to occur for a more defensive positioning:

• Pare back equity risk, especially US versus RoW: Optimal weight to stocks tends to fall from expansion to downturn as stocks go from seeing a boost in returns to a drag.
• Reduce US HY to max underweight: Allocation to lower-quality (BBB and HY) corporates typically collapses in expansion, given the unattractive returns profile; downturn only sees performance deteriorate further, taking HY (and BBB) to its lowest weighting in the cycle.
• Tilt towards long-duration in late-cycle, add cash: UST and cash combined have the largest allocation in downturn.

These are largely in line with our current recommendations, based on our cross-asset allocation framework of which the cycle indicator forms one of the three pillars, along with long-run fair value models and short-run expectations from our strategy colleagues.

With long-run capital market assumptions which are below average for most assets, unenthusiastic 12-month forecasts from our strategists and a cycle model that's about to turn, we reiterate our stance to be EW in stocks, with a preference for ex-US equities, EW in bonds, with a tilt towards USTs, and UW in credit, in particular low-quality corporates. For investors looking for late-cycle hedges, we also recommend vol trades like buying credit puts, USDJPY puts and long Eurostoxx calls versus S&P calls to take advantage of dislocations in the vol space." - source Morgan Stanley.

Of course everyone is looking at the inverted US yield curve as a good predictor of a downturn to show up and markets are already pricing rates cut from the Fed. From a lower volatility positioning, it makes sense to be overweight US Investment Grade and adding duration and somewhat reduce exposure to US High Yield. In Europe, when it comes to financials, credit continues to benefit from the ECB support, financial equities, not so much, regardless of the price to book narrative put forward by many sell-side pundits. We continue to dislike financials equities and rather play exposure through credit markets, even high beta offers better value. 

But what about the cycle? Is it already turning in the US given the inversion of the US yield curve? On that specific point Morgan Stanley in their note pointed out the following:

"New cycle indicator, still same old cycle (for now)

Our revamped US cycle indicator suggests that the market is still in expansion. But our model also says there's a high chance (~70%) of a shift to downturn within the next 12 months.

Our market cycle indicators are a central part of our cross-asset framework, launched with our initiation of coverage nearly five years ago. While prior builds have served us well over this time, generally pointing to continued cycle expansion amid bouts of volatility, we have looked to continually improve these indicators. This is the latest iteration.

The main changes to the methodology revolve around index composition, weighting system and the way we systematically categorise cycle phases, relying on breadth of change across metrics instead of moving averages. The result is, in our view, an improved cycle indicator which can better flag turns in real time, with greater confidence and less lag. Currently, the revised US cycle indicator ('v2019') ( Exhibit 22 ) points to continued expansion, driven by many key macro indicators being above-trend ( Exhibit 23 ).

…but a market cycle peak is imminent

We don't think that this expansion can be sustained for long:

Exhibit 26 shows our real-time downturn probability gauge, which estimates the chance of our cycle model inflecting to downturn from expansion within the next 12 months, based on historical experience.

What this chart suggests is that, given the level of the cycle indicator, the chance of a shift to downturn over the next 12 months is elevated at close to 70%, up from ~60% from end-2017 when we last checked up on the cycle.

What's been behind this prediction? The strong unbroken run of improving data over the last year has been the main 'culprit':

Since April 2010, we've not had a six-month period where a majority of the components of the cycle indicator were not improving; it is, to our knowledge, the longest streak in history ( Exhibit 27 ).

Historically, such an environment of data improvement breadth and depth (with the likes of unemployment rate and consumer confidence hitting extreme levels in recent months) has meant a high probability of cycle deterioration in the next 12 months – after all, what goes up must come down. Indeed, the latest disappointing consumer confidence data pushes the number of cycle indicator components deteriorating over the last six months to seven now – enough to be considered 'critical mass'. If such deterioration persists, our rules-based approach to identifying cycle phases could very well call a switch from expansion to downturn as early as next month. At any rate, our market cycle indicator and the probability gauge are very clear – an inflection from expansion to downturn is on the horizon." - source Morgan Stanley

As we indicated on numerous occasions, the cycle is slowly but surely turning and rising dispersion among issuers is a sign that you need to be not only more discerning in your issuer selection process but also more defensive in your allocation process. This also means paring back equities in favor of bonds and you will get support from your Japanese friends rest assured.

It doesn't mean equities cannot rally further, there is still the on-going US-China trade spat yet to be resolved. Right now Macro continues to deteriorate, particularly in the Eurozone with its Manufacturing PMI falling to 47.5 (49.3 - Feb). Germany and Italy were notable contributors to the stronger decline:

• Germany : 44.1 vs 47.6-Feb
• France : 49.7 vs 51.5-Feb
• Italy : 47.4 vs 47.7-Feb
• Eurozone : 47.5 vs 49.3-Feb 

This is a reflection of world trade growth further slowing as highlighted by DHL's Global Trade Barometer from March 2019:

"Key findings:

• Overall GTB index for global trade falls by -4 points to 56 compared to December, signaling only a slight growth and coming ever closer to stagnation.
• Prospects weakening for most surveyed countries – but remain above neutral 50, still indicating positive growth, apart from South Korea
• Outlook for global air trade is sluggish, dropping by -3 to 55 points. Growth of global ocean trade is also slowing down, reflected in an index value of 56, a decrease by -5.

According to the latest three-months forecast by the DHL Global Trade Barometer (GTB) global trade is foreseen to grow only slowly. The overall growth index decreased by -4 points compared to the last update in December, scoring 56 points in March. The slowdown is especially attributed to the significant decelerating growth prospects of India (-18) and South Korea (-12).

Also in the US, trade growth is expected to lose momentum (-5 points), whereas the GTB forecasts for China (-1), Germany (+2), Japan (-2) and the UK (+2) are largely in-line with the previous update.

