US Futures Tumble After Cohen “Campaign Finance Violation” Headlines

Ironic that this should happen on the day the S&P hits a new record high and stocks reach the longest bull market in history.

While markets remained somewhat unimpressed when the first headlines hit intraday, once the details hit on what Cohen was pleading to, US equity futures plunged. Specifically:

  • *COHEN SAYS HE VIOLATED CAMPAIGN LAW AT DIRECTION OF CANDIDATE

  • *COHEN PAID $130,000, WAS LATER REPAID BY CANDIDATE, HE SAYS

  • *COHEN: VIOLATED CAMPAIGN LAW AT DIRECTION OF UNNAMED CANDIDATE

  • *U.S. SAYS AIM OF PAYMENT TO HIDE CANDIDATE’S ‘ALLEGED AFFAIRS’

The Dow is down 160 points from the initial headline highs…

 

 

 

 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2vZzKww Tyler Durden

Paul Manafort Convicted of 8 Bank and Tax Fraud Charges; Mistrial on 10 Other Charges

Paul ManafortPaul Manafort, the former chairman of President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and a veteran dweller of the D.C. “swamp” culture Trump allegedly detests, has been found guilty of eight out of 18 charges related to tax evasion and bank fraud. But the jury could not reach a conclusion on the remaining 10 and the judge has ordered a mistrial on those remaining charges.

In October 2017, Manafort became first person indicted by FBI Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller as part of a larger investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Manafort used more than 30 overseas bank accounts to manipulate more than $60 million in income, disguising it in order to keep from having to pay taxes.

Jurors reached agreement that Manafort was guilty of five charges of tax fraud, two counts of bank fraud, and one charge of failing to file a foreign bank account.

Though Manafort has ties to Ukraine and Russian interests, none of the charges against him have anything to do with allegations that Russian nationals attempted to influence the election with secret social media buys or by hacking into voting systems or the Democratic National Committee’s communications.

Instead, Manafort was accused of making millions off his ties to a Russia-friendly former Ukrianian president and of concealing his lobbying income from the United States government in order to evade taxes. Then, when the revenue stream dried up—the Ukrainian president was removed from office and fled to Russia—Manafort secured new bank loans by inflating his income and concealing his debts. He was later hit with new charges of obstruction (and had his bail revoked) for allegedly contacting and attempting to influence the testimony of two potential witnesses.

In this trial, he faced 18 counts of tax evasion and bank fraud. In a second trial, scheduled for September, he will face charges of money laundering, failing to register as a foreign agent, and lying to the Justice Department about his Ukraine lobbying.

On a basic level, this is a familiar story about corruption and influence-peddling, one that proves the old trope that the cover-up is worse than the crime. Media coverage of the trial has focused largely on Manafort’s extravagant spending habits—ostrich leather bomber jackets!—because it illustrates why he went to such great lengths to hide his income.

While there have been guilty pleas (George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn) of people in Trump’s orbit, Manafort is the first to be prosecuted and found guilty by Mueller’s team.

So what does the first actual conviction of somebody connected to Trump’s team means for Trump and Mueller’s broader investigation?

This is not about Trump. The behavior leading to Manafort’s indictment preceded his role in Trump’s campaign by several years. The FBI had previously interviewed and investigated Manafort, and Mueller essentially “inherited” this ongoing investigation when he took on the role of special counsel. After reporters revealed Manafort’s secret work and payments from Ukraine’s former president, Manafort left Trump’s campaign. Trump has insisted repeatedly that there was “no collusion” between him and Russia, and that Manafort’s crimes have nothing to do with the Trump campaign. This conviction does not undermine either claim.

While the timeline for Manafort’s illegal behavior does allegedly extend up to—and extend beyond—the time he worked for Trump, the crimes he’s been convicted of are not related to the presidential campaign. Thus, Manafort’s conviction on these charges is not an obvious precursor to impeachment, or of any other sort of charges against Trump. Though some will certainly try to make the case that it should be; Manafort was, after all, part of the meeting in Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner, at which Russians offered incriminating information on Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

This is about Trump. A paradox here: If you’re willing to set aside the issue of whether Manafort’s relationship to a Ukrainian president proves any sort of “collusion with the Russians,” it’s easier to be clear-headed about how Manafort implicates Trump.

