The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it’s the illusion of knowledge (Stephen Hawking)

It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so (Mark Twain)

Invest with smart knowledge and objective odds

THE DAILY EDGE: 3 MAY 2019

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION—APRIL 2019

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 263,000 in April, compared with an average monthly gain of 213,000 over the prior 12 months. The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised up from +33,000 to +56,000, and the change for March was revised down from +196,000 to +189,000. With these revisions, employment gains in February and March combined were 16,000 more than previously reported. After revisions, job gains have averaged 169,000 per month over the last 3 months.

image

In April, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 6 cents to $27.77. Over the year, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.2 percent. Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 7 cents to $23.31 in April [+3.4% YoY]

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls decreased by 0.1 hour to 34.4 hours in April. In manufacturing, both the workweek and overtime were unchanged (40.7 hours and 3.4 hours, respectively). The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls held at 33.7 hours.

The unemployment rate declined by 0.2 percentage point to 3.6 percent in April, the lowest rate since December 1969.

China tempers US hints that Beijing and Washington are preparing for the ‘last round’ of trade talks

Messages from the United States camp that next week’s talks in Washington with China could be the last round in efforts to end the year-long trade war have been tempered by Beijing’s negotiators, who have suggested the tactic to “generate pressure” should not be taken “seriously”.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said on Thursday that US President Donald Trump and Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping will decide after the negotiations between delegates next week whether to meet to finish the trade deal, hinting that this will be the last round of talks before a possible summit between the two leaders. (…)

But after US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Monday before the US delegation headed to Beijing for the 10th round of talks this week that the US side is expecting to “either recommend to the president we have a deal or make a recommendation that we don’t” following next week’s talks, reaction from the Chinese side did not echo the seemingly fixed deadline for a conclusion.

Taoran Notes, a social media account used by Beijing to release trade talk information and to manage domestic expectations, said the hints from the US side that next week’s 11th round of talks are a deadline is merely a trick “to increase tensions and generate pressure on the other side”.

“It’s the same tactic as the US threatening to raise tariffs, it is merely smoke and mirrors to exert extreme pressure [on China],” the post said. “You don’t have to take it seriously.”

It warned that there is still a possibility that the two sides will end up in “an unhappy departure” if one side wants the other to make compromises and neglects “fairness in negotiation”. (…)

Global manufacturing growth remains lacklustre as international trade flows contract again

The performance of the global manufacturing sector remained lacklustre in April. Rates of expansion in output, new orders and employment were only marginal, and well below their long-run trends, while new export business fell further.

The J.P.Morgan Global Manufacturing PMI™ – a composite index produced by J.P.Morgan and IHS Markit in association with ISM and IFPSM – posted 50.3 in April, down from 50.5 in March, to register its lowest reading since June 2016. A later-than-usual release date meant Japan Manufacturing PMI data were not available to include in the April 2019 global readings.

The weakness in the global manufacturing sector was most evident in the intermediate and investment goods sectors, both of which saw production and new orders contract during April. The consumer goods industry fared better, with growth of both output and new business accelerating during the latest survey month. Consumer goods was also the only category to see new export work increase, albeit only moderately. (…)

image

New export business declined for the eighth successive month. Decreases were seen in China, the euro area, Brazil, the UK, Taiwan, South Korea, Turkey, the Philippines, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Poland and the Czech Republic. (…)

The outlook for the sector was relatively subdued in April. Business optimism dipped slightly and remained among the weakest signalled since data on sentiment were first compiled in July 2012 (fourth-lowest overall). Price inflationary pressures continued to ease, with rates of increase in input costs and output charges both at 31-month lows. All three of the sub-industries covered by the survey saw rises in input costs and selling prices, with rates of increase registered for both measures sharpest at consumer goods producers.

Fed Is Shifting the Goal Posts, and Investors Should Care The way the inflation target is implemented could change, with big implications for markets

(…) Goldman Sachs thinks the emphasis on symmetry in the inflation target is already influencing long-dated bonds, as investors anticipate modestly higher inflation over the long run. JPMorgan strategists think the market is already anticipating a “regime shift” to target average inflation, multiplying the impact of the Fed’s dovish turn in January.

If there is a change by the Fed, the effects could be significant in pushing up the prospects for long-run inflation and so bond yields, with knock-on effects across markets. It could also begin a shift by central banks around the world away from the simple inflation targets that have come to dominate policy over the past three decades and open the door to more radical changes, including an acceptance of higher inflation. (…)

Aiming for average inflation would help in a recession because, assuming investors believed the Fed, they would expect rates to stay lower for longer, as the Fed wouldn’t need to clamp down on inflation so quickly in the eventual recovery. That should hold down long-run bond yields and so keep monetary policy easier than it otherwise would be, aiding the economy. (…)

Broadly speaking, the Fed’s rates would be lower at the peak of a boom than under the current policy, which could make financial markets even more prone to bubbles. (…)

If monetary policy proves impotent in the next recession, central-bank-financed spending may well enter the political mainstream. Confused smile

Negative Yields Deepen Along With Europe’s Problems The amount of negative-yielding government bonds outstanding through 2049 has risen by 20% this year to about $10 trillion

