Recession or Soft Landing?

Smartkarma

Contributor:
Smartkarma
Visit: Smartkarma

By The Macro Compass

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  • The soft landing crew is increasingly taking over.
  • No, the bond market’s base case is not a recession – it’s immaculate disinflation.
  • Yes, getting this call right is crucial for your portfolio performance in 2023.

DETAIL

The soft landing crew is increasingly taking over. No, the bond market’s base case is not a recession – it’s immaculate disinflation. Yes, getting this call right is crucial for your portfolio performance in 2023.

In this article, we will:

  • Look at different corners of the bond and equity markets to assess what are the market-implied probabilities of a recession or a soft landing;
  • Debate how to approach macro investing in such a binary environment.

The Bond Market – Immaculate Disinflation

‘‘The bond market is pricing 200 bps of cuts = the bond market says recession – 100% !’’

No, not really.
The bond market’s base case is immaculate disinflation, and let me show you why.

Most of the confusion stems from an overly simplistic approach.
In the average recession over the last 30 years, the Fed cut by 350 bps over an 18 months period.
The bond market is pricing 200 bps worth of cuts between Jun-2023 and Dec-2024, so that must mean the bond market’s base case (60%) is a recession.

Historically the Fed cut 350 bps within 18 months of the start of a recession

This simplistic analysis is misleading because it ignores:
– The ultimate landing point for Fed Funds and real yields
– The credit market
– The tails

Let’s start with a clear chart.

Fed Funds are priced to peak at ~5% in summer, and then 200 bps of cuts are expected.
Yet, Fed Funds are never (!) priced to be below reasonable estimates of neutral rate (2.25-2.75% in nominal terms) throughout the next 2-5 years.

A recession with Fed Funds never below neutral

This would be the first time ever the US is in a recession and the Fed doesn’t cut rates below neutral – it doesn’t make sense, right?

Indeed, because the bond market’s base case is not a recession: it’s immaculate disinflation.

This is also evident in the expected path for real yields, which compares expectations for Fed Funds (see above) against inflation expectations.

In any recessionary or growth slowdown episode of the last 15 years, real Fed Funds 2-year ahead were priced to be between -100 and -200 bps.
That’s the bond market asking the Fed to be very accommodative given poor growth.
This time, market-implied US real yields in 2025 are priced to be…positive?!

Real yields not consistent with a recession

Again, that doesn’t square with the ‘‘bond market is pricing in a recession’’ mantra.

Inflation slowing down to 2.5% quickly, and the Fed cutting rates to neutral (and never below) is not recessionary pricing.

It’s immaculate disinflation pricing.

The credit market wholeheartedly agrees: a recession is not the base case.
US high-yield credit spreads are trading barely above 400 bps, below the 20-year average and far away from median recessionary episodes (1000 bps).

Additionally, the default cycle is priced in to be very mild and downside protection in the broad credit market is not as expensive as it would be if a recession was base case.

High-yield credit spreads more consistent with soft landing

Finally, the tails.
Insurance is very expensive when the house is already on fire.

So, what tail risks are markets trying to insure against by December 2024?
A recession with Fed cutting rates below neutral (say, to 1.5% – orange line) or higher-for-longer (say, Fed Funds above 4% – blue line)?

Using a 2-year horizon and option-implied probabilities, insurance on the Fed keeping rates higher-for-longer is more expensive than insurance on Fed cutting rates in a magnitude consistent with a recession.

Insurance on higher-for-longer is more expensive than on recession

The bond market’s base case is immaculate disinflation, not a recession.

A relaxed credit market, inflation rapidly declining to 2% and the Fed cutting rates back to neutral, forward real rates still expected in positive territory and the lack of aggressive insurance bid for recessionary cuts all point in that direction.

Recession: 20-25% probability
Immaculate disinflation: 45-50% probability
Growth regime/higher-for-longer: 30% probability

The Equity Market – Soft Landing

The equity market’s base case has rapidly shifted towards soft landing.

There are three main angles to cover:
– Earnings expectations
– The internals of the stock markets
– The tails

First, the more recessionary vibes.

Analysts are realizing their 2023 EPS estimates might have been too optimistic.
The pace and breadth of negative revisions is in line with other recessionary episodes.
Also, highly cyclical sectors like semiconductors are experiencing EPS slashes in the 30% area which are almost consistent with a recession.

