Complete Intelligence

Login

Tag: Monday

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 21 Feb 2022

We have the PPI numbers from the US and China recently and we talked about its impact on the inflation, CPI numbers, and whether it’s peaking or not? We also looked at the containership traffic and supply chain changes from China as compared to other locations. And with improvement in global mobility, what does that mean for the oil and energy market? We also discussed volatility and what to expect this week?

This is the seventh episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

For those who prefer to listen to this episode, here’s the podcast version for you.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/04ATdMquZbUb0Lm4RVLJkS?si=bf093f6490084a8e

Follow The Week Ahead experts on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Sam: https://twitter.com/SamuelRines
Nick: https://twitter.com/nglinsman/
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Transcript

TN: Hi everybody, and welcome to The Week Ahead. Today I’m joined by Tracy Shuchart, Nick Glinsman and Sam Rines. Albert couldn’t join us today, but he will be back. He’s still friends with us. So before we get started, I’d like to ask you to subscribe to our YouTube channel and like this video. That obviously helps us with visibility. It helps you to get alerts when new videos are out. So if you don’t mind, please take care of that now.

So this week we had a lot going on. So we had a very strong PPI print come out. We had Chinese PPI come out. So the US print came out at 9.6% year on year. Chinese PPI came out around actually the same level, 9.1% down from 13%. We had US retail sales search at 3.8%. It was 2.1% was expected, avenues were down on the week, crude was sideways, precious metals were up a bit and the ten year is back below 2%. So what did we say last week?

Well, Sam, last week said that Monday’s Fed meeting was a non-event. Nice job, Sam. Nick said that the Fed wouldn’t fight Volatility. Nice job, Nick. And Tracy two weeks ago, since that was the last time she was with us, said the crude would trade sideways but be pretty volatile, which it has been. So nice job, guys. You nailed that stuff. Right on.

So let’s start with PPIs. So it looks like producer prices are maybe turning over. I don’t know if it’s too early to call that, okay. But based on the Chinese data and the US data, it looks like those PPIs may be turning over a little bit. So what do we think about that? Are we going to see PPIs moderate? First. And what’s the impact on overall inflation, secondary impacts, ultimately CPI and all that stuff? So Sam, do you want to get us started?

SR: Sure, I’ll give a little off. I think China tends to lead in terms of PPI, right. So when you begin to see their PPI go from 13 to nine, give or take a few tenths, that’s a big deal. The second derivative is extremely important when it comes to input costs. We all knew it was supply chain. We all know it’s supply chain. And we all know that the supply chain is not fixed yet. So the pace of that decline is unlikely to continue at 4% month over month or whatever it might be, but it is going to continue to dissipate, at least on the margin, at least call it moderately. That’s important.

That does feed in CPI at some point. And I think one of the interesting points that we talked about last week was housing. And when you begin to see some of these numbers come down on PPI, you begin to get lower input costs to new starts, et cetera. That has a pretty interesting feature effect.

NG: What did you think about the San Francisco Fed paper on the owner’s equivalent rent? Which I thought was reasonably hawkish in terms of having a half percent impact on core CPI.

SR: Oh, if you’re asking me, I thought it could be hawkish to a degree, but at the same time, it was also in my mind a single that was almost a core thing to them. So something that they’re going to cut out.

NG: It does lag, Zillow and apartment list.

SR: Yeah, it always will. Just on a mechanical basis. It’s impossible for the Fed to get a calculation that’s going to keep up with Zillow or any of the other indices. I thought it was almost one of those. It could be really hawkish if they were to incorporate that into their framework. What I would say is it’s more likely that they’ll go in the European direction, which is just cut it out completely in general from their inflation metrics, which is dovish.

NG: Interestingly.

TN: Let’s move on this a little bit. Sam, it seems to me that you’re indicating that PPI at least is peaking. Is that fair to say?

SR: It feels that way? Yeah, it feels that way. Okay. It feels that way. It certainly looks that way in China. I could take a month or two to feedback into the US, but I would say it’s peaking.

TN: Okay. Now, Nick, I think you take the other point of view where this is sustainable. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but is that fair to say?

NG: Well, actually, I think last week I was mentioning that the inflation outlook is going to level off. I mean, I agree with Sam on China PPI leaving us PPI. I was just fascinated by that particular owner’s equivalent rent housing, part of the CPI composition. And actually in Europe they’re looking to introduce it, which was a paper this week, which again would be quite a surprise.

I just look at not just PPI in China as a leader. I think I’ve seen people say it’s sort of three to six months lead time before it impacts the CPI. So we could have to wait a little bit longer to see it come through. But I just think there are other things in the pipeline and we had this discussion today that suggests to me that financial conditions are of their own making beginning to compress, and if the Fed start to do stuff will compress further and that will have a negative impact on liquidity, whether you define that by balance sheet or as we defined it, we had a conversation day reserves, bank reserves, and I think that’s where I see this peak.

don’t know whether we finished, but I think we’re going to Plateau, if not start to turn around. However, it’s where we finish, where the authorities want us to finish 2% above 2%. I’m sure they want some inflation to hit the debt loads, but the question is where do we finish it? And can you fine tune that accurately? Yeah, that’s not an easy thing to do.

TN: So staying on the China PPI issue, I think if we look at, say, container rates from China and even Port backups from China, if we look at the chart that we’re showing now, the dark blue line is container traffic at major ports from China. So it looks like from Ningboy that the container traffic has subsided quite a bit over the past month. And one would think that that would take some pressure off of supply chains. So if you look potentially at PPI peaking and if you look at the kind of order to receive rates of some of these multinational companies, it’s running in about nine months from, say, China, Southeast Asia to the US hit here in six to nine months, or will it hit later?

Are you guys seeing those dynamics in your studies and with your clients? Do you think that the freight delays and the freight out of China is declining? Tracy, what do you see?

TS: Yeah, I mean, I think the data is a little bit skewed because of the Chinese lunar New Year. But that said, if we do see some pressure let off of China, that will eventually show up here, I’ve always said it’s going to be 2023 before we kind of see some supply chain issues ease. Because what I’m looking at in the industries that I particularly look at, which is materials and energy, I mean, that’s still hitting those. In fact, it’s just starting to hit the industry as far as pipes are concerned, in parts of that nature.

So if we do see that subside, it will eventually end up here in the US and North America. But again, it’s going to be on kind of a lag time.

TN: Right. So China started stimulating or easing, say, last month with a small rate cut.

TS: That’s what I was going to ask you about. Tony, you and I have talked about CMY for years now, right. In the past. And so I wonder what your thoughts were with China beginning to simulate how important is that to how important is that that they tackle the appreciating CNY? There are a number of issues.