(…) Corporate bonds issued by SanofiSA maturing in 2022 and LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE maturing in 2021 also traded at negative yields, according to data from FactSet. (…)

In March, the ECB slashed its forecast for real gross domestic product growth this year to 1.1%, from 1.7% just three months earlier, and its forecast for consumer-price inflation to 1.2%, from 1.6%. (…)

In Germany, where growth has stalled, officials plan on running a budget surplus rather than stimulating growth by running a budget deficit. This is a problem because such fiscal restraint by Europe’s largest economy could choke off growth in the rest of the region. By contrast, in Italy, where the heavy debt burden is already seen as a problem, officials have proposed borrowing more to kick-start persistently slow growth. (…)

Euro-Area Inflation Accelerates After String of Upbeat Data

Consumer prices rose 1.7 percent in April from a year earlier — the strongest number since November. The narrower inflation gauge that strips out volatile components such as energy and food came in at 1.2 percent, a six-month high, surging from 0.8 percent in March. (…)

The pickup in price growth may have been partly driven by temporary factors that are likely to unwind in May. Germany data earlier this week showed inflation accelerated at the fastest pace in five months in April on the back of surging cost of package holidays — a side effect of Easter holiday that came later than last year. (…)

imageimage

FYI: Real per capita disposable income in the Euro area (19 countries) was +1.2% in 2018 down from +1.6% in 2017. Real per capita expenditures: +0.8% in 2018 (0.0% in second half) from +1.4% in 2017.

Markit also doubts the “string of upbeat data” will continue:

While the official (Eurostat) data appear to be on course to register growth of manufacturing output in the first quarter, the PMI suggests this bounce largely reflects pay-back from a steeper downturn than signalled by the PMI in the fourth quarter: the official data saw output fall 1.0% in the three months to December while the PMI signalled a 0.6% rise.

Such disparities between the PMI and official data are invariably the result of large changes in production in specific sectors (in this case, primarily autos), which are not fully captured by the PMI methodology, but which tend to reverse out in future months. The advantage of the PMI is that the survey provides an accurate guide to the broader underlying growth trend, looking through the noise of the volatile official data.

As such, any recovery signalled by the official data in the first quarter looks set to be only temporary, giving way to renewed weakness in the second quarter.

EARNINGS WATCH

We have 363 companies in with combined earnings up 1.8%: the beat rate is 75%, the surprise factor +6.2% and the blended earnings growth +0.7%.

Trailing EPS are now $163.55.

image

TECHNICALS WATCH

From CMG Wealth:

  • 13/34–Week EMA Trend Chart:

  • Volume Demand vs. Volume Supply:

These Ned Davis tables echo the analysis from Lowry’s Research on supply vs demand:

  

But remember that this game has snakes also:

spy

ndxe

image

InSight Captures Sunrise and Sunset on Mars

THE DAILY EDGE: 9 APRIL 2019

Currently traveling. Here’s a good piece from ING:

Germany: How bad is it?

The second half of 2018 saw the German economy grind to a sudden halt. While increasing global uncertainties, looming trade wars and one-off factors like the low water levels in many of Germany’s rivers also mattered, the automotive industry has probably been the most significant driver of the growth disappointment. From fast lane to slow or crawling lane within less than six months, how could this happen?

Let’s start with a reminder: the German economy is not only about cars, but cars do play an important role. Currently, some 2% of total employment is in the automotive industry. However, adding second and third round effects (just think of entire villages close to production plants), between 7% and 8% of the entire German economy is linked to the automotive industry. And there is more. Between 70% and 80% of automotives produced in Germany are exported making automotives one of the most important export goods. Also, one-third of all investments in Research and Development in Germany stem from the automotive industry.

Vehicle production in the EU (000 units in 2017) and auto employment (2016)
unnamed (11)

Source: ACEA, European Automobile Manufacturers Association

The slowdown in the German automotive industry started in the summer of last year with announcements of city bans for cars with older diesel engines. Some five million cars could become subject to these bans. As a result, demand for diesel cars dropped and precautionary savings of German households increased. More than half a year later, however, there are first rulings that these bans will not be implemented. A complete U-turn looks possible.

Also, the introduction of a new emissions standard (WLTP, worldwide harmonised light vehicles test procedure) and delays in complying with these new standards led to severe disruptions in German automotive production and delivery. Also, the trade war between the US and China and the subsequent slowdown of the Chinese economy have left their marks. However, these marks are still very small and nothing compared with often-heard doomsday scenarios.

In 2018, total car sales in China dropped by some 4% YoY – the first decrease in twenty years. German car manufacturers, however, saw their sales increase by 2%. A slowdown, but not a contraction. In 2018, almost one quarter of all cars sold in China were German. More than one third of all cars sold by VW, BMW and Daimler went to China. VW sold almost 40% of its cars in China.

Contrary to the last crisis in 2008/09, the German automotive industry is currently not suffering from significant excess capacities. Nevertheless, the (German) automotive industry is facing an entire list of challenges. Some are external, like Brexit, the trade wars or a cooling of the Chinese economy; others are sector-specific, like electric mobility, CO2 emission reductions, autonomous driving or car sharing; and some are intertwined. The current trade US-China trade war has already affected German car producers in several ways as BMW is, for example, the single largest US car exporter.