Manafort is one of many, many folks with troubled backgrounds and histories of bad behavior who have worked with Trump and influenced his policy leanings. Trump’s campaign and administration hava featured a parade of incompetent and embarrassing figures, and a high turnover rate. While many on the left are willing to believe any sort of accusation against Trump and the people around him with only the slightest of evidence—or no evidence at all—this is not the case with Manafort.

Manafort was bad news. Those of us who care little about the highly politicized fight over “collusion,” or who take a dim view of the absurd idea that Russian social media buys made people vote for Trump, should still recognize that Manafort representats a much more dangerous problem: Trump’s terrible judgement. If we grant the president his innocence in any Russian meddling (and I actually do, based on current information), Manafort’s participation in Trump’s campaign will nevertheless taint the rest of his presidency. No amount of “Deep State” conspiracy complaints and screams of “Witch Hunt” can erase the reality that the former head of his campaign was financially beholden to a foreign power. Manafort’s conviction is not grounds for impeaching Trump, but Trump’s record of poor judgment in his personnel decisions might—and frankly should—cause some people to think twice about re-electing him.

Manafort is “The Swamp.” Trump campaigned on a promise to drain “the swamp,” meaning the culture of corruption, cronyism, and self-dealing that causes the federal government grow to ever larger for the fiscal benefit of a select few. Yet Manafort has always been a clear and obvious veteran swamp-dweller, using his connections to lobby for policies that benefit special interests and pocketing the money. During the trial, prosecutors say one bank chief executive officer kept approving loans to Manafort that they otherwise would have likely rejected because he was hoping for a role within the Trump administration.

Manafort could face decades in prison just for these charges, essentially the rest of his life.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2N79ret
via IFTTT

Prison Inmates in at Least 17 States Are Going on Strike Today

Prison inmates in at least 17 states plan to go on strike today. They will refuse to work or eat, in protest of the low wages and inhumane conditions that they say prevail through the U.S. prison system.

Details on how many prisoners are participating are extremely difficult to confirm, since prisons, by design, are not transparent institutions. But activists both inside and outside the institutions have been working to organize the strike for months.

“Fundamentally, it’s a human rights issue,” Jailhouse Lawyers Speak, an anonymous collective of incarcerated organizers, say in a statement. “Prisoners understand they are being treated as animals. Prisons in America are a warzone. Every day prisoners are harmed due to conditions of confinement. For some of us it’s as if we are already dead, so what do we have to lose?”

The strike was sparked by an April riot at Lee Correctional Institution in South Carolina that left seven inmates dead. Prison guards reportedly stood by and did nothing to stop the violence.

“Seven comrades lost their lives during a senseless uprising that could have been avoided had the prison not been so overcrowded from the greed wrought by mass incarceration, and a lack of respect for human life that is embedded in our nation’s penal ideology,” the organizers write in their list of 10 demands. “These men and women are demanding humane living conditions, access to rehabilitation, sentencing reform and the end of modern day slavery.”

The demands include “immediate improvements to the conditions of prisons and prison policies that recognize the humanity of imprisoned men and women,” as well as “an immediate end to prison slavery.” The 13th Amendment to the Constitution outlawed slavery except, notably, “as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” That provision led to “convict leasing” programs throughout the South after the Civil War, where convicts, the majority of them black, were subjected to brutal unpaid labor for the benefit of private companies.

The convict leasing system was eventually abolished, but the use of prison labor is commonplace today. For example, as Reason‘s Eric Boehm has reported, California inmates are currently volunteering to fight the biggest wildfires in state history, but they’re being paid only $2 an hour. In Alabama inmates are paid 25 to 75 cents an hour to make license plates and other items. In Arkansas, Georgia, and Texas, they make nothing at all for mandatory labor.