The outlook for global air trade is sluggish, dropping -3 to 55 points. All surveyed countries are forecasted to slowdown in air trade except for Germany (+9). The largest declines are expected for South Korea (-14), India (-13) as well as Japan (-5). China and US dropping moderately with -3 and -2 points. Moreover, the index for South Korea and UK air trade drops below 50 points, suggesting a contraction of air trade growth.

Global ocean trade outlook is also modest, seeing decelerated growth (-5 points to 56). The largest downturns are found in India (-20), South Korea (-10) and US (-7). German ocean trade further weakened, as the country’s index falls slightly by -2 to 46 points. China (-1 point) is forecasted to decelerate slightly. Meanwhile, ocean trade in the UK (+4 points) and Japan (+2 points) is picking up some steam." - source DHL - Global Trade Barometer, March 2019

With China’s Caixin March manufacturing PMI beating expectations at 50.8 from 49.9 last month (50.0 expected), optimism that China can once again provide the heavy lifting for global growth has been renewed, hence the latest positive tone from financial markets. 

Could it be that we will see weaker growth for longer? In that case bonds could continue to perform in that environment where bad news is good news again thanks to the renewed "Easy Come, Easy Go" stance from central banks.

We can therefore expect US Treasury Notes 10 year yield to fall further in that context. It seems that bond bears were a little bit too hasty in 2018 in the demise of the long duration trade.

We have been asked recently by one of our readers on  the rise in interest rate volatility seen recently through the MOVE gauge index responding by posting its biggest two-day gain since 2016. We replied that it didn't change our recommendation of playing "quality", Investment Grade that is, over "quantity", US High Yield. On that specific point we read with interest Barclays US Credit Alpha note from the 29th of March entitled "Rates Moves Dictates Credit Moves":

Rates Moves Dictating Credit Moves

Interest rate volatility remains high, with consequences for the credit market, as spreads have widened modestly. In addition to the decline in yields, the 3m10y Treasury spread has inverted, and the market is implying a rate cut by the Fed for the first time since the beginning of 2013. The last time 3m10y was inverted and the market implied a significant rate cut was in late 2006, as the prior economic cycle reached maturity. As Figure 2 shows, equities rallied at that point, and credit spreads held in despite concerns about a weaker economy.

An obvious question is whether the current inversion signals the end of the cycle, since, in the past, recessions have occurred on average four quarters after the 3m10y inverts. However, the 2y10y curve has typically already been inverted, which is not the case today. We believe more caution is warranted based on recent curve moves, consistent with our forecast for wider spreads at year-end.

Digging deeper into the relationships of credit markets around the 3m10y inversions in 2000 and 2006, we notice significant differences compared with this year. In both instances, high yield was outperforming investment grade and the BBB/A spread ratio was flat or lower. This seems to support our short-term view that BBBs should outperform their beta.

We had also been advocating owning BBBs versus BBs recently, and the gap between those spreads has moved almost 20bp higher from the recent lows. While a sizable move, it still does not make BBs look particularly cheap. However, we think that differences in trading conventions for the high yield and investment grade markets are behind a lot of the BB underperformance and expect some bounce-back for BBs in spread terms as soon as rates stabilize. Traders are quoting BB prices broadly flat over the past week, as rates rallied and spreads moved 20bp wider. In contrast, BBB bonds are quoted more or less unchanged on spread, but their prices jumped more than a point. Underscoring the technical nature of the move, we note that even within capital structures that have both BBB and BB rated bonds, such as Charter Communications, the basis spiked. As a result, we believe there could be some near-term tactical spread outperformance for BBs." -source Barclays

We could see a continuation in the high beta rally yet it doesn't seem to us vindicated by recent flows, so we would rather stick with our defensive call for the time being.

Given all of the above, we are more inclined towards credit markets and "coupon clipping" and playing it safe through Fixed Income and credit markets as warranted by current fund flows we are seeing and Japanese support coming from overseas. As well our final chart displays the defensive positioning as we enter the second quarter.

• Final charts - The deflation play is back in town

Looking at the dismal macro data which has tilted central banks towards a much more dovish stance, the positioning and fund inflows for the second quarter appear to be more geared towards "deflation assets". Our final chart comes from Bank of America Merrill Lynch The Flow Show note from the 28th of March entitled "Pavlov's Dog Bites Fed" and shows "Deflation vs Inflation flows":

"Positioning into Q2: consensus starts Q2 long “secular stagnation” & “deflation”; YTD $87bn inflows into “deflation assets” e.g. corp & EM bonds & REITs, and $42bn redemptions from “inflation assets”, e.g. EAFE equities & resources (Chart 4); investors are discounting neither recession (they love corporate bonds) not recovery (they don’t like cyclical equities).

Weekly flows: $8.6bn into bonds, $0.4bn into gold, $12.5bn out of equities.

Credit inflows: $5.2bn into IG, $2.2bn into EM debt, $0.9bn into HY.

Max deflation: record redemptions from TIPs ($1.3bn).

Equity outflows: $7.7bn out of US, $4.8bn out of EU, $2.0bn out of EM.

Cyclical outflows: $1.5bn out of financials, $0.4bn out of consumer, $0.2bn out of
tech.

Q2 catalyst: Positioning & Policy were positive catalysts in Q1; Profits will be the catalyst in Q2; we say consensus global EPS numbers remain too high (BofAML Global EPS model forecasts -9% EPS growth in the next 12 months vs. analyst consensus 0% - Chart 5).

Q2 scenarios: evolution of BofAML global EPS model forecasts will determine whether Stagnation, Recession, Recovery the dominant Q2 outcome.

Stagnation: global EPS forecast stagnates @ -5-10% as US growth dips below 2%, global PMIs vacillate around 50, US rates fall toward anchored/negative Japanese & Eurozone rates, secular “Japanification” trade of past 10 years hardens; the big tell...credit bid, volatility offered; the big trades...long 30-year UST, biotech, short resources, volatility.