The most imminent threat for the German automotive industry seems to be any Chinese slowdown – given the abovementioned importance of the Chinese markets for German car manufacturers. Here, the fact that fiscal stimulus should lead to an overall rebound of the economy as well as the fact that there is still ample room for growth in the Chinese market (currently some 14 cars per 100 inhabitants, while in Germany it is 56), both bode well for a gradual rebound.

As regards the two other external risks, Brexit and trade wars, the downside risks are far greater than any upside. Aside from short-term disruptions of supply chains for some German car manufacturers, a hard Brexit could lead to a drop of around 30% of German car sales in the UK (according to Deloitte).

The biggest elephant in the room is possible US tariffs on European cars. In theory, President Trump is due by mid-May to follow up on the Commerce Department’s as yet unpublished findings as to whether US auto and auto-part imports are proving a national security threat.

For reference, the three largest German car manufacturers import more than half the vehicles they sell in the US from other countries (Daimler about 50%, BMW around 70% and VW more than 80%). Not all imports come from the EU, they also come from Mexico. German car exports to the US account for between 3% and 12% of the three companies’ annual sales. BMW and Daimler export around 50% of the cars produced in the US to countries outside the US.

Effect of US unilateral import tariffs on GDP (import tariffs of 25% on cars, % of price-adjusted GDP)
unnamed (12)

Source: IFO Institut, May 2018

The introduction of tariffs on European cars is therefore a very complex and complicated issue. Next to the pure sentiment effect, the actual impact of a 25% import tariff on cars would, according to the Ifo index, lead to a reduction of German GDP by 0.16%. Given the inter-linkages of German automotives and automotive suppliers, the short-term impact could be even higher. In our view, the US administration will try to leverage the threat of tariffs on European cars for as long and as much as possible. This could be done without even imposing these tariffs.

All other structural challenges the (German) automotive industry is currently facing are longer term with unclear implications currently. The only thing that is clear is that the sector will undergo further changes and shake-ups. At the current juncture, this means that cost pressures will probably mount, investment needs will increase and restructurings will occur. How far and when this will play out at the macro level is impossible to tell.

Nonetheless, we believe the German automotive industry could leave the crawling lane in the coming months as some of last year’s braking factors should disappear. A quick return to the fast lane, however, looks unlikely and unexpected collisions cannot be excluded.

Passenger car production plants across Europe
unnamed (13)

Source: ACEA, European Automobile Manufacturers Association

From Fitch Ratings:

China VAT Cuts May Ignite Price War, Divergence in Auto Market

China’s VAT cuts and ensuing manufacturer suggested retail prices’ (MSRPs) reductions could result in a price war and an increasingly diverging performance of auto manufacturers, Fitch Ratings says. Luxury brands and the best performers in the mass market are better positioned to gain market share, while the already thin margins of weaker brands are likely to be squeezed.

Consumers could anticipate that more brands will cut MSRPs and adopt a wait-and-see approach, clouding the already gloomy outlook for 1H19 auto sales, exacerbating the impact of macroeconomic slowdown, weak consumer sentiment and policy uncertainties. However, we still expect more clarity on stimulus policies to support a market recovery in 2H19 and overall passenger vehicle unit sales to be flat, or grow slightly, in 2019.

The Chinese government lowered VAT rates to 13% from 16% for automobile domestic manufacturers and importers, among other industrial manufacturers, effective from 1 April. Most luxury brands have cut MSRPs by 2.5%-3% in the past few weeks, including BMW, Mercedes-Benz, JLR, Volvo, Lincoln and Audi, passing VAT savings on to dealers and buyers. (…)

Most of the first movers to pass on VAT savings are among the best performers in China’s slowing auto market that enjoyed robust margins over recent years, part of which they can sacrifice to gain more customers. Retail market share of luxury brands expanded to 12.7% in 2018 from 10.6% in 2017. During the same period, the shares of German and Japanese brands in wholesale deliveries grew to 21.4% and 18.8% from 19.6% and 17.0%, respectively. High-profile MSRP cuts following the VAT cut will help these outperformers to attract more customers and continue gaining market share. Furthermore, entry-level premium cars could divert some customers from high-end models of mass-market JV brands that hesitate to cut prices.

In contrast, follow-up price cuts may not meaningfully improve the market positions of weaker JV brands, such as those from France, Korea and some from the US, but squeeze their already thin or even negative margins as deeper price cuts may be required to retain market share. We also expect the downward pricing pressure to spread to Chinese proprietary brands, some of which have moved upward in the product price curve and compete head-to-head with the lower-end JV brands.

Car dealers of the luxury brands and leading mass-market brands are likely to benefit most from the recent price cuts, with improvements in both vehicle sales and margins. While reports of MSRP cuts may attract more show-room traffic, actual retail price changes may not be that significant as dealers will have some flexibility to retain the tax savings by narrowing dealer discounts. Average dealer discounts were elevated at 18.3% at end-2018, according to China Passenger Car Association, compared with 13%-14% in 2016-2017.