Other prison strike demands are fairly specific, such as the restoring felon voting rights and rescinding the Prison Litigation Reform Act, a bill passed in the 1990s that made it much more difficult for inmates to file federal civil rights lawsuits challenging their conditions and treatment.

“These are conditions that the American public has neglected—malignly—for years,” Nicholas Turner, president of the Vera Institute of Justice, says in an emailed statement. “Different from other elements of justice reform where people can see evidence that undermines the flawed assumptions that the system is working—videos of police brutality, imposition of bail in public courtrooms—most people are blind when it comes to prison conditions. What happens behind those grey walls is obscured from public view.”

Organizers chose to begin and end the strike on August 21 and Septembe 9, two significant dates in U.S. prison history. On August 21, 1971, San Quentin guards shot and killed the influential Black Panther activist George Jackson. Jackson had smuggled a gun into prison and freed other inmates, who murdered several guards and two other inmates, before attempting to escape. (Jackson’s supporters have never believed the official story of his death.)

On September 9 of the same year, inmates at New York’s Attica prison took over the facility and held 42 officers and civilians hostage. The inmates demanded better conditions and access to uncensored newspapers and political material, among other things, but they also wanted legal immunity for the takeover, which New York officials adamantly refused to promise.

The Attica rebellion ended four days later when New York State Troopers retook the prison by force, unleashing a hail of bullets that killed 39 people, including 10 hostages. Officials initially lied to the press and public, claiming inmates had slit hostages’ throats. The state of New York then went to extraordinary lengths—including intimidation and destruction of evidence—to cover up retaliation, torture, and outright murder during and following the retaking.

Today’s protest follows a similar large-scale strike in 2016, which reportedly involved 24,000 inmates in 29 different prisons. In 2013, about 30,000 California inmates went on hunger strike to protest the state’s draconian use of solitary confinement.

“The courageous people who are bringing focused attention to America’s system of mass incarceration through the Nationwide Prison Strike deserve our admiration,” Udi Ofer, director of the ACLU’s Campaign for Smart Justice, says in an emailed statement. “The ACLU supports the demands of the Nationwide Prison Strike, including the demand for a right to vote. Our country is stronger when people most marginalized and directly impacted by unjust policies raise their voices in protest and demand a different future.”

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2MFnuL9
via IFTTT

WTI Rebounds After Bigger Than Expected Crude Draw

WTI rallied up to tag $68 (Sep) stops intraday, as a U.S. plan to sell strategic oil reserves highlighted concerns about tightening global supplies, ahead of tonight’s API report. After fading into the print, WTI rebounded after API reported a bigger than expected crude draw.

 

API

  • Crude -5.17mm (-2mm exp)

  • Cushing +195k (+900k exp), Genscape +519k

  • Gasoline -930k (-500k exp)

  • Distillates +1.8mm (+1.5mm exp)

Last week’s surprise crude build (biggest since March 2017), API reported a big surprise crude draw of 5.17mm. Distillates built more than expected and gasoline drew down more than expected. All in all – a big mixed bag.

 

WTI also bounced perfectly off its 200DMA…

“You’re seeing somewhat of a relief rally here and part of it is technical in nature for crude,” with oil bouncing off the $65 level and 200-day moving average, said Rob Haworth, who helps oversee $151 billion at U.S. Bank Wealth Management in Seattle.

The contract is rolling and was trading right at the same level as before last week’s API at its peak today before fading into the API print, but rallied back above $66 (Oct contract) after the data hit…

“The strength is really primarily from the weak dollar and also you’re getting another week of expectations that you will see crude stocks drop,” said Gene McGillian, manager of market research at Tradition Energy. “The fundamental picture is tighter than it was a year ago.”

via RSS https://ift.tt/2wfXo7j Tyler Durden

Manafort Jury Reaches Verdict In Fraud Trial; Failed To Reach Consensus On 10 Of 18 Counts

Jurors in the trial of former Paul Manafort have reached a verdict on eight of the 18 counts against the former Trump aide. After a day of passing notes to the Judge, they said they were unable to reach a decision on the other 10. 