Recession: global EPS forecast drops to -15% as surge in US unemployment claims indicates US consumer joining manufacturing recession in China, Japan & Eurozone where PMIs drop to 45; the big tells...oil <$50/b, JNK <$33, INJCJC4 >300k; the big trades...short tech & corporate bonds, long T-bills, US dollar & VIX.

Recovery: global EPS forecast turns positive as “green shoots” in Asian exports (Chart 1) & Chinese growth blossom, while lower US rates boost US housing data; credit spreads prove once again they are better lead indicator for risk assets than government bond yields (Chart 6); the tells...SOX >1450, XHB >$42, KOSPI >2350, yield curve steepens; the trades...long global banks, short bunds & US dollar.

Next up: big 5 datapoints in coming week to set course for Q2 (see table 1); tactically we are in Q2 “Recovery” camp; H2 we expect big top in markets before debt deflation/policy impotence leads risk assets lower."  - source Bank of America Merrill Lynch

"Easy Come, Easy Go", we believe that US equities face headwinds coming from a more defensive stance from CFOs ready to defend their balance sheet and start reducing buybacks, CAPEX and even dividends in some instances. This would be more beneficial in that context to credit investors. Earnings are already facing EPS "headwinds". The continuation of the rise in oil prices though is still supportive for US High Yield. Yet, given the "high beta" nature of High Yield, we would prefer to play it safe rather than going all in à la Martin Donovan. 

"There is no gambling like politics."- Benjamin Disraeli, British statesman

Stay tuned ! 

Macro and Credit - The Armstrong limit

"Men go abroad to wonder at the heights of mountains, at the huge waves of the sea, at the long courses of the rivers, at the vast compass of the ocean, at the circular motions of the stars, and they pass by themselves without wondering." - Saint Augustine

Watching with interest the Japanese Nikkei index touching its highest level in 27 years at 24,245.76 points, with US stock indices having rallied strongly against the rest of the world during this year, and closing towards new highs, when it came to selecting our title analogy we decided to go for another aeronautic analogy "The Armstrong limit". The Armstrong limit also called the Armstrong's line is a measure of altitude above which atmospheric pressure is sufficiently low that water boils at the normal temperature of the human body. Humans cannot survive above the Armstrong limit in an unpressurized environment. Above earth, this begins at 18-19 km (59,000-62,000 feet) above sea level. The term is named after United States Air Force General Harry George Armstrong who was the first to recognize this phenomenon. Commercial jetliners are required to maintain cabin pressurization at a cabin altitude of not greater than 2400 m (8,000 feet). The Armstrong limit describes the altitude associated with an objective, precisely defined natural phenomenon: the vapor pressure of body-temperature water.  Back in August in our conversation the "Dissymmetry of lift", we discussed our Quantitative Tightening (QT) amounted to reducing global liquidity and tightening global financial conditions overall as well as less airflow to maintain growth (we are already seeing signs in Europe).  When it comes to airflow and liquidity relating to equity indices we touched in this subject in two previous conversations: "The Coffin corner" in April 2013, the other being "The Vortex Ring" in May 2014. When it comes to our analogy and our reference to the Nikkei and US equity indices we remember clearly that the Nikkei hit its all-time high on 29 December 1989, during the peak of the Japanese asset price bubble, when it reached an intra-day high of 38,957.44, before closing at 38,915.87, having grown six fold during the decade. Sure the S&P 500 has grown six fold during the decade since the collapse of Lehman Brothers but it's within 1% of its all time high. One question investors are starting to ask themselves is what is the "Armstrong limit" for US equities? Bank of America Merrill Lynch in their recent The Flow Show note from the 27th of September entitled "Jay stalking" have two very interesting charts when it comes to equity allocation from Global Wealth and Investment Management (GWIM) into equities and cash allocation levels:

- source Bank of America Merrill Lynch

One might indeed wonder what level is the "Armstrong limit" before boiling point we think...

In this week's conversation, we would like to look at once again at the US consumer which seems to be increasingly relying on his credit card as well as other signs that warrants monitoring at this stage in the cycle.

Synopsis:

• Macro and Credit -  What's the Armstrong limit for the US consumer's confidence?
• Final charts - The "profit" illusion

• Macro and Credit -  What's the Armstrong limit for the US consumer's confidence?

In continuation to our last conversation, we think it is essential for the US growth outlook and forward earnings to continue to focus on the state of the US consumer. After all, the first on the line in any case of trade war escalation is the US consumer who gets the price increase passed onto by corporations facing a surge in costs. With the US consumer confidence index climbing to 138.4 in September from 134.7 in August, the highest since September 2000 we are wondering if it is the absolute Armstrong limit.

On this question we read with interest Wells Fargo's take from their US Consumer Confidence note from the 25th of September:

"In the past 51 years, only 11 times has confidence been higher than it is today. Said differently, roughly 98% of the time confidence is lower than it is now. That’s good news for the consumer, but for how long?

Remember the Sock Puppet Commercials?

The last time consumer confidence was as high as it is today was in the year 2000. A number of financial and economic indicators from that era are similar to where they are today. The stock market was soaring to all-time record highs, the unemployment rate was below 4% and the economy was in its 10th year of uninterrupted expansion. Then, as now, there were few people seeing an end in sight.

While we still think the current expansion has room to run, we would be remiss not to make note of just how rare a thing it is to see confidence at these lofty levels. Only in 11 individual months since 1967 have we seen confidence higher than it is today. Nine of those months were in the year 2000. The other two were in 1999. This is the thin air of the high peaks.

The euphoria is not limited to the consumer sector. The ISM manufacturing index is at its highest level since 2004 and the NFIB Small Business Optimism Index, an indicator of small business confidence, is at its highest level on records that date back to 1974. The fact that these measures are at record highs does not preclude them from going higher, but one characteristic that they all share is a tendency to peak before a slowdown.