TN: I think the appreciating CNY is an issue. I think the stimulus is an issue for a number of reasons. So the CNY is important. What they’ve done over the last two years is appreciated the CNY to accumulate commodities as commodity prices rose. They appreciated the CN so they could accumulate copper, so they could accumulate crude oil and food and other things. There was a lot of worry about food security through Cobain in China. And so they accumulated that stuff and they have a lot in storage.

So with all the political events happening this year with the party Congress in November and other things, it’s really important for them to start to stimulate and also to make things easier on exporters. And that’s why it’s important to devalue the currency. It’s a controlled currency. So it is, in fact, a devaluation that they’ll do.

So they have to do value to get those exporters on sites and to start accumulating, say, more dollars than other currencies. And so with that devaluing and the easing will also come fiscal spending as we’ve talked about in Q two and into Q three before that party meeting. So it’s a really important time for China to make their currency cheaper and to get money out into the channel. And the money transmission mechanism in China is a lot more direct than it is in the US. It’s a lot more direct.

So the PPOC says get money out and the banks get money out. It just happens the old school the way it used to in the US. Does that make sense to you all?

TS: Yeah, absolutely.

NG: Nobody does.

TN: Okay. Anything else on China and the impacts of, say, China easing while the ECB and Fed are tightening? Any concerns there.

TS: Does that mean that we see a rotation somewhat into Chinese equities?

TN: I think that’s possible, right. Although there is some currency risk there. I think the growth, the pent up demand and the growth there may be an opportunity. It really depends on Horizons and it’s something we have to watch. But I think it may be an opportunity for some sort of rotation to China. Again, not in the main, but at the edges of a portfolio.

NG: People have been waiting for that for a couple of months and it’s still not happening. So Tensor is now under investigation by the USDR. Evergreen has just been delisted from Hong Kong and I think there was another set of technology restrictions imposed by the CCP. So every time you think this could be the right time bank.

TN: But Chinese technology is for China and it’s not for the US. Necessarily. Most Chinese companies are really focused on the domestic and the regional market, not necessarily on the US.

NG: Understood. The Chinese tech has been a big expression of interest by the West Coast, and that’s where we got to watch.

TN: Okay. And Tracy, you tweeted about global mobility earlier this week, and so we’re showing that tweet now. So I’m curious, what’s your thought on mobility and the impact that will have on global oil demand?

TS: I think that we’re going to see I think as we’re seeing these countries that are slowly lifting demands, especially like Switzerland, that just lifted all their mandates, including if you’re flying to Switzerland, you don’t need a test anymore. You don’t need a backstash. I think that this will be a global trend. Right? It won’t be. Even as we head into summer, which is high season demand for the Northern Hemisphere. Demand is almost at depending on who you ask, it’s almost at 2019 levels, if not above. And so they’re looking at May to August demand increasing by 5 million barrels per day at over 103,000,000 barrels per day. I mean, that’s a lot of increase in demand. And we’re just not seeing supply come online anywhere.

So I definitely think although we’re kind of seeing some consolidation and if we see Russian, Ukraine pensions kind of pull back a little bit or dissipate, then we could see a bigger pull back into say, the mid 80s. But I think we’re still headed for over 100 into the summer just because of literally supply demand fundamentals.

TN: Interesting. Okay. So while we’re on energy, we have a viewer question from Twitter from Clifford Topham. He says following BlackRock’s about turn on fossil fuels in response to Texas potential threat of removing BlackRock from managing state pensions. Is this the start of a change in attitude by Wall Street? So is it the beginning of the end of ESG?

TS: Well, I think Wall Street is about greed. Right? We all watch the movie. That’s where the money is. So what I think is going to happen is we’ll still see these smaller banks and the smaller insurance companies, etc. That we have seen this week kind of pull back and not get involved in the OMG industry. I still think that we’re going to see these major investment firms and these major banks still hang on to that, if not increase their exposure.

TN: Okay. Sam, are you with your clients on the ESG side? Is there any movement there?

SR: There’s not a lot of movement there in terms of real money. Right. So you can have a bunch of small insurance companies. You can have small pension funds. You can even have a few small colleges. In the grand scheme of things, who cares? You’re still getting all the votes going in the wrong direction for oil and gas companies. You still have Exxon being told that it needs to vest of oil and gas, which is nuts because it’s literally an oil company.

Now, to be honest, we’re not seeing a significant reversal of ESG. We’re seeing maybe call it a billion 3 billion that type of potential money going into the space. And that’s if you look at their portfolios and say do a 2% overweight to the SMP 500 and go 7.5%, that simply isn’t that much money.

TN: Okay, very good. Let’s move on to Volatility. Nick, you talked about Volatility last week, and I wanted to dig into that a little bit. We’ve seen Volatility. We’ve seen the VIX approach 30 this week. And so I’m curious, based on your hypothesis last week, do you see that sustaining? Do you see the VIX increasing and like over a time frame?

NG: I think the Volatility broadens out to other markets. For example, we’ve had VIX can be between 32 and 34. It’s known that people come in and suppress the VIX. The Fed have been active in sellers. That’s well known, and they cover it when it gets to the end. And in fact, in the zero rate world, it’s been in the Fed’s top Randy to suppress Volatility.

And thus, hence you have the Ford guidance with this diminishing Ford guidance. And Mesa mentioned it this week as well, that as they start to hike rates potentially, do QT tighten up everything? The use of Ford guidance has been diminished to it would be a hindrance. The whole point of tightening is not to give the full scope of what’s coming. But the important thing is for all subsidiary markets, Volatility in the treasury market has exploded. I remember everything is priced off of the risk free asset.

TN: Right.

NG: So you’ve seen the move index fly higher. And the reason why that’s so important is bid offer spreads on the treasury market are actually widened. So that means there’s a liquidity issue. And if you remember back in 2020, you had the repo crisis, which was a liquidity issue. If that continues, then the bit of a spread and thus liquidity in credit markets, which should be beginning to suffer and CDX rates were spiking higher stay that will suffer, that will then feed through to equity markets. You will have less liquidity, hence higher Volatility.

So it’s a very risky path and it will be a very volatile path from now on.

TN: Okay. And so when you say from now on, you mean over the next, say, through the end of the year, or is this something that happens, as we say, approach QT in second quarter.

NG: This should carry on happening.

TN: Okay.

NG: I mentioned to you earlier I still don’t trust this Fed. I think it could end up being stop start the economy at the beginning. I think this is going to carry on for quite a while.

TN: Okay. You started to interject, but did you want to add something on that?

SR: Yeah. No, I was going to take the other side of that. Saying that the Fed communicating less is, in my opinion, a Vic suppressor at this point, because if you don’t have Bullard coming out and saying stupid things that nobody should have ever taken seriously. You don’t inject half of the volatility that you currently have in the market right now. You don’t have the possibility of an intermediating hike. You don’t have the 50 basis points. You don’t have the QT coming potentially in March.

So in a way, I think taking away the forward guidance and beginning to actually have some sort of a coherent path with an economy that hasn’t actually broken yet. 30 next time seller. I saw that all day. And if something happens in Ukraine, sell it again and you get I think that’s probably the best risk adjusted return this year is selling Vixen spikes.