The jury asked Judge T.S. Ellis earlier in the day what would happen if they couldn’t reach a verdict on a count, and Ellis told them to keep working on it. 

Developing…

via RSS https://ift.tt/2Pt5en2 Tyler Durden

Germany Calls For Global Payment System Independent Of The US

In a stunning vote of “no confidence” in the US monopoly over global payment infrastructure, Germany’s foreign minister Heiko Maas called for the creation of a new payments system independent of the US that would allow Brussels to be independent in its financial operations from Washington and as a means of rescuing the nuclear deal between Iran and the west.

Writing in the German daily Handelsblatt, Maas said “Europe should not allow the US to act over our heads and at our expense. For that reason it’s essential that we strengthen European autonomy by establishing payment channels that are independent of the US, creating a European Monetary Fund and building up an independent Swift system,” he wrote, cited by the FT.

Maas said it was vital for Europe to stick with the Iran deal. “Every day the agreement continues to exist is better than the highly explosive crisis that otherwise threatens the Middle East,” he said, with the unspoken message was even clearer: Europe no longer wants to be a vassal state to US monopoly over global payments, and will now aggressively pursue its own “Swift” network that is not subservient to Washington’s every whim.

German foreign minister Heiko Maas

Swift, a Belgium-based global payment network, enables financial institutions worldwide to send and receive information about financial transactions. The system’s management claims Swift is politically neutral and independent, although it has previously been used to block transactions and enforce US sanctions against various countries, most notably Iran.  In 2012, the Danish newspaper Berlingske wrote that US authorities managed to seize money being transferred from a Danish businessman to a German bank for a batch of US-sanctioned Cuban cigars. The transaction was made in US dollars, which allowed Washington to block it.

According to Thorsten Benner, director of the Global Public Policy Institute, a Berlin-based think-tank, Maas’s intervention was the “strongest call yet for EU financial and monetary autonomy vis-à-vis US.”

The German foreign minister’s article highlights the depth of the dilemma facing European politicians as they struggle to keep the Iran deal alive while coping with the fallout of US sanctions imposed by Mr Trump against companies doing business with Tehran.

Maas also called for the creation of a “balanced partnership” with the US in which the Europeans filled the gaps left where the US withdrew from the world. Europe must, he said, “form a counterweight when the US crosses red lines”.

As the FT adds, the EU has vowed to protect European businesses from punitive measures adopted by Washington, but that has failed to convince EU companies, who are more concerned about maintaining their access to the lucrative US market than in the more modest opportunities presented by Iran.

Last month Washington rebuffed a high-level European plea to exempt crucial industries from sanctions. Mike Pompeo, US secretary of state, and Steven Mnuchin, Treasury secretary, formally rejected an appeal for carve-outs in finance, energy and healthcare made by ministers from Germany, France, the UK and the EU.

Swift is also affected: unless it wins an exemption from sanctions, it will be required by the US to cut off targeted Iranian banks from its network by early November or face possible countermeasures against both its board members and the financial institutions that employ them. These could include asset freezes and US travel bans for the individuals, and restrictions on banks’ ability to do business in the US.

Maas’s stark warning against US domination of global payments comes with relations between Germany and the US in their worst state for decades. Mr Trump has chastised Berlin over its large trade surplus, its relatively low military spending and its support for Nord Stream 2, a new gas pipeline that will bring Russian gas directly to Germany.

Meanwhile, Berlin has looked on in dismay as Mr Trump has withdrawn the US from the Iran deal and the Paris climate treaty, imposed import tariffs on EU steel and aluminium and appeared to question America’s commitment to Nato.

In short: Europe has finally had enough and it plans on hitting back at Trump where it truly hurts: the money.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2nYFL8m Tyler Durden

Stocks & Gold Jump As Real Routed, Dollar Dumped

Stocks are at record highs… so…

Since the headlines crossed proclaiming some low-level Chinese folk will visit DC to meet some low-level Trump administration folk – Gold and The Dow have soared together, dollar faded, and bonds modestly bid…

 

China stocks extended Monday’s “National Team’ gains but went flat after the lunch break…

UK’s FTSE faded a little on the day but European stocks extended recent gains too…

New record highs in US equities for Russell 2000, Dow Transports, S&P 500, and S&P Mid 400.