Progression of bottom-up consensus S&P 500 EPS estimates

Yet, 2023 EPS consensus at $225 implies roughly a 4% earnings growth this year.
In recessionary episodes, the average EPS decline is instead -30%.

In a recession, earnings decline for 5 quarters on average by 30%

The Chinese reopening is obviously playing a role in boosting cyclical growth expectations around the world.

Countries with tight Chinese trade relationships like Germany or Australia have outperformed in a risk-adjusted way.
Within sectors, US semiconductors and high-beta have been the market’s darling while defensive sectors like staples and utilities are lagging.

Soft landing vibes getting stronger, helped by the Chinese reopening.

The Volatility-adjusted market dashboard shows cyclicals are strongly outperforming

What about tails?

If markets were truly worried about an earnings recession and a stubbornly higher-for-longer Fed, you’d expect some bid for deep out-of-the-money put options.

But given the absence of jump risks in 2022, the strong ‘‘Fed put’’ muscle memory and expectations for earnings to be weak but not in recessionary territory downside protection in the S&P 500 is at the cheapest levels in 2 years.

The implied volatility in 20% out-of-the-money SPX puts with a 3-month expiry are trading in the lowest 15th percentile on a 2-year history (chart below) and in the lowest 40th percentile on a 5-year history.

SPX 20% OTM volatility, 3-month put

The stock market’s base case is that a broad recession will be avoided as the growth downturn is bottoming (also thanks to China) and that we are past peak Fed tightness.

Downside earnings revisions are happening, but EPS is expected to still grow which is not consistent with a recession.
A cyclical growth boost is getting increasingly priced in, and cyclical sectors and countries are outperforming defensive.
Finally, the option market shows investors have little to no appetite for buying heavy downside protection.

Recession: 15-20% probability
Soft Landing: 60-70% probability
Growth regime: 15-20% probability

Conclusions

Neither the bond nor the equity markets are pricing a recession as a very high probability scenario.

Instead, the base case is an immaculate disinflationary episode leading to a period of below-trend growth.

How do investors navigate this rather binary macro outlook, with a gravitational pull force (nominal growth slowdown) opposed by a cyclical push force (Chinese reopening boosting growth expectations)?

The three best practices are:

  • Rely on a data-driven macro process, and don’t get stuck in a narrative if data is not validating it;
  • Use episodes of extreme market conviction in the prevalence of the pull or push dynamic to take advantage of macro opportunities;
  • Look for allocations towards investments that have a positive expected value in both outcomes, or for exposure to idiosyncratic asset classes whose return profile is not solely dependent on calling this binary macro outcome right.

Originally Posted January 22, 2023 – Recession or Soft Landing?

Disclosure: Smartkarma

Smartkarma posts and insights are provided for informational purposes only and shall not be construed as or relied upon in any circumstances as professional, targeted financial or investment advice or be considered to form part of any offer for sale, subscription, solicitation or invitation to buy or subscribe for any securities or financial products. Views expressed in third-party articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or opinion of Smartkarma.

Disclosure: Interactive Brokers

Information posted on IBKR Traders’ Insight that is provided by third-parties and not by Interactive Brokers does NOT constitute a recommendation by Interactive Brokers that you should contract for the services of that third party. Third-party participants who contribute to IBKR Traders’ Insight are independent of Interactive Brokers and Interactive Brokers does not make any representations or warranties concerning the services offered, their past or future performance, or the accuracy of the information provided by the third party. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

This material is from Smartkarma and is being posted with permission from Smartkarma. The views expressed in this material are solely those of the author and/or Smartkarma and IBKR is not endorsing or recommending any investment or trading discussed in the material. This material is not and should not be construed as an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any security. To the extent that this material discusses general market activity, industry or sector trends or other broad based economic or political conditions, it should not be construed as research or investment advice. To the extent that it includes references to specific securities, commodities, currencies, or other instruments, those references do not constitute a recommendation to buy, sell or hold such security. This material does not and is not intended to take into account the particular financial conditions, investment objectives or requirements of individual customers. Before acting on this material, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and, as necessary, seek professional advice.

In accordance with EU regulation: The statements in this document shall not be considered as an objective or independent explanation of the matters. Please note that this document (a) has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research, and (b) is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination or publication of investment research.

Any trading symbols displayed are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to portray recommendations.