TN: Interesting. Very good. Okay, guys, what are we looking for the week ahead? Tracy, what’s on your mind for the week ahead?

TS: Well, again, I think that oil markets are probably going to move sideways until we get some sort of resolution. As far as the Ukraine Russia deal, I think the equity markets are still skittish about that.

Again, I think we’ll see a lot of volatility there. I think precious metals will continue to do well sideways to up, perhaps. Right. Because that market is kind of crazy, but it does well on uncertainty. And I think that if you’re looking at based on industrial metals, that will continue to see those rise because we’re having political problems, say, for instance, with copper in Chile and Peru because of the new leftist government there.

TN: How much of global supply is Chile and Peru?

TS: 40%.

TN: 40%. Okay. So that’s a little bit. Yeah, exactly. Okay. Very good. Sam, did you have something?

SR: Oh, no, I just was English.

TN: Nick, what are you looking for next week?

NG: A continuation of what we’ve had this week. And I think at some point it’s going to be up and down on Ukraine. Who knows, right. I do think the rhetoric from the Fed will continue. I think what’s interesting to me is I take the most retail of retail ETS to see whether retailers sold anything on the way down. And that would be Ark haven’t sold anything. There is a whole lot of pain out there.

And I just think we’re volatile with the downside bias. Yes. You’re going to have a spike up on good news. We had that this morning and it all gave back. Yeah. It didn’t keep it. So I think there’s something more than just Ukraine behind everything. And I think this volatility and my point on I don’t disagree with Sam on the bigs, but I think what’s going on in the fixed income markets will come as a surprise and will flow through and just make trading difficult.

TN: Okay. Let me ask you also, we’ll take this from you and then we’ll move it to Sam as well. When we see the ten year rise above two again.

NG: If things calm down, it goes straight back above two. Yeah, absolutely.

TN: Okay. Sam, what do you think about rates about the ten year?

SR: So what I would say is it would completely flip on my comment that it’s all curve flatteners from last week and say, hey, it’s curve steepener now. Any good news on Ukraine? Anything? You saw it when a few tanks moved or supposedly moved get a big move in oil. You got a big move in the curve. You got the FOMC minutes, et cetera, et cetera. Everything from here in terms of a dissipation looks like Kurt Stephen to me with two stuck somewhere between 140 and 150.

TN: Okay.

SR: And twos heading north or in towns heading north. So really like the steeper now?

TN: Okay. So it sounds like you all are saying we’re kind of in a wait and see for most markets. Is that fair to say.

NG: Wait and watch? Wait and watch?

TN: Yes, wait and watch. Okay, great. No big decisions over the next week, is that what you’re saying?

NG: Keep your risk tight and small.

TS: I mean, everybody’s going to be watching Ukraine and Russia and everybody’s going to be watching the March meeting for the fed. Until then, I think you could see a lot of volatility in the markets, whether it be in equities us Treasuries or commodity markets.

TN: Very good, guys. I always appreciate this. Thanks so much for your time. Have a great weekend. Thanks.

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 14 Feb 2022

In this week’s episode, we look at the CPI numbers from last week, the inflation cycle, and will the Fed stop QE on their Monday meeting? What do you have to expect on the metals market in the longer term? Will the demonstrations around the world push the US to bring out fiscal stimulus again — and can they? What does this mean to the Democrats on November US Election? And lastly, what you should know to thrive and survive this coming week?

This is the sixth episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

For those who prefer to listen to this episode, here’s the podcast version for you.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3g8GVyOSmh2NYrcfHevj51?si=b923efb0567a4979

Follow The Week Ahead experts on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Sam: https://twitter.com/SamuelRines
Nick: https://twitter.com/nglinsman/
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon

Transcript

TN: Hi, everyone, and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. And we’re joined by Nick Glinsman, Albert Marko. And today we’re joined by Sam Rines for the first time. Tracy Shuchart could not make it this week. She’ll be back next week.

So before we get started, I’d like to ask you to subscribe to our YouTube channel. It obviously helps us with visibility and it gives you a reminder when a new episode is out. So if you don’t mind, please take care of that.

Now, a lot has happened this week. We saw CPI slightly higher than expected, which is what we talked about on the show last week. Consumer sentiment out on Friday, slightly lower than expected. And there were a few things that we said last week that will remind you of the ten-year cross, too. Nick pretty much nailed that. Crude went sideways. Tracy said that we would see a slight pull back in sideways move in crude. The S&P have a slight down bias, which is what we talked about. And the Dow had a slight upward bias, which is what we talked about. So good week all around. Thank you guys for being so on the spot for that.

Let’s start with CPI. And Sam, since you’re the new guy, it’s surprised high. So what really jumped out for you and what do you expect to see with CPI prints going forward?

SR: Basically, the entire print jumped out to me. I don’t think there was a single thing that was actually positive on the inflation front. There was no positive news that we could extrapolate from there. Whether you’re looking at the actual headline number, the core number, three month annualized accelerating, et cetera, it was a pure CPI hot. It was just hot. Cupcakes and cakes were the worst news in there. Both of those up. I think it was like 2.2%. 2.3% on a month over month basis. The only thing that was a little bit lower, that kind of offset, that was ice cream. So dessert got more expensive for most of us.

I think generally the way to look at CPI right now is we were supposed to have this really interesting hand off from goods to services. And what we really had was no hand off from goods and services begin to start running. You had people begin to go outside of their homes, but they’re also working at home. So you need more stuff. If you have an office and you work from home, you need two computers, you need two microphones, you need two cameras.

That’s really what we’re beginning to see is the confluence of the end of COVID restrictions, but not really the end of COVID all at the same time. That’s a big problem.

TN: So the durable good cycle is we’re late in that cycle, right. So it’s not as if we’re redoing our homes anymore. Most of that stuff is gone. It’s more consumption, right?

SR: Yeah, it is consumption to a certain degree. But also you haven’t really seen a slowdown in people buying homes. When people buy homes, when people build homes, they need to put stuff inside of them. They need couches.

TN: That’s fair.

SR: So I would say we’re probably not at the end-end of the durable good cycle, we might be in the fifth or 6th inning. Okay. But millennials still on homes, right? Millennials figured out that when you can’t go to a really cool restaurant in New York City, it’s not really worth living in 1000 square foot apartment or smaller with a kid. Right. They’ve decided that they really want to go make a household somewhere, buy a house.

So I think we’re more call it mid innings of durable good cycle. And on the services front, we’re just beginning to see the re emergence there. You’re just beginning to see housing costs, housing and rent, et cetera.

TN: Okay, so this inflation cycle is something that Nick and Albert have been talking about for over a year. You started talking about this in August of ’20 or something like that?