Futures pushed up overnight and stocks extending gains from the open and one could argue that stocks faded as the Cohen news hit (but it was modest at most)…

 

Everything ended higher in stock-land, but it was well off its highs after Cohen headlines…

 

The S&P tagged its record intraday high (2872.87) as VIX was pressed lower…

 

Just another day in the world of the short-squeeze…

 

Discount brokers (eTrade, Schwab, and TD Ameritrade) took it on the chin as JPMorgan unveiled their latest effort to grab retail AUM…

 

 

Bear in mind that bonds and stocks have completely decoupled in the last few days…

 

Treasury yields ticked up today modestly but remain lower on the week…

 

The Dollar continued to roll over notably… to two-week lows – extending losses post-Trump (overnight saw a jolt lower in the dollar as Japan opened)

 

Hurting the longs as Treasuries hurt the record shorts…

 

The Brazilian Real dominated the FX space – tumbling over 1% and tumbling below the critical 4.00 level for the first time since Feb 2016… BRL traded 4.03 handle by the close…

 

Offshore Yuan’s rebound continues to two-week highs

 

Cryptocurrencies dipped overnight around the same time the dollar dipped at the Japanese open…

 

Dollar weakness helped WTI today – despite the pre-telegraphed SPR release

 

WTI’s spike looked very technical – bagging stops above $68 before fading back…

 

Gold rallied for the 3rd day in a row (the biggest 3-day gain since March), tracking yuan higher…

 

Finally, there’s this… the yield curve is tracking disappointing macro data BUT stocks don’t care… yet!

via RSS https://ift.tt/2OV1v0b Tyler Durden

New Jersey Could Legalize Weed Next Month

New Jersey could become the 10th state to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, and it could do so before the end of next month.

State Senate President Steve Sweeney (D-Gloucester) tells Politico that there is enough support in the state legislature to pass legalization, even though the details are still being worked out and a bill has yet to emerge. Despite that lack of clarity, it seems like Sweeney, Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin (D-Middlesex), and Gov. Phil Murphy are generally in agreement that recreational legalization and an expansion of the state’s six-year old medical marijuana program should be top priorities for the fall.

“Don’t be surprised when people who say they were against it vote for it,” Sweeney says to Politico, seemingly an indication that he believes some Republicans will end up supporting the proposal too.

That won’t necessarily be needed, since Democrats hold a 10-seat majority in the state Senate and control more than two thirds of the state Assembly. But GOP support for the bill would be a further indication that prohibitionist policies are losing their grip. A recent Monmouth University poll found that a majority of the state’s voters back full legalization, and that 60 percent of them (and 50 percent of Republicans) believe legalization will boost the state’s economy.

The last stumbling block to legalization may be a question about how to tax marijuana sales. Murphy, who promised last year to legalize marijuana if elected governor, used his first budget address to call for a 25 excise tax (on top of the state’s 7 percent sales tax) on weed sales. The levy would generate an estimated $60 million annually. But Sweeney tells Politico that he’d favor a lower rate.

“If you tax it too high, you incentivize people to use the black market because you’ve raised the price too high,” he says.

Sweeney has point. High marijuana taxes in Washington state have inflated the price of pot and kept the black market alive. The combined sales and excise tax of 32 percent would make New Jersey’s marijuana taxes a bit higher than similar taxes in Colorado (which has a 15 percent excise tax and 15 percent sales tax), California (a 15 percent excise tax), Massachusetts (a 10.75 percent excise tax), and Oregon (a 17 percent excise tax), but lower than the 37 percent excise tax charged by Washington state. (Other states with legal recreational weed—including Alaska and Maine—apply taxes by weight at the wholesale level, making it difficult to compare to retail taxes.)

It’s worth noting, as Murphy often did on the campaign trail last year, that legalization will allow the state to save some serious cash no matter how much revenue the new taxes generate. New Jersey currently spends about $140 million annually prosecuting some 24,000 low-level marijuana arrests a year.

