William De Vijlder

The publication by the ECB of different economic scenarios illustrates the extent of uncertainty which at present surrounds the forecasts for key macroeconomic variables. As a consequence, companies may hold off investing, preferring to wait for better visibility. While understandable at the micro level, such a wait-and-see attitude could act as a drag on growth and reinforce the view of companies that their caution was warranted.The large increase in the dispersion of earnings forecasts points to huge uncertainty at the individual company level. However this has not stopped the US equity market from rallying. Although several factors help to explain these different reactions to uncertainty, such dissension cannot last forever. At some point company cautiousness or investor bullishness will have to give in.

Fed Chair Powell’s comment about what would happen in case of a prolonged recession has weighed heavily on equity markets. Historically, recessions are accompanied by major equity market drawdowns. The year-to-date decline is more limited, which stands in stark contrast with the plunge of activity. Massive monetary and fiscal policy support has led to a reassessment of the distribution of risks, which goes a long way in explaining the rebound of equity markets. The focus is now shifting to the outlook for corporate earnings, hence the importance of the debate on the shape of the recovery.

In theory, and all other things being equal, an increase in uncertainty results in a fall in the price of risky assets and an increase in the price of safe haven assets. In a way, this can be considered as the “price of uncertainty”. The reality is rather more complex. Greater uncertainty also affects growth prospects, which in their turn influence asset valuations.

Economic sciences teach us that financial markets fear uncertainty as it introduces volatility in prices of financial assets. Based on the reaction of markets since the beginning of the year, one could conclude that economic textbooks need to be rewritten. In spite of a high level of commercial and geopolitical uncertainty, markets have recently set new records.

There is a considerable gap between what are considered to be the geopolitical ramifications of the escalating tensions between the US and Iran since the start of the year and the subdued reaction of markets. The market reaction probably reflects the investors’ view that the probability-weighted impact on growth should be very limited because the risk of a major escalation is considered to be small and/or because of an expectation that the impact of higher oil prices on the economy is limited. What also may play a role in the market reaction thus far is that, leaving the geopolitical uncertainty aside, the economic environment is considered to be conducive to taking risk: stabilisation of survey data, reduction in trade-related uncertainty and accommodative monetary policy.

The ECB’s monetary policy meeting account illustrates the dilemma it is facing: inflation is subdued and risks to growth are tilted to the downside, yet the financial stability implications of the very accommodative policy need to be closely monitored. These implications are covered in sobering detail in the ECB’s Financial Stability Review. A possible side effect of very low to negative interest rates is that borrowing and spending become more procyclical. Quantitative easing (QE), by modifying the risk structure of investment portfolios (less government bonds and more exposure to assets with a higher risk), will probably increase the sensitivity of portfolio returns to the business cycle.

In recent weeks, equity markets performed well. Focussing on the US, it is hard to argue that this reflects an improvement in the earnings outlook or a perspective of more rate cuts than hitherto expected. This would imply that a decline in the required risk premium was the key driver. US treasury yields also increased significantly, which probably reflects to a large degree an increase in the term premium. The decline in the equity risk premium and the increase in the bond term premium were driven by a common factor, namely a reduction in economic tail risk on the back of progress in the trade negotiations between the US and China and a stabilisation of certain survey data.
The reduced likelihood of very negative economic developments, which has boosted equity markets, has also reduced the attraction of bonds as a hedge against equity risk. As a consequence, bond yields have moved up in sync with equity markets.

Asset prices can play a useful role when assessing the economic outlook. The big drop in treasury yields during August has raised concern although a nowcast points to satisfactory third quarter growth in the US. This would mean that increased uncertainty about the trade dispute has caused a flight to safe havens and a decline in long term interest rates. Swings in the communication about the trade dispute cause swings in investor uncertainty and hence in risk premiums. This reduces the signal quality of asset prices, which may end up weighing on the real economy.

Based on historical experience, the recent increase in equity volatility may end up weighing on future growth.

US long-term rates rose sharply in early October, which brings to mind the sudden rise in early February. Upside surprises in terms of wages and inflation triggered February’s upturn, while the catalyst in early October was a strong rise in non-manufacturing ISM, an indicator that is usually not monitored very closely. That this indicator should have such a big impact already shows how nervous the markets are.

In Wall Street stock market fell sharply again, pursuing a bearish trend initiated several weeks earlier. For an economic understanding of these trends, it is worth comparing equity market behaviour with that of the other asset classes, an exercise that is all the more difficult given that the correlation between asset classes tends to increase as pressures rise.

Equity markets continue to be particularly volatile. Understandably this has weighed on government bond yields. The volatility of high yield bonds remains low however. This could indicate that recent equity market swings are driven by other factors than worries about the outlook for GDP growth or monetary policy.

The eruption of US equity market volatility, with global spillover effects, is a delayed reaction to a rather significant increase in bond yields since the second part of August. Market-implied inflation expectations didn’t move that much so the rise in long term rates reflects an increase in real yields which in turn is related to strong growth numbers. Historically the relationship between weekly changes in yields and stock market performance is weak. This implies that one should focus on drivers of investor risk appetite and in particular signs of slower growth.

Judging by the recent developments in financial markets, investors feel more upbeat. On the economic front (growth and the outlook for monetary policy) nothing has really changed. The euro has benefitted from the ‘risk-on’ environment despite a widening interest rate differential with the US.

In the September 2018 edition of EcoTV week, William de Vijlder and François Doux discuss on the protectionist threat which has been grabbing headlines but hasn’t stopped Wall Street from reaching new highs, supported by growth in earnings and the perception of a dovish Fed.

Speculative positioning in VIX futures shows investors expect volatility to remain low, which implies an absence of growth or inflation shocks. The flattening of the US yield curve shows investors expect slower growth. These conflicting views may reflect differences in investment horizon but in the end, only one of the two can get it right, which is a source of concern.

Central bank communication has gone through a fundamental transformation in the past three decades.

Recent data have brought relief that strong US growth remains intact but eventually this is likely to produce concern about inflation overshooting the Fed’s target.