AM: Yeah, something like that. I mean, it was evident that the supply chain stresses is going to cause inflation. When the demand starts to tick up and there’s no inventory, of course, it was inevitable at that point.

TN: So when does it end? Obviously, this isn’t kind of the transitory inflation we’ve been told, and that’s been said many times. But do you see this continuing through, let’s say all things equal. There’s no rises from the Fed, nothing else. How long does this go before it works itself out? Nick?

NG: I’m sorry, Albert, do you want to?

AM: No. From my perspective, wage inflation is a problem. So until that gets sorted out, inflation is going to be sticky.

NG: Yeah. With Atlanta Fed wage price level, it was 5% I think it was, came out for the first time in 20 years. Actually, I’m going to be slightly contrarian. I think we’re at that peak. Whether we can go up, we can still go up a bit more, but I think there’s a peak. The trouble that people have got to get their minds around is if we’re peaking, it could take several months. Where do we come down to? And my suspicion is we come down to a level that’s still significantly above the 2% Fed targets.

The other thing that I think is really important, you’ve got the conventional wisdom. Feds behind the curve, Feds behind the curve. And now all these forecasts from the street have sort of come like this. Goldman have now joined Bank of America on seven.

The key thing to understand in a zero rates environment, they introduced forward guidance, and that was their technique to try to suppress volatility in the market. Well, now that things have shifted around so rapidly and we’re moving to a rate hiking cycle, they’re actually not going to be suppressing volatility. By definition, they can’t you hear this in Europe as well? Data dependency. We’re dependent on the data. Well, they’re dependent on the data in Europe because their forecast is so terrible. Haven’t been much better in the US either. Right.

So you’re going to have much more volatility. So what we’ve seen in the last couple of weeks, which if you traded, if you ran money through 2008, it’s sort of nothing. But what we’ve seen in the last couple of weeks, get used to it. And I suspect going back to what we mention last week and I even put it on a tweet. Newton’s law of gravity is going to start to impose itself on those stocks without the high dividends, those stocks that don’t have the earnings, those stocks that are over owned.

I know we’ve got witching out next week or OpEx not clear whether the market is long or short delta. Just not clear to me because actually a couple of days ago, Goldman came out with a chart that showed that short interest on the S&P is really low. So if that’s the case, and I maintain that we’ve got a lot of trap longs still there, this volatility is going to get worse.

I mean, you’re getting volatility in the treasury market. And remember, the treasury market, by definition, is zero rates, low rates environment, is long convexity. So the price moves to a couple of basis points are way bigger than they were back in the days when you had a decent coupon, back in those good old days where retirees would earn some money on their bank deposits.

TN: Yeah.

NG: So they’re not suppressing volatility anymore. Volatility cannot be suppressed, even if they sell VIX. We’re talking about broad systemic volatility. Is it a risk? Could be. But that’s gone. Those days have gone. Forward guidance. They’re not even going to forward guide. Powell’s last press conference. I’m going to be humble. I can’t give you whether it’s a 50 or a 25. He never said anything. No. When he was asked aggressive questions. So it’s sort of interesting.

TN: That is very interesting. I think not worried about volatility is a very interesting point, even if they just dial it down a little bit. It’s a very interesting point to me.

So let’s move in that direction, Nick. There was a lot of Fed speculation this week, obviously more intensive than even last week. Inter-meeting hike, 50 basis point hike, 25 basis point hike, all this other stuff. So what are you thinking about that and QT? I also want to get kind of your and Albert’s view and Sam, of course, on this thing going around on Thursday about an emergency meeting on Monday. So let’s talk about all of that stuff with Fed and central banks.

NG: I just don’t think this Fed has it in them to do something shocking. So the first order of business, if they were to do anything intermeeting, is stop QE. That’s absolutely absurd that that’s still going on. Right. So you stop the QE.

Remember, this is a Fed that’s built on… Most of these members are built on the gradualist approach of the Fed. They’ve been suppressing volatility. They don’t want to shock anybody. So I think there is a valid discussion to have between 25 basis points and 50. It’s a discussion they need to have and they need time to think about it.

Interesting Bollard came out as hawkish, given he used to be a Dove and we’d forecasted actually everything he said. We got a little experience of deja vu, but I’m suspicious of this intermeeting situation. The only thing I can think of really would be stopping QE. That’s where their first… If you watch the Main Street media, that was their first part of call with the “experts”, and they’re still doing QE, which is why they’re still doing QE. I think they need a proper… Right now, given it’s a new hike, first hike in the whole process, they need to have a proper meeting.

TN: So you think there’s a greater than zero possibility that they’ll stop QE on Monday? I’m not saying you’re saying it will, but you’re saying it’s greater than zero.

NG: That would make sense to me, but it would be a bit dramatic given all the huff and puff that’s been in the since last night about this secret meeting, which is also right. I would be surprised if they do an intermeeting.

I’m still trying to figure out whether they’re biased towards 25 and 50. Remember, the market is giving them 50, but when is the last time the Fed taken what the market is giving it?

TN: Albert, what do you think about Monday, the speculation about the meeting on Monday?

AM: Well, yeah, everyone’s talking about this meeting that popped up all of a sudden, and some people are starting to dismiss it’s procedural and whatnot. But realistically, they got together over the weekend to discuss what’s really happening. The last time they did something like that was pre-COVID in 2020.

Right now, the Fed and actually the Biden administration together are looking at problems with the Russian invasion of Ukraine looming, trucker rally, actually in the United States and France and Australia that are looming. I mean, any more supply chain shocks is systemic problems of the economy. And I think they have to address it one way or another.

Whether it’s a 50 basis point hike in Monday or March or something, you’re going to have to do something against inflation.

TN: So you think it’s possible that they can take some action on Monday? You don’t think this is just a procedural meeting?

AM: I don’t think it’s a procedural meeting whatsoever. I think something’s wrong with the system and they’re working to address it.

TN: So if you had to say they’re going to stop QE or they’re going to announce a rise, which is more likely on Monday.

AM: I think they’re going to announce a rise. Well, to think about it, they’ll probably stop QE before they actually do a rate hike. I think the rate hike will definitely come in March.

NG: That’s the sequence.

TN: Okay.

SR: And just to add something there, I think it’s really important to remember that effective Fed funds right now is eight basis points, right? Eight to nine basis points. It bounces around a little bit but we hike in ranges now, right? So we’re going to hike from zero to 25 to 25 to 50 or 50 to 75 and they don’t have to put it at the midpoint right? So going to ranges, so to speak, is not the only way to look hawkish.

If you raise one range of 25 to 50 and set it at 40, 45 towards the top end of the range, you can do one “rate hike”, but be pretty hawkish within that range, you can show your intention pretty quickly there which would match pretty closely to what the market expectations are when you kind of extrapolate down to actual basis points what the market is giving the Fed. So I think it’s really important to pay attention to not just where the range ends up, but where they decide Fed funds goes within that range.