Regardless of how it shakes out, the debate over how to tax legal sales of marijuana is a welcome one, since it signals a full retreat by the forces of prohibition. It was left on the committee room floor during the heated budgetary debates of New Jersey’s spring legislative session, but now legalization may be just weeks away.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2whQsqt
via IFTTT

Oil Markets Are In For A Bumpy Ride

Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via Oilprice.com,

The always-volatile oil market is set for even more volatility over the next two years as investors and speculators try to make sense of the conflicting market forces determining the pace of demand growth and global oil supply.

Over the past month, the two key themes have been how much Iranian oil will come off the oil market from U.S. sanctions in November, and how much demand growth could suffer with the trade wars. More recently, another theme is the emerging markets turmoil following Turkey’s crisis. Throw in all the new and much stricter International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations on sulfur fuel oil requirements from 2020 that are expected to upend the refining and shipping markets, and oil prices are set for wild swings, industry executives and analysts say.

The severe IMO restrictions on fuel oil’s sulfur content – aimed at reducing emissions – will drive increased demand for middle distillates such as diesel and marine gasoil, which in turn will push up demand for crude oil, Morgan Stanley analysts say. This would boost crude oil demand by additional 1.5 million bpd, potentially sending oil prices to $90 a barrel in 2020, according to Morgan Stanley.

But before the 2020 regulation, analysts and investors are closely watching two currently unfolding developments – the sanctions on Iran’s oil and possibly weakening global oil demand growth – the main bullish and bearish factors, respectively, in the market right now.

With new sanctions coming into play and also the IMO 2020, we see there is more volatility and therefore more opportunities to trade. So, we see our customers taking, slowly but surely, positions for that to happen,” Eelco Hoekstra, chief executive at independent tank storage company Vopak, told CNBC on Friday.

Earlier this month, Tom Kloza, co-founder of the Oil Price Information Service, told CNBCthat prices could swing wildly, with a plunge to $50 and a spike above $100 not completely ruled out.

“If we had an oil [volatility index] it would be incredibly volatile” over the next year and a half, Kloza told CNBC.

The volume of Iran’s oil that sanctions would take out of the market is the biggest ‘known unknown’ on the supply side, with Venezuela’s plunging production and unstable Libyan exports already factored in in analysts’ estimates. But some experts believe that the Iran sanctions are yet to be fully priced in.

Earlier this month, Fitch Solutions said that the market is unprepared for the loss of Iranian oil, and that Iranian exports are “set for a ‘cliff edge exit’ from the market in Q418.” Under its core scenario, Fitch Solutions sees Iranian oil exports dropping by 1.3 million bpd by end-2019 with China expected to keep imports at around current levels; India and Turkey substantially reducing intake to qualify for waivers; and Europe, Japan, and South Korea cutting imports “to low or near-zero levels.”

“We are substantially above-consensus and our forecast implies Brent will average almost USD80.0/bbl over the rest of the year,” Fitch Solutions said.

ING, for its part, sees the global oil market “largely balanced over 4Q”, but this assumes that Iranian losses due to U.S. sanctions don’t exceed 500,000 bpd and Venezuelan production averages 1.2 million bpd in Q4.

However, ING commodities strategist Warren Patterson warned last week that the trade war and the higher risk in emerging markets have weighed on the price of oil, with Brent Crude prices dropping nearly 10 percent since late May.

“It does seem that the synchronised global growth story from earlier this year is losing some momentum,” Patterson said.

“Looking at individual cases suggests the potential impact on demand growth is limited, however when looked at in aggregate, the potential impact does start to look more significant,” the strategist noted.

The higher oil prices are already destroying gasoline demand in Brazil, for example, where motorists have the alternative to switch to ethanol, ING’s Patterson says. In Brazil, more than 50 percent of the light vehicle fleet consists of flex fuel vehicles that can run on gasoline or 100 percent ethanol. When ethanol becomes cheaper than gasoline, drivers switch to ethanol. In the first half of this year, gasoline sales dropped compared to the same period of 2017, while ethanol sales increased, said Patterson, adding that “This alternative option for motorists in Brazil has meant that we are actually seeing oil demand destruction in the country.”