No Time Like the Present

There is an interesting dynamic going on between consumers’ assessment of the present situation, compared to expectations for the future. As seen in the middle chart, the present situation measure is running well ahead; in the prior cycle there was a similar divergence late in the cycle.

Some Things That Are Different From 2000

The below chart plots consumer confidence alongside both retail sales (ex-autos) and real income growth on a per-capita basis. Here we see something that Fed policymakers have been wringing their hands over throughout this cycle, which is: if the labor market is so hot, how come income growth is so tepid?

That slower income growth tempers our enthusiasm for the ability of consumer spending to sustain growth indefinitely. We will get the latest read on this when the personal income and spending numbers hit the wire on Friday of this week.

I Don’t Know Why I Go to Extremes

For now, the surge in retail sales cannot be denied and we would be foolish to bet against the consumer with such a solid backdrop for consumer confidence. The official write-up that accompanied the release stated that “Consumers’ assessment of current conditions remains extremely favorable, bolstered by a strong economy.” We would not disagree, but what takes the shine off the apple for us is that extremes, by definition, imply “reaching a high, or the highest degree.” If this is the extreme, there is nowhere to go but down." - source Wells Fargo

With US Personal Income rising 0.3% in August, slightly less than expected (0.4%) last Friday, then indeed slower income growth should indeed temper slightly your enthusiasm we think.

As a reminder from last week's conversation, and as per the below Macrobond chart, the University of Michigan Consumer Confidence turning points tend to coincide with significant S&P 500 12 months return. It is worth remembering this from an Armstrong limit perspective:

- graph source Macrobond (click to enlarge)

Also, keep that in mind when looking at the significant rise of the S&P 500, because we think that we are in the melt-up "euphoria" phase and have yet to touch the "Armstrong limit":

- graph source Macrobond (click to enlarge)

Or you could also ask yourself as well what is the "Armstrong limit" when it comes to the S&P 500 Profit Margins in this long in the tooth credit cycle:

- graph source Macrobond (click to enlarge)

You could as well ask yourselves when will we reach "peak" M&A, which is also a sign you generally see in late credit cycles:

- graph source Macrobond (click to enlarge)

In last week's conversation, "White Tiger" we indicated that although everyone is focusing on the flattening of the yield curve, from an inflationary expectations perspective we worry a lot for asset prices about a spike in oil prices if we do get geopolitical flares up in November between the United States and Iran:

"The issue of course for the stretched US consumer would be if Core PCE inflation continues to pick up slightly faster than core CPI if healthcare service price inflation accelerates while rent inflation gradually slows. This upside risk to healthcare prices and expected further labor market tightening, one could expect core PCE inflation to rise further, not to mention the issue with gas prices at the pump should oil prices continue as well to trend up. Remember that the acceleration of inflation is a dangerous match when it comes to lighting up/bursting asset bubbles." - source Macronomics, September 2018

So for us, from an Armstrong limit perspective, we are closely watching the evolution of oil prices:

- graph source Macrobond

An inflation spike is very much on our radar. Oil has extended its gains after the longest quarterly rally in a decade thanks to a slowdown in American drilling as well as supply concerns. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia have discussed market stability yet it seems there are some questions relating to spare capacity with traders highlighting a potential surge towards $100 a barrel at some point. 

From an Armstrong limit perspective relating to the state of the US consumer, oil prices matter because not only retail has been sustained by the rise in credit card use but housing is seeing headwinds already thanks to rising mortgage rates. The issue at hand is the size of energy costs for the US consumer relative to his consumer spending. On that subject we read with interest Wells Fargo's take from their note from the 28th of September entitled "What Good is a Bigger Paycheck if it All Goes to Gas Money?":

"Wages and salaries posted the largest monthly increase since January, but increasingly higher gas prices and other energy costs are commanding a larger share of consumer spending.

Income Gets Boost from Wages

Personal income increased 0.3% in August, which was a bit shy of the 0.4% that had been expected by the consensus.

More than two thirds of the increase was due to the fact wages and salaries notched a solid 0.5% gain. That was the best monthly increase since January and the latest indication that the hot job market is at last translating into meaningful improvement in wages.

Personal interest income, which comprises less than a tenth of overall income, was down for the second straight month and was in fact the only category of personal income that declined during the period.

Energy Costs Taking up Larger Share of Consumer Spending

Despite the slightly softer print on the income side, spending did not disappoint with the 0.3% pick-up in outlays, matching the consensus expectation. The fact that wages and salaries drove much of the increase explains why the saving rate was able to remain unchanged at 6.6%.

Consumer durable goods outlays slipped 0.1%, but every other major category of spending was either flat or positive to varying degrees. Echoing one of the themes from the August retail sales report in which gas stations reported faster sales than other types of stores, the biggest category gainer in terms of price was energy goods and services, up 1.9% on the month. This category includes spending on gasoline but also includes energy goods delivered to the home through utilities like electricity and natural gas. The takeaway is that higher energy prices in August might have been holding back spending in other categories. Excluding food and energy, spending was flat in August.

Inflation Dynamics

People are not suddenly buying a lot more gasoline. Prices, of course, are largely to blame. The energy prices category within the price indices has seen double-digit percentage gains in each of the past four months. Mercifully for consumers, prices for durable goods have also been lower in each of those past four months, ameliorating the impact of higher energy prices. The headline measure for the personal consumption expenditures deflator, the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, slowed slightly to 2.2% from 2.3% on a year-over-year basis in July.