TN: It could be incremental. They could be a Chinese central banks type of like 37 basis points or it’s 38 basis points or something?

SR: Exactly. Exactly. And I think that’s going to be the kind of “the shock” and all that they can use. They can have call it a very hawkish one hike. They don’t need to do two hikes to be overly hawkish.

TN: So what do you think, Sam, on Monday? Do you think it’s a procedural or do you think it’s possible that there could be some sort of policy change?

SR: I think it’s procedural.

TN: Okay. Interesting. It would be interesting to come back in a week and see what’s happened with that. I like the differences there. Sorry. What’s that?

NG: You get the coin out and heads at something.

TN: Right? Exactly.

NG: One thing it can be, it can be a hike without stopping the QE.

SR: Yes.

TN: Right. Okay. That’s a good point. So speaking of inflation, before we get onto the truckers and other stuff, Nick, you guys put out a piece last week about the metals market. And I’m really curious. It looks like there’s a view that there’s longer term rises in metals, industrial metals especially. Can you give us a little bit of color on that and help us what to expect in metal markets?

NG: Sure. It was a longer term view. It’s not really a short term trading view. The view is, I have the thesis that some of the greatest trades attached to some of the biggest traders in time have arisen because of policy mistake. Whether the policy is benefiting or whether the policy was just maligned. And right now we’re in this net zero push, which is the new neurosis and there’s no transition plan.

So the first thing, if we were to look to commodities right now, where is it? The most obvious place that it’s hit? European energy. Right. The German is getting rid of nuclear. It’s just a complete nano mess. But it’s actually in the metals market where over the next couple of years it’s going to be really keenly felt.

There’s been a lack of capex like energy. There’s been a lack of capex in metals. They learned what lessons? We don’t know. Lessons from 2011 when prices were very elevated. And with that lack of capex and they’re paying high dividends, they’re rewarding shareholders, means the supply cannot be flexible enough, elastic enough on the upside to meet all this huge demand.

So we put the blocks together. China. China, give or take, is still there as a big user and consumer of the metal. Now you add on the rest of the world, plus China, additional China on net zero products. EV cars, right. All the wind farms, solar panels. All this stuff needs metal. Some of it needs fossil fuels as well.

And I got triggered a couple of weeks ago. There was a report in France that said in the next two years, the available supply of copper, not new finds, or not new mines. The available supply right now would have been used up. Yes or no. But the point is that’s the direction. Nickel, even more so. And then you think about nickel and the geopolitics of Russia having a huge nickel company. What we’re about to go through, potentially with sanctions?

All this geopolitics grinds against the need for these metals in terms of net zero. So basically you’ve got those two forces against each other which squeezes everything up in terms of price. And from the point of view, we have no transition plan. So if there was none of that, we needed a transition plan anyway.

So our view, you can go through the metals. Aluminium has been making new multi year highs this week.

TN: Right.

NG: Aluminum being the cheaper copper.

TN: Okay. Yeah. And I think as a medium, longer term plan, as a strategic placement, I think that’s very interesting.

Let’s move on to other components of uncertainties with what seems to me is a resurgence of populism with these trucker strikes and other kind of demonstrations.

Obviously, the Canadian trucker strike has stolen the headlines this week, but there are things happening across Europe, and they have been for a year. Australia has been happening for six months, something like that. Demonstrations. You see sporadic demonstrations in the US with talk about truckers striking at the Super Bowl or something like that. So what do you guys think about that? Is that a real risk, and is that a risk that will flow into markets?

AM: I think it absolutely is a risk. If you’re talking about adding more stress to the supply chain, of course it’s going to be a systemic risk. I won’t even put it past some foreign actors propelling it through social media campaigns to stress the United States, France and Australia.

TN: Okay.

AM: I certainly would if I was Russia or China. I would definitely do that.

TN: Okay. So what does that do if there is this kind of wave of populism that is pushing back against kind of COVID restrictions? Do you think that puts more stress on, say, the US government to get fiscal spending out there to kind of placate people?

AM: There’s no way we’re getting fiscal. The reasons that the Fed has been doing all the shenanigans behind the scenes is because there’s no fiscal that’s happening.

TN: Okay.

AM: Rumors are that they’re even buying oil futures.

TN: Okay. So it makes things complicated, right? I mean, if you can’t send fiscal out to the people, then it makes kind of populism even more complicated.

AM: Of course.

TN: And more acute. Right. So what does that say for November in the US? Does that mean that it’s going to be tougher than we had thought on Democrats?

AM: Oh, absolutely. I mean, they sent out a memo to all the Democratic governors with all the warning flags. If you don’t lift off these COVID restrictions, we’re going to get massacred in November. So all of a sudden you saw this week like a dozen Democratic governors lift all the mask mandates.

TN: Okay. But do you agree if they had room for fiscal, it would solve some of these populist issues?

AM: That’s a tough question, Tony. I mean, possibly, but then the talk of new stimulus checks comes out and then the inflation probably gets worse. What are we doing?

TN: It’s a complex problem, which is why I’m asking the question.

NG: Didn’t Germans should make it pretty clear though, this week? They said I’ve been… Last year with the last fiscal. I said inflation. Inflation, inflation.

TN: Yes.

NG: Clear as you can be. But he’s a swing vote in the Senate. He just said we’re not getting inflation.

TN: Inflation tramps fiscal is what you’re all saying, is inflation tramps fiscal regardless of what happens with populist.

AM: Sorry, Sam. Let’s make a quick real quickly. Inflation is a nuclear football for politicians.

TN: Well, especially at 7.6%. Right. So fuel inflation of 40% year on year. I mean, this is crazy.

Okay, let’s move into what we expect for next week. What are you guys looking for next week?

SR: The flattening on the 210s curve will continue until the Fed breaks something and has to go the other way.

TN: Okay.

SR: I think that to me is the easy trade out there right now. It’s 210 flatten and done.

NG: Put a health warning on that.

SR: Yeah.

NG: If the Fed wimp out, I even think 25 basis points and non hawkish statement. If they whimp out, that long end is going to get hit because the idea of a flattening curve.

Remember, the sequencing is wrong here. That curve flattens after they’ve well into hiking cycles because of the potential for a recession. 13 out of the last 14 hiking cycles have led to a recession. That’s why I curved bear flat. Okay. It’s already doing it.

But the point is it’s because they think it will be enough. If the Fed given the narrative now, don’t go ahead with this. And I’m still anxious about the Fed, even though Powell warned back when the QE three was being launched, you’re going to create a whole lot of problems. Ironically, he got all the problems.

I’m just still nervous about this Fed because.

TN: I think everybody is Nick. I think that’s why we’re seeing the volatility because no one’s getting a clear signal. And we saw some Fed governors out on Friday saying that 50 basis points is too much and putting 25 basis points into question.

So I’m not sure if there’s a consensus.