Emerging markets currencies have weakened against the U.S. dollar in recent weeks – especially with the Turkish crisis – which could affect oil demand and depress oil prices. But the upcoming sanctions on Iran put an upward pressure on prices, with analysts currently only guesstimating how much oil would be removed from the market. The IMO rules throw in another unknown, so experts see wild swings in oil prices ahead.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2MEP0IF Tyler Durden

“This Has Never Happened Before”: JPM’s Kolanovic Spots An “Unprecedented Divergence”

Over the weekend, when discussing the recent bifurcation between the US and emerging markets, we noted that one shouldn’t pay attention to the “significant role played by the sharp decline in the EM tech sector, especially after the recent collapse in Tencent stock and more recently, the sharp drop in JD.com following poor earnings.”

Furthermore, we said that “since the start of June, the EM tech sector has accounted for c.40% of the decline in the value of EM equities, with the Chinese internet names the primary drivers following recent regulatory challenges and poor results. And, as the chart below highlights, this has opened up a record divergence in tech performance between the US and EM. Needless to say, such a divergence is unusual: in the 18 months to the end of June this year, both the US and EM tech sectors rose by 50% in USD terms. Since then, the EM tech sector is down 6%, while its US counterpart up by 5%.”

We concluded that this “record divergence” is bad news for EM bulls, because looking ahead, with the top 5 stocks in EM all tech names, a stabilization in EM tech is a necessary condition of broader EM outperformance

Two days later, none other than JPM’s quant guru, Marko Kolanovic also spotted this bizarre phenomenon, and in a note published earlier today writes that “the recent divergence in the performance of US Equities vs. the rest of the world is unprecedented in history”.

Specifically, Kolanovic looks looks at price momentum which he finds is “positive for US stocks and negative for Europe and Emerging markets across all relevant lookback windows.”

His take on this “unprecedented divergence” is simple: “This has never happened before”, and explains as follows:

Over the past 20 years, even the individual regional indices rarely had such a divergence (for instance, the divergence of US and Europe momentum happened only 2 times). Given that this is such a rare occurrence (has never happened for both Europe and Asia), it suggests to us this is a market condition that will not persist.

In other words, something will give – either the US will fall or EM and Europe equities will catch up and move higher (the historical sample of these events is too small to statistically infer which way this convergence will most likely happen). We believe this market setup has been driven, in part by fundamentals, but also significantly by technical drivers.

The JPM strategist then breaks down the causes for this divergence which he lumps into two constituents categories: fundamentals and technicals.

In fundamentals, he lays out all the usual talking points we have noted in recent weeks that explain why the S&P just hit a new intraday high, oblivious of events in emerging markets: these include “Trump’s tariffs and sanctions causing broad equity risk aversion and a rally in the USD against a backdrop of strong support for US equities from buybacks, tax-related earnings boosts, as well as inflows from systematic strategies since April.

While buybacks, facilitated by Trump’s tax repatriation, as well as strong earnings thanks to Trump’s $1.5 trillion fiscal stimulus are certainly a key aspect driven US equity outperformance, the other key reason for strong US performance is the Fed pushing the USD higher as other central banks around the world are on hold. Then there is the ongoing trade war:

The trade war is also negatively impacting China equities and CNY, and there are a number of largely idiosyncratic developments from Turkey, Italy, Argentina, Russia, etc. that weigh on equities and currencies outside of the US.

As Kolanovic summarizes, “buybacks are creating a shortage of US stocks, the Fed is creating a shortage of US dollars, and Trump’s trade wars and sanctions are further boosting the USD.”

Kolanovic then falls back on his bread and butter: low liquidity and systematic flows, i.e. the technicals, which further boosted the divergence between the US and the rest of the world.