Existing tariffs on a variety of imports totaled roughly $100 billion in August; with this week’s additional tariffs on $200 billion going into effect, the price effects for consumers might become more tangible. The nation’s largest retailer this week warned that it might be forced to charge higher prices.
In its statement earlier this week, the Federal Reserve noted that “inflation on a 12-month basis is expected to move up in coming months” before eventually stabilizing near the Fed’s 2% target rate." - source Wells Fargo

Tariffs and rising gas prices do not bode well for the euphoric US consumer we think in the near future. Sure US equities, consumer confidence and even US High Yield have had a very good run in 2018 (CCCs have outperformed higher quality by a wide margin: +5.6% of excess returns) in comparison to the rest of the world, so it's highly likely that the "risk-on" euphoric mood will continue given financial conditions are still fairly accommodative (as per the most recent Fed SLOOs), but we think that 2019 could start becoming much more challenging as QT accelerates and depending on the Fed's hiking path as we are officially out of negative real rates for now.

In continuation to our “macro” long conversation “The Money illusion”, where we concluded that liquidity is a coward and where we repeated what we indicated back in June 2015 from our conversation "The Third Punic War", bear markets for US equities generally coincide with a significant tick up in core inflation, given the amount of buybacks since with the issuance of debt in many instances in our final charts below, we are wondering if there could be as well a "profit illusion" when it comes to the US markets.

• Final charts - The "profit" illusion

Sure, liquidity is a coward and as many have pointed out, with dwindling inventories on banks balance sheet and the very significant rise in corporate debt issuance in credit markets, one can indeed ask if "liquidity" is an illusion. On the question of the "profit illusion" our final charts come from our esteemed former colleague David P. Goldman who now writes in Asia Times and ask if buybacks are creating the illusion of profit in his article from the 28th of September entitled "Something strange is happening with US corporate profits":

"Are companies creating the illusion of higher profits through stock buybacks? 

It was reported earlier this week that S&P 500 companies bought back a record US$189 billion of their own shares in the first quarter of this year. The buybacks make results look better than they really are, as The Wall Street Journal reported.

The charts below show that raw, unadjusted US corporate profits actually FELL year on year, and corporates are creating the illusion of higher profits by buying back shares.

This is the rawest, simplest measure of profits, before tax and inventory/capital consumption adjustments, which are model driven. This is basically what corporations report on their income tax, and it doesn’t look terribly strong.

Are profits rising or falling? 

- source Asia Times - David P. Goldman

One could contend that the boiling frog which is a fable describing a frog being slowly boiled alive, could be related to the Armstrong Limit looking at the altitude reached by equities and some valuation metrics. As a reminder, the premise of the fable is that if a frog is put suddenly into boiling water, it will jump out, but if the frog is put in tepid water which is then brought to a boil slowly, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for our inability or unwillingness to react to or be aware of sinister threats that arise gradually rather than suddenly such as the markets we are seeing one could argue. Though some would add that "thermoregulation" by changing location is a fundamentally necessary survival strategy for frogs and other ectotherms, rendering the legend a "myth". From an Armstrong Limit perspective, we certainly hope that some investors have their "g-suits" on given the lofty levels reached in some instances. Also we do not know yet what is the Fed's own "Armstrong limit" in their current hiking path but we ramble again...

"There can be no rise in the value of labour without a fall of profits." -  David Ricardo

Stay tuned !

Macro and Credit - Intermezzo

"It was one of those March days when the sun shines hot and the wind blows cold: when it is summer in the light, and winter in the shade." -  Charles Dickens

Looking at the pyrrhic victory for the European technocrats in Brussels thanks the consolidation of Germany's Merkel coalition and the results of the Italian elections (which amounts to "Hunga Hunga"), and given the "regime change" put forward by many pundits thanks to the return of volatility after years of central banking repression, when it came to selecting our title analogy we reminded ourselves of the musical term "Intermezzo". In music, an intermezzo is a composition which fits between other musical or dramatic entities, such as acts of a play or movements of a larger musical work. In music history, the term has had several different usages, which fit into two general categories: the opera intermezzo and the instrumental intermezzo. In the 19th century, the intermezzo acquired another meaning: an instrumental piece which was either a movement between two others in a larger work, or a character piece which could stand on its own. As CITI's Chuck Prince said nicely in July 2007:

"When the music stops, in terms of liquidity, things will be complicated. But as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance. We’re still dancing" - Chuck Prince

To some extent, early market jitters such as the ones caused by the explosion of the pig's "short-vol" house of straw amounted to an "intermezzo" we think. A larger musical work is at play and it is the evolution of the credit cycle. It is slowly and gradually turning, with macro hard data erring on the soft side recently (US durable goods orders falling 3.7% in Jan, vs 2.0% drop expected) while consumer confidence, being soft data, printing on the strong side. When it comes to liquidity, it is being withdrawn by the Fed through its "Quantitative Tightening" (QT). While we have already seen some casualties such as the short-vol ETN complex amounting to the equity tranche in the capital structure, it remains to be seen where and when will the next larger fishes will show belly up at some point down the tightening road, but, we think the time has not yet arrived.

In this week's conversation, we would like to look at the situation of the US Consumer, given in various recent musings we were asking ourselves if he had been "maxed out" and rely heavily these days on credit card use to sustain his consumption habits. As pointed out by famous French economist Frédéric Bastiat, there is always what you see and what you don't see particularly in a country boasting a very high Gini coefficient such as the United States. 

Synopsis:

• Macro and Credit - Thanks to Gini coefficient, when it comes to consumer leverage, it's not always what you see
• Finals chart - Let the good times roll?