NG: Actually, there’s a great trade to be had. Great trade in some of the markets. You buy a struggle, you buy volatility effectively. Make it, usually pay up for premium, but you make it completely not dependent on direction.

TN: Is what you’re saying for the next several weeks.

NG: Because they’re not going to suppress volatility anymore. It’s reversed. So everything they do now is by definition going to be creating more volatility. We’ve been zero rates, forward guidance. Let’s just cruise.

And the balance sheet is pushing stocks up. The other thing you need to watch, by the way, is the level of reserves.

TN: Right.

NG: Because I actually think if back in 19 there was that Reserve issue with the repo. I think that slightly could be problematic if something like that happens again.

TN: Okay, great. Good to know. So let’s go one by one. And what do you guys see say in equity markets next week? Is your bias for equity markets? Do you have a downside bias in equity markets? Sorry, Albert, go ahead.

AM: So I was just going to say next week, I think it’s going to be all about the Federal Reserve’s narrative building. It’s going to be a choppy session in equities all week. They’re preparing you, they’re sending out boulerd with ridiculous 100 point basis comments, and they’re just preparing you for a 50 basepoint rate hike.

TN: Right.

AM: So that’s what I think is going to happen. So we’ll just be choppy on next week.

TN: Okay. Sam?

SR: I like SPX more than I like the Dow, and I like the queues less than I like the Dow.

TN: Amid the volatility, you believe in tech?

SR: No. Okay. I don’t like any of them. Okay. And I prefer the S&P to the Dow. And I prefer the Dow to the queues.

TN: Okay.

SR: Yes, exactly. And I don’t like any of them. But if you had a gun to my head and made me buy something, it would be SPX and shorting queues against it.

TN: So there’s a slight downside bias in markets next week, equity markets? Okay, Nick, same?

NG: Yes. I think, as I said, I like what I wrote. News is law of gravity. As these rates come up, it starts to put gravity on the equity market and gravity will bring it down.

TN: Okay.

NG: One provisor, though. If we get some, along the path that we’re going, we get some serious shake outs. I do think what could be interesting is some of these commodity related starts, because actually commodities do quite well during a hiking cycle. Okay. That again, fits with our thesis anyway.

AM: Of course, gold has been on a tear for the last four trading days.

NG: Confusing everybody, right?

AM: Yeah, of course.

TN: Sam, do you agree with that commodity during the hiking cycle?

SR: I think oil is great during a hiking cycle. If you look back over hiking cycles, oil tends to do pretty well. I actually like the long oil short gold trade.

TN: Okay. So you bring us into a good point. Oil was my last stopping point. So, Albert, Nick, do you guys sit in the same place with oil? You think in the short term, say next week oil is looking good, or you think it continues to trade sideways?

AM: I think it goes up. I know. Rumors are Fed buying oil futures. I think it’s going to go up to 110. Not next week, but over the next week.

TN: Even with the inflationary pressure? Even with, which is unbelievable for me to say that. Even with the dollar rising. It’s unbelievable for me to say this.

NG: Albert just made a great point. These commodities are all at new levels and really the dollar hasn’t collapsed yet.

TN: Okay?

NG: Can you imagine what would happen if the dollar sells off some of these commodities?

TN: Yeah, we’re going to have to wrap it up there. So thanks very much, guys. This has been great and have a great week ahead.

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 31 Jan 2022

The Week Ahead - 31 Jan 2022

We’re dissecting Jerome Powell’s latest announcement — what does that mean to markets this coming week? Will we see Powell’s inner Volcker this year? What are we expecting to happen in the energy markets considering the geopolitical risks in Russia and Ukraine? Has the White House and Treasury told the Fed to fight inflation as its top priority?

This is the fourth episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1CgJgSFPcqQ5VMuopN9S2h?si=212cd6f83928481a
For those who prefer to listen to this episode, here’s the podcast version for you.

Follow The Week Ahead experts on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl
Nick: https://twitter.com/nglinsman/
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon

Show Notes

TN: Hi, everyone, and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. And I’m joined by Nick Glinsman, Albert Marko, and Tracy Shuchart. Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to subscribe to our YouTube channel. It helps us with visibility, helps you get reminded of our new episode. So please do that.

While you’re thinking about it, this week was all about the Fed. Of course, we expected Monday and Tuesday to be choppy. We told you that on our last Week Ahead, which they were. We talked about it last week. We talked about the said meeting last week. And as Wednesday got closer, it appeared that Powell would be more bearish. And that seems to be exactly what we got.

So today we’d love to focus on a few things. Nick, let’s start with you. What were your main takeaways from the Fed?

NG: Okay, I’ve got three takeaways, most of which came after the Fed. Okay. The statement was sort of bland, almost appalling in terms of, it felt like it was leaving the risk markets to determine the Fed’s policy. And then, boy, Powell come out hawkish. He refused to give any direct answers but never denied any of the points and the questions such as how many rates, how many it takes?

So what was interesting is today, we had the first Fed Speaker, Neil Kashkari, the Uberdam for the FOMC.

TN: That’s right.

NG: And he basically came out and said whatever it takes, we’ve got to get inflation. I mean, shocking. Now where Powell got confirmed in his hawkishness came today with the ECI data. The base figure was slightly less than expected. But lift the bedsheets up and you are seeing major wage pressures.

If you look at some of the increases in wages and salaries, four and a half percent for all civilian workers, 5% for private sector workers, up from 4.2 and 4.6% respectively. If you go deeper, hospitality, health care, you’re looking at 7% and 8% increases.

TN: Nurses in many cases are making as much as doctors now in a number of cases.

NG: Exactly. So that basically confirmed Powell’s words of a rapid pace of wage grip. Okay. And I think that was a very key piece of data, which in fact, a Bongi like me would have been waiting for. Right now.

TN: We don’t see them bonds today, did we?

NG: What’s that?

TN: We didn’t see the action in bonds today, did we?

NG: They were down initially and then after the day, they rallied a bit. But I think that was more to do with reversing a very successful week of your well positioned. And what’s interesting, though, this came after that hawkish press conference. So typically what you have is the yoke of mutually reinforces the relationship with the Fed’s monetary policy. So simplistically, when an economy is strong and in danger of overheating, you are going to see the yield curve steeper. Long end, higher rates relative to the short end.

Now that then reflects that the rates have to rise, that’s the historical perspective. What was interesting this time was the curve was bare flat, and it was headed towards an inversion, the consensus. That’s a really bad signal of an approaching recession.

What it’s basically suggesting at that point, historically, the bond market tends to suggest Fed’s tighten too much. We’re going to get a recession. It needs to stop. Reassess, perhaps even cut. So what’s startling about this whole move is you got yield curve flat, bear flattening, coming so soon before the Fed has even started raising rates.

TN: Right.