Low liquidity is magnifying the impact of any fundamental and speculative flows, resulting in large moves and numerous flash crashes (e.g. ZAR, TRY, several prominent stocks, etc.). Systematic equity investors are on one side shorting Europe and EM equities, and on the other side buying US equities. For instance, CTAs and related macro trend-following strategies currently have about average long equity exposure in aggregate (52nd percentile). Given that all trend signals in Europe and Asia are short, and all US signals are long – these investors have large long exposure to US stocks and short exposure in Europe and Emerging market stocks.

… since April, various volatility targeting strategies have added up to $100bn in equity exposure, mainly in US equity indices – another tailwind predominantly for US stocks.

This rotation of a few hundred billion dollars of equities into the US purely on technical factors, “was further reinforced by the significant ‘same way’ flows in currencies, commodities and rates. Significant outflows from EM FX, EUR, etc. and into USD are making long USD a crowded position.”

Meanwhile, as we noted over the weekend, and as Jeff Gundlach notably highlighted last Friday, investors are also shorting bonds (as non-commercial shorts all-time highs), while going long US equities via index futures and short volatility positions.

To Kolanovic, this type of crowding is very similar to early 2016, which led to a subsequent rally of Value and EM assets and USD selloff.

Assuming that Kolanovic is correct (he is) and this divergence is unsustainable, what happens next, and how does the convergence play out? In one of two possibles ways:

“Risk on, USD down” outcome with EM and value assets staging a rally and USD selling off, while US stocks continue going higher (but lagging).

Alternatively, we could see a “Risk off, USD up” convergence, with US markets selling off and catching up with the poor performance of Europe and EM assets, e.g. driven by a continuation of the trade war and further USD strength (for now we will ignore a spectrum of ‘in-between’ outcomes).

Maintaining his optimistic outlook which he has laid out every month this year, Kolanovic remains upbeat and writes that “the more likely outcome is a ‘risk on’ convergence, given decent global growth, cheaper valuations outside of the US, a continuation of buybacks in the US, intensified criticism of rate hikes and strong USD by US administration, new stimulative measures in China, and ongoing negotiations to resolve trade war with China. A ‘risk on’ convergence could be further fueled by poor liquidity and a short squeeze in currencies (EUR and EM FX), metals (precious and industrial), broad EM equities and China stocks.”

That said, Kolanovic cautions that “one should not dismiss a scenario in which the trade war with China is not resolved and the US market experiences a sharp correction. This could be further fueled by concentrated US market leadership, a decline in the high levels of equity HF exposure (e.g. HFRXEH beta in 95th percentile), and selling from systematic investors (e.g. Vol targeting funds are currently in their 66th percentile of equity exposure).”

What could catalyze this “Risk off” convergence?

An obvious potential catalyst for this scenario would be a breakdown in China trade negotiations, and continuation of the USD rally.

There is one additional footnote to the downside case: any “risk off” outcome would hit the US far harder than it does the rest of the world, to wit:

escalating the trade war could cause a disproportionally negative impact on the US economy and equity markets at this stage. The disproportionally higher damage to US markets was described above in the context of the divergence of positioning and valuations.

It gets worse: should the status quo divergence persist, it would imply that contrary to the President’s simplistic interpretation of the market, the “trade war in its current form” will likely be lost by the US given the strong dollar, which made US goods more expensive across the world, with the delayed effect on the economy likely to manifest itself shortly. Kolanovic explains: 

The USD rally effectively introduced ‘tariffs’ against US products sold globally. At the same time, the weaker CNY, EUR, etc. make their products more attractive across the world, including in the US. Given that China represents less than 20% of US total trade, the damage of tariff policies (and strong USD) on US trade could be several times larger (e.g. even up to 5 times) than any intended gain. The simple math is also likely a reason for recent nervous comments from the US administration about the Fed, rates, Chairman Powell, CNY and USD. It is a realization that the trade war in its current form is likely already lost given the strong USD.

All of this, of course, trickles down to Trump, and his belligerent trade war rhetoric. And if Kolanovic is correct, the loss of the trade war couldh it at the worst possible time: just as companies report Q3 earnings… which is scheduled to take place just days before the midterm elections which Trump and the republicans – for fears of impeachment