• Macro and Credit - Thanks to Gini coefficient, when it comes to consumer leverage, it's not always what you see

Back in March 2017 in our conversation "The Endless Summer" we concluded our long conversation asking ourselves if the US consumer was somewhat "maxed out". We indicated as well that this on-going "Endless Summer" had created a significant windfall for the holders of financial asset. The "wealth effect" has globally lifted all "financial" boats but, in our book a credit cycle's length is around 10 years, so we do believe we are entering the last inning and that the final melt-up in asset prices could be significant before the usual "Bayesian" outcome. When it comes to the US economy, US consumer credit matters a lot. We continue to monitor that space given any weakness in US consumer credit could be an additional sign the US economy is reaching a turning point. In January 2018, in our conversation "The Lindemann criterion", we indicated that measuring the level of indebted households matters and in particular the use of Consumer Credit and in particular non-revolving credit:

"US consumer debt surged by the most in over 2 years to $3.8 trillion and jumped by 8.8% in November, the most in two years, to $3.83 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve. Clearly in the coming months US Consumer Credit should be on everyone's radar in conjunction with SLOOs we think." - source Macronomics, January 2018

Another sign that caught our attention as of late has been the article in the WSJ pointing towards mounting credit card losses in their article from the 4th of March entitled "Credit-Card Losses Surge at Small Banks":

"Small banks have been fighting for a bigger piece of the credit-card market in search of higher returns. Now, they’re contending with rising losses.

Missed payments on credit cards at small banks have risen sharply over the past year, a sign that their cardholders are taking on more debt than they can handle. Their charge-off rate, or the share of outstanding card balances written off as a loss after consumers failed to pay, hit 7.2% in the fourth quarter, up from 4.5% a year ago, according to Federal Reserve data.

Concerns have been mounting in the broader credit-card industry about the recent trend of rising delinquencies. While overall card losses are still relatively low—below the historical average of the last 30 years, for instance—they’ve been slowly climbing in the last two years.

But they’ve especially surged at smaller banks, those outside the 100 largest by assets that have less than around $10.4 billion in assets. There, the average charge-off rate is near an eight-year high, while the 3.5% loss rate at large banks remains well below the 10.6% seen in 2010." - source WSJ

The US savings rate has been falling while consumer credit has been on the rise with a significant usage of the credit card in recent months it seems. This is something to be mindful about, particularly when as we will see in our conversation that when it comes to consumer leverage in the US all is not what it seems. Monitoring Fed Senior Loan Officer and Opinion Survey (SLOOS) will be paramount this year.

There were as well some additional interesting points in the WSJ article:

"The small banks’ experience is “simply a leading indicator of a downturn to come,” said Robert Hammer, founder and chief executive of credit-card industry consultant R.K. Hammer. In the run-up to the last recession, he noted, losses accelerated for small banks before they did for big ones.

Some small banks have viewed credit cards as a way to cross sell their customers and to bring in new creditworthy customers. That became a challenge as big banks pursued the same set of borrowers by charging low interest rates for promotional periods. Personal loans offered by a growing number of lenders provided even more competition.

That left many small banks with card applicants who had lower credit scores." - source WSJ

Is it a worrying sign? You would have to take into account the impact on "millenials" into the equation we think. Since the Great Financial Crisis (GFC), Congress passed the CARD Act of 2009, a comprehensive credit card reform legislation to protect consumers. Under the bill, lenders cannot issue credit cards to a consumer under the age of 21 unless they prove they have independent income or obtain a cosigner. Also, many millennials are clearly "credit mature" in their 20s compared to the previous generations. As millennials come of prime working age, many are having a hard time obtaining credit cards because lenders are unwilling to extend credit to individuals that have a short or no credit history (yes dear readers in your FICO score, credit history is the most important factor!). This is indeed slowing credit creation somewhat for them. Due to the experience of the GFC, millennials could be less inclined to "buy" using credit or are "convenience users" who pay off their entire credit card balance every month, limiting the need for multiple credit cards.

But the "millenials" are only part of the story. There is much more to it and necessitate a bigger dive into the US consumer credit market. On that very subject we read with interest Deutsche Bank's State of the US Consumer report from the 26th of February entitled "Robust Consumer with Pro-cyclical and Seasonal Tailwinds on the Horizon".

One of the most important points made in this report was the Employment Cost Index (ECI) pointing towards rising inflation:

"One measure of wage inflation is the Employment Cost Index. The ECI measures total labor costs for companies, including wages, salaries, and benefits. Historically, labor costs have been predicted with a nine month lead by companies’ plans to raise worker compensation, see chart below. Both series have trended higher since 2010 but are now beginning to reach levels at or above previous peaks, signs that the labor market could start to overheat and bring higher inflation." - source Deutsche Bank

From the above, there is indeed a potential for a surge in inflation particularly with trade war rhetoric heating up which could add to inflationary pressures building up in the near term (and that's bullish gold by the way). A move toward trade protection in the US could lead to a further decline in global trade, making everyone worse off. Also, corporations have spread their supply chains across the world in the last ten years and they could be impacted seriously via a rising cost bases due to protectionism and trade war on top of a surging ECI index.

Returning to consumer credit, more concerning and well documented has been the rise in student loans since 2007 as indicated by Deutsche Bank in their report:

"Federal student loan performance worth monitoring

Average student loan balances continue to rise, despite the leveling of the number of consumers with student loans, as outstanding balances have more than doubled since 2010. Since 2007, student loans have risen from 15% to now over a third of the entire consumer debt complex (ex- mortgage).

With the rise of student balances, student debt leverage has also continued to rise steadily since 2003. Among the bottom 60% of income households, DTI from student loans has seen an average increase of +10% pts since 2007.

While the leverage within student lending may have a spillover effect for other consumer loan categories, we note nearly ~20% are deferred or in forbearance (i.e. the impact is being pushed out). Although defaults are currently at ~15% of total recipients, the highest % of defaulted accounts are for the lowest average loans (~2/3 of defaults are for loans & $10k) with defaults usually relating to noncompletion of school.

- source Deutsche Bank

So yes Student Loans have been rising significantly since 2007 and the onset of the Great Financial Crisis (GFC) but it is part of a significant increase in overall leverage of the US consumer. Again, there is what you see and what you don't see as pointed out by Deutsche Bank in their thorough report:

"Items to watch

Lower income consumers are more levered than they appear: The aggregate deleveraging post-crisis has largely benefited from mortgage leverage sitting at its lowest level since 2001. However, other consumer leverage (card, student, auto, and personal) continues to grind higher into 2018 and is now at all time highs (~26%). Excluding disposable income for the Top 5% income bracket of US consumers, consumer debt levels are closer to 43% of adjusted disposable income—almost double the reported measure of ~26%. The latest triennial Fed Survey of Consumer Finances highlights this dynamic, with the bottom 40% income households running at ~50% non-mortgage DTI, which is ~10% more than LT averages.

The subprime/low income consumer is stretched: Sluggish wage growth and rising healthcare and rent expenses as a percentage of income (non-debt obligations near 25 year highs) among lower income households have stretched subprime consumers as they look to augment rising expenses with debt.

Banks have met this increased demand by providing deeper credit access to subprime (increased participation, especially for cards), leading to higher leverage and an increased severity risk of loss as delinquencies start to diverge for lower quality consumers. Like DTI, adjusting debt payment burdens to exclude the top 10% income brackets almost doubles the reported Fed figure (9.6% PTI vs. 5.8% reported PTI by the Fed).

Socio-economic divide driving credit cycle: While aggregate consumer fundamentals remain robust, subprime consumers are seeing rising delinquencies and losses starting to normalize much faster than other credit tiers: +90-day DQs within subprime cards have rose+300bps Y/Y in 3Q17 vs. only~30bps on average for near prime/prime borrowers. ~45% of Americans would have difficulty paying a surprise medical bill of ~$500 (Kaiser Foundation), while ~50% of US consumers live paycheck to paycheck (FITB). Taken all together, a disconnect between the lower credit tier borrowers and the economic cycle is starting to emerge.

Monitoring FICO score inflation: Consumers with a FICO score below 600 have declined from 25.5% in 2010 to ~20% (40m consumers) in April 2017, while aggregate FICO scores have increased from 680 in 1999 to 703 in 2Q17. FICO score inflation has been driven by a robust macro environment, extension of a steady business cycle, demographic aging, and methodology changes. Additionally, non-prime consumers with the same FICO score is more risky today than coming out of the recession as the long business cycle helped bankruptcies off the credit report and solid job market has enabled consumers to pay their bills." - source Deutsche Bank

Indeed as per the above, some credit cracks are starting to show, particularly within the lower credit tier borrower which had been saved by the bell thanks to central banks stepping in with its ZIRP policies and QE to stave off defaults and bankruptcies.

Of course the missing part so far of the "inflation equation" has been wage growth. Over time there has been a stable relationship between wage growth and total consumer debt but it seems that since 2013, there has been a change in the narrative as per Deutsche Bank's report:

"Modestly widening gap between wage growth and debt growth

Wage growth and total consumer debt growth have been relatively stable in the low- to mid-single digit range since 2013; however, the gap between wage growth and debt growth has widened modestly in 2017, with non-mortgage consumer debt now growing at a faster clip than wage growth (with the gap narrowing tightly in 4Q17).

Aggregate non-mortgage consumer debt expansion has come in at +5.5% Y/Y vs. 7% to start the year, and other than the pullback in 2016, has been running at 6% to 6.5% since 2013. The current 5.5% rate is ~150bps lower than the median growth rate since 1965, suggesting non-mortgage consumer debt still has room for growth heading into 2018.

- source Deutsche Bank

The rapid pace in credit card growth aka non-mortgage consumer debt expansion is running hot currently and needs to be closely monitored in the months ahead, particularly if it is starting to bite the lower tier credit borrower with already strains showing up within small banks. No surprise in the above quoted article from the WSJ that smaller banks are experiencing rising defaults given the acceleration seen in credit growth from small issuers aka small banks but also non-banks have been playing the game at an accelerating pace as well.

We pointed out the importance of tracking the quarterly Fed SLOOs for additional signs of tightening lending standards which are still quite loose. The trend though is pretty clear for auto and card, banks are starting to tighten their credit standards in these areas as indicated by Deutsche Bank:

"Banks continue to tighten credit standards on auto and card

As the credit cycle continues to slowly normalize, 4Q17 saw a continuation of a net percentage of banks starting to tighten credit card and auto lending standards, with ~10% of banks reporting tightening card standards on average so far through 2017. We believe it will take a couple years of tightened originations to reflect into total outstanding balances.

Why tightening consumer lending standards should not hurt the economy yet. 

The tightening has been driven in large part by prime/subprime auto (which is needed) and by the smaller banks in card (which does not matter as much, and given small issuers have recently returned to ~11% growth). The Fed’s senior loan officer survey includes 60 banks, but does not adjust for size, which will likely distort results. For example, in credit card, the Top 10 banks control 70% + of card balances and many are actually loosening lending standards (ie Chase and Discover, for example). Furthermore, non-banks have become a larger driver of consumer credit post-Crisis. For example, banks are only 30% of auto and personal lending. TransUnion credit bureau data shows that while banks in net aggregate have started to tighten lending standards, consumer participation across all products outside of HELOCs continues to grow at a healthy clip in 4Q17.

2017 bankcard originations tracking just slightly below highs set in 2016

With data provided by Equifax, total bankcard originations FY17 are tracking just below 2016 levels (through 3Q17) with a slight tightening in originations coming from subprime credit tiers giving prime and near-prime originations a slightly higher percent of total bankcard originations. Interestingly, private label retail cards have actually seen a slight increase of subprime consumers percent of total originations increase at the expense of prime borrowers (likely as retailer woes leave retailers looking to loosen credit standards in order to boost sales).

Card delinquencies and charge-offs are rising, but still well below 30-year averages

Concerns over credit deterioration had been worrisome in 2017, with delinquency rates starting to rise in auto and card products. While card losses have been on the rise from post-crisis lows set in 2015, they still remain ~70bps below precrisis averages and are exhibiting a steady normalization path, considering recent industry growth and the seasoning of these vintages. Outside of auto and card, other financial products are actually either improving in performance or remaining flat in 1Q18.

Within card, normalization occurring across all credit quality

Delinquencies have seen an uptick across credit tiers, however still remain below pre-crisis levels, in aggregate. Score inflation masking the underlying credit quality of the consumer, a change in the mix with newer vintages, and outsized growth for newer vintages (growth math) are contributing to higher delinquencies across these credit tiers.

Retail card delinquencies peaking faster and higher

Retail private label cards (specifically the 2015 and 2016 vintage) are exhibiting a shorter time to delinquency and a higher DQ rate than even pre-crisis vintages. We see a combination of mix shift towards lower FICO score customers, potential retail bankruptcies, and FICO score inflation as contributing factors. Regarding retailer bankruptcies, an analysis by Moody's suggests that increased charge-offs for the retailer ahead of a bankruptcy filing are more common, as these retailers start to loosen their credit standards and aggressively market to lower end consumers in order to bolster sales. Whether consumers also feel less inclined to pay off a card for a retailer that has recently gone bankrupt could be another factor to monitor." - source Deutsche Bank

It certainly feels that we are in 2007ish environment at the moment, hence our "intermezzo" title, yet given the lateness in the credit cycle as indicated by more M&A deals, a flattening of the US yield curve and a continuation of buybacks. As per our prognosis and Deutsche Bank thorough analysis, there is what you see, and what you don't see when it comes to the US consumer. As pointed out by the Kansas City Fed, 43% of the increase in average FICO scores from 1999 to 2007 is attributable to the aging of the US population. Demography is indeed "destiny" and if it looks like credit scores are higher thanks to demographics, leverage as we have seen is much higher than anticipated. This is a continuation as well from the theme we tackled back in March 2017 as well in our conversation "The Endless Summer" when we asked ourselves if "boomers" were bust, given that they are more leveraged than previous generations were ahead of retirement. Sure most of them have a relatively small exposure to student debt as their enter their golden years, but their retirement "preparedness" remains a very big issue. During the next 20 years, roughly 74 million "boomers" will retire in the United States. That is an average of more than 10,000 new retirees a day...

For now soft data in the US is strong whereas hard data is somewhat weaker, and it seems Wall Street is more pessimistic than Main Street. In our final charts below we will look at consumer confidence which seems diverging to the prevalent mood in Wall Street thanks to trade war rhetoric as of late.

• Finals chart - Let the good times roll?

Whereas there has been a change in the narrative in Wall Street with the returns of higher volatility and more gyrations in financial markets, it seems that the US consumer has remained more unfazed and upbeat as per the rise seen in consumer sentiment. Our final charts come from Wells Fargo Economics Group from the 2nd of March entitled "Consumers Remain Unfazed By Market Volatility" and displays not only Consumer Sentiment Survey but more importantly expectations of higher income to come as well as a very interesting chart displaying the US consumer uncanny ability in calling a market top in the housing market, or to put it simply, when Main Street is better at forecasting than Wall Street:

"Consumers Remain Upbeat About the Economy and Incomes

Consumer sentiment rose 4 points in February to 99.7 and is just 1 point below its recent high hit in October of last year. Consumers appear to be unfazed by the recent volatility on Wall Street. Relatively few consumers cited the stock market as a factor influencing their views on the economy and, surprisingly and reassuringly, a larger proportion of those that cited it as having an impact said it was positive for the economy rather than negative.
Consumers are clearly more focused on the underlying fundamentals. Our below chart shows consumers’ assessment of current economic conditions, which rose 4.4 points in February to 114.9.

The University of Michigan noted that more consumers reported they had recently heard favorable news about the economy in February than any other time since 1984. Two-thirds of consumers reported their attitudes were influenced by the recently enacted tax cuts and stronger overall employment growth.
The persistent improvement in consumer sentiment provides some relief for folks concerned about ballyhooed threats, such as rising interest rates or steel tariffs. Consumers are not turning a blind eye towards the threats, but appear to be balancing them against expectations for stronger job and income growth. Consumers’ assessment of their finances has improved greatly over the past year. Fifty-four percent of consumers said that their finances had improved over the past year, which is the highest share since January 2000.
Consumers are also optimistic about the labor market and income growth going forward, with a significantly larger share of consumers expecting the unemployment rate to fall over the next year (35 percent) than expecting it to rise (23 percent). The percentage of consumers expecting their income to rise over this year rose 3.8 percentage points to 55.3 percent. An even larger share (57 percent) of consumers stated that they expect the country will have continuous good times over the next 12 months, up 3 percentage points from January.

The increased confidence in job and income prospects should be good news for consumer discretionary spending, which has recently shown some signs of cooling off following a strong holiday shopping season.
While consumers are remarkably upbeat, they are still aware of many of the key risks present today. An overwhelming 77 percent of consumers said that they expect interest rates to rise over the next 12 months and 48 percent expect gasoline prices to increase. Consumers just seem to be doing a better job than the financial markets in putting these risks into perspective. Stronger economic growth and increased job security are far more important to consumers and that is apparent in buy plans for major household items, which rose 6 points in February. On a more cautionary note, plans to buy a car or a house both rose much less during the month, although the proportion of consumers stating that now is a good time to sell a house jumped 7 points to 73 percent."

- source Wells Fargo

In this ongoing "intermezzo" period giving us that 2007 feeling, what is really striking to us is that the amount of leverage for the US consumer is not what it seems, and no matter how strong the willingness of the Fed to hike is, it appears to us that much sooner than in previous hiking cycle, the Fed is going to "break" something. As per the above chart, it seems to us that Main Street has a pretty good forecasting record in calling housing market tops it seems, much better than some sell-side pundits but we ramble again...

"Pessimism of the spirit; optimism of the will." - Antonio Gramsci, Italian politician

Stay tuned!