NG: So if you have a Swift move to inversion, it’s going to be slightly, somewhat harder for the Fed to carry out its hiking program over time. That tells me that you’re going to have it front loaded. It also suggests to me, which is what you got from Powell’s press conference, it may not be 25 basis points each hike. It may be 350s. Right. Especially with this inflation.

He was all about inflation risks to the upside and a very strong labor market.

TN: 350 basis point hikes. I just want to make sure we make sure that we know what you said.

NG: Yes. Basically the Yoker is suggesting that. But some of his comments were this is a labor market that’s rocketing. This is inflation that still has risk. The upside. We saw a bit of that today. He also said supply chains are not going to get resolved this year. We’re going to have to wait till next year.

TN: Okay. Let’s stop there, because I want to ask you something, and this may be an overly simplistic way of asking the question and Albert and Tracy jump in here.

But it seems to me that kind of what he’s saying indirectly is, hey, there are supply side inflation, okay. And we as the Fed can’t control the supply side, we can only control the demand side to some extent. And so what we’re going to do is we’re going to put a stopper on demand so that demand can come down to match up with the available supply. And that’s how we’re going to we don’t have the tools to put the kibosh on the supply side inflation. So we’re going to bring the demand down.

First of all, does that seem to be what he’s saying?

NG: I think that’s probably what he’s trying to say. I would add one other point. So we were all thinking that after the big rise in crude oil and energy prices last year, we would get some beneficial payback by the comparison, but we’re not oil still going up, so we’re not getting that.

And the most extreme version is, for example, Europe. These have all got to feed through from wholesale to retail.

AM: Yeah.

NG: I think it was 95% of surveyed American CEOs. I can’t remember the sort of survey, but I can dig it out. Are expecting to raise prices.

AM: Yeah. The problem with them trying to limit demand, though, is it’s going to start affecting jobs. Labor market’s certainly going to weaken if demand starts to fall off. Because wage inflation is going nowhere. I’ll tell you that right now. Wage inflation is here to stay politically is absolutely just not going to ever come back down. So that’s going to be sticky for quite a while.

NG: But I think Powell was implying that where he basically said the labor market is super strong. So I don’t disagree with it will dampen it. The question is whether it turns around.

Remember, we’re getting all these people retiring and dropping out. Yes, that was your data, Albert.

TS: He kept reiterating the labor market is super strong. But the labor market really, if you look under the hood of it, it’s not really super strong. We all know that.

TN: That’s true.

NG: Yeah. Agreed. But it’s perceptions. Remember, these guys are basing their work off their forecasts. One of their forecasts have ever been right. Okay. Even worse in Europe. So the point I’m making is they have their parameters. They have the data that they look at and monitor and whether we agree with that data or not. And I mean, I would always disagree with the way the Fed measures, the BLS measures CPI, but it was impacted by Arthur Burns of the Fed in 1970s. Right.

So the point to be made is they have their data sets that they watch, and according to those data sets, they may be wrong. I don’t disagree.

TN: So just yes or no, because you’re implying some things that two weeks ago we talked about or last week we talked about, yes or no. Will we see J. Powell’s innver Volcker this year?

NG: Yes.

TN: We will?

NG: In the short term.

TN: Albert, what do you think? Yes or no? Will we see J. Powell’s inner Volcker?

NG: Mini Volcker.

AM: Mini Volcker, I agree with. One and done Volcker, a one week Volcker, yes, I agree with.

NG: If he does the one and done, the bond market will riot. If you look at the Fed meeting. But look at the statement. That statement said, basically risk assets will determine the level of Fed funds, right?

AM: Yeah.

NG: Bond market’s sold off. Hold on. The bond market’s sold off, aggressively. Sold off all across the curve and particularly the long end. It didn’t start to flatten in a bare manner until that press conference.

TN: Sorry, guys, let me stop you both just for a second. Tracy, will J. Powell show his inner mini Volcker this year?

TS: I said this last week. I’m in the one and done camp, maybe two, but I’m cutting it out there. I know Bank of America came out today and said seven. They said the “seven” yes, today, which I think I don’t know what they’re smoking exactly. But I’ll go with max two on this one, even though I said one and done. I’ll stretch that out.

Maybe one more, but that’s where I stand on that one.

TN: Okay. So while we’re with you, Tracy, can you give us a quick view on what did markets get right and wrong this week from your perspective? What do you think is a little bit out of whack?

TS: Well, I mean, I think energy markets obviously remain elevated because of the Russia-Ukraine risk, right? Because Russia’s 10 million barrels per day, they produce a lot of gas. That’s here with us to say we have a northeastern so that kept a bid under at least the energy markets, right. I think last week we were talking about continued volatility all around in, say, the indices and obviously that trend is continued and probably likely will continue into next week.

Again, looking ahead to next week, I expect that probably we’ll still keep a bid under oil, but we did go kind of sideways this week. Even though we got new highs, I still think we’ll stay in that $82 to $87 range, probably for the next week or so, and then probably get a little bit. If nothing happens with Russian and Ukraine, we’ll get a little bit of pullback there. But still looking at the overall fundamentals of the market, they remain very strong. So I don’t think we’ll see any kind of material.

TN: Okay. This is on the commodity side. On the commodity side. Okay. What about the equity side?

TS: Well, it’s. Far as equities indices are concerned, I think that we’re again going to see continued volatility. What I think is very interesting. As long as the market is pricing in rate hikes, that’s going to put pressure on growth versus value. Right.

And so I think that trend will continue. I think we’re in for a rough note. Until that March meeting, until we actually hear an actual decision, we could be setting up for another volatile month in February.

TN: Okay. That’s fun. Right. Okay. So let’s take that and let’s swing over to geopolitics for a minute. And Albert, I want to ask you a couple of things about geopolitics. Tracy mentioned Kazakhstan, which we’ll get to in a minute. But has the White House told the Fed and treasury that inflation is a top priority? Is that what you’re hearing out of DC? Are they getting political pressure to make inflation their top priority?

AM: Oh, absolutely. Inflation is a nuclear bomb for politicians. I mean, gas prices rising, food prices rising. The job market is they can say it’s strong, but it’s not. I mean, realistically talking about 15%, 20% unemployment, so it’s not strong. So, yeah, inflation is absolutely priority number one for the next couple of months.

TN: Right. Okay. And then as we move into a little bit more on geopolitics, so we got a viewer question from at 77, Psycho Economics. He says, has Russia’s stabilization of Kazakhstan increased their influence over energy exports to Europe?

So give us a little bit of kind of overview of what you see happening in Kazakhstan. And then if you and Tracy can help us understand what’s happening with the energy exports to Europe, that would be really helpful.

AM: Yeah. Kazakhstan has been stuck between Russia and China for a couple of years now. But realistically, that’s Russia’s backyard. They control the area. Ever since the United States was booted out of Uzbekistan, they’ve lost a lot of sway in the region. So the energy sector from Kazakhstan all the way to Turkey and into the Mediterranean is pretty well dominated by the Russians right now.

TS: And I would agree with that. I would also like to mention just as an energy producer, I mean, Kazakhstan doesn’t produce all that much.

So if you’re looking at the commodity side, I would say Ukraine would have more of a dent because of how much they’re involved in the cereals markets. How much do they export in the cereals markets, how much they export in the uranium market. So that’s definitely more commodities heavy area that I would be concerned about then Kazakhstan, just from the energy standpoint.

AM: Yeah. And when you’re looking at Russia and talking about energy, it’s not necessarily you don’t single out just Russia’s energy production. They go out and they meddle everywhere they possibly can, whether it be Libya, Kazakhstan, Turkey, everywhere they can to sit there and depress those energy exports so they can pump out there. So that’s what I mean by Russian dominance in the sectors. Sure.

NG: Will Russia attack the Ukraine?

AM: You’re looking at maybe 1020 thousand conscripts that Russia probably hasn’t paid in a while to go and loot the countryside of Ukraine where it’s already Russian dominated speakers.

Biden comes out and talks about sacking Kiev as if it’s Hannibal on the gates of Rome. This is just absurdity. Russia has no military, nor does he want to go into Kiev and hold it. What’s the point of bombing the thing? Of course, they can go in and destroy Kia if they wanted to overnight, but that serves absolutely zero purpose. So are they going to invade? Yeah. I mean, I would give it a 60 70% chance, but would it be something some big kind of issue at. No, the market is looking at this issue as World War II. And it’s just nothing more than a little bit of a skirmish that’s kind of kinetic.

TN: But they’ve already invaded the economy. They’ve already invaded any investors who want to go into Ukraine, that nobody’s going to touch Ukraine for at least the next year. Right.

AM: Well, Tony, listen, I’ve been to that region, worked there for years in Georgia and Ukraine. I mean, Ukraine has corruption issues, of course, aside from the Russian problem. Right. They’ve got legal framework problems and corruption problems that it makes investing there quite difficult.

TN: Right. Okay, so you’re saying no, not going to happen. You’re saying maybe some looting in Eastern Ukraine.

AM: But they’ll reinvent the same areas that they did in 2014. They’ll make Biden and the west look inept, and that’s their goal. That’s it.

TN: Great. Okay. Sounds fun. As we look ahead, what milestones are you looking for? The week ahead, Nick, what are you expecting to see next week in markets?

NG: I’m fascinated to see the next bunch of Fed speakers come out. If we had the Uber Dove, very hawkish. That’s as hawkish as he’s ever spoken, Kashkari. I’m fascinated to see what the others are going to say.

What I can’t get a handle on is whether this is a genuine bear market inversion or flattening going on the bomb market. I still maintain the point that you’ve got to look at the market and watch what’s going on. Okay.

So I’ll be interested to see whether that continues. If it doesn’t continue, that tells me that it was actually a bit half partly people reversing bad positions on the Euro curve because really traditionally we should be having your curve deepening.

And then next week, well, we’ve got unemployment coming out on the Friday, so that’s going to be pretty fascinating. And then we’ll have the following week, all that inflation data starting to come through, and we won’t have the favorable comparisons from a year ago.

The banks have all jumped on like Tracy said, bank of America seven hikes. Goldman is four to five hikes. They are jumping on this. This did surprise the banking community, with maybe the exception of Goldman, who came out beforehand and said this is what I was thinking. So it’s a pull and push between what we’ve just been discussing. How many heights have we got a minivolk building up here in the Fed? If he’s got the support of the White House and treasury, then maybe we have. Right. I think he had to have that before he came out with that sort of speech.

So the question I mean, I looked at today’s equity market. To me that started off as a okay, let’s cover the shorts because we’ve had a good week and there’s no liquidity. So the market just carried on popping up be interesting to see what happens on Monday. And remember, we have holiday, new lunar year, holiday in the Far East. So the forest is shut, as it were, even less liquid.

TN: Right. So, Tracy, you’ve said for a long time that Yellen is a strong dollar Treasury Secretary. And so what Nick is saying about the Fed and the treasury and the White House being in sync, it seems to make sense if they’re tightening that that is certainly something that Yellen might want.

TS: Obviously, you’re going to see a strong dollar. The Feds raising rates, they’re taking liquidity out of the dollar market. Right. So in that environment, we are going to see a rising dollar. What we should be looking at, though, is emerging markets. Right that nobody’s really talking about. How does this affect emerging markets? Emerging market debt that’s denominated in USC as a dollar gets higher, that puts pressure on emerging markets, even though a lot of banks came out and said emerging markets should do better this year than DM markets, but in my opinion, not in an environment where we see a rising US dollar. So that’s something to look forward to.

TN: In the biggest emerging market. We saw the Euro really taken to the shorts this week. Right. So the Euro is really problematic and it’s probably the newest of the emerging markets, in my view. So they’ve got real problems. But yeah, I think watching emerging market currencies is something that we really need to do over the next probably month to see how dramatic will the shift that we saw this week, will that remain? Will that get even more dire? I think it will. Yeah.

And Albert, what are you watching for the next week?

AM: I have to reiterate what Tracy just said. Literally, it’s the US dollar in the first half of the week and then this bonds the second half of the week.

I think if the US dollar gets over 98, it’s a real problem for emerging markets.

TN: Yeah.

AM: Especially the Europeans. You’re talking about the Euro. But the Europeans like the Euro suppressed right here because it’s boosting the manufacturing sector. So it’s like it’s a give and take with them. But yes, the dollar gets over 98. Start looking at problems.

TN: Well, and my big question is when will the CNT break? When will they finally say uncle and I’ve been saying for a while it’ll happen after lunar new year. They just can’t keep this up. And with an appreciated dollar, it becomes even harder for them to keep that CNY at six point 35 or whatever it is right now.

NG: Did we see a few little twitches of weakness today and yesterday?

TN: We did, yes.

AM: Just remember, Tony, October is a big meeting for the party in China and they are going to stimulate that economy sometime this year. It’s just a matter of when it starts and when you’re talking about the currency. Yeah. That’s going to be a problem that we have to tackle pretty quickly.

TN: Well, it’s monetary policy. Q one, Q two and it’s a lot of spending in Q two. Q three, right?

AM: Absolutely.

TN: They’re going to play with the currency in Q one. Q two and play with the triple R and all this other stuff in Q one, Q two. And then spending is going to rip starting in June.

AM: Oh, yeah. Full disclosure. I’m building big position in China names as we go here.

TS: And commodities will benefit from that as well. They start spending right. And you’re going to see commodities rip as well, which also hurts the inflation picture.

NG: I was going to say that will be a negative for the bond market.

TN: Okay, guys. On that note, thank you very much. It’s been great and have a great weekend. Thank you.

TS: Thank you.

NG: Thank you, Bernie.

TN: Okay. Good one, guy.

NG: That was my feet.

TS: That was good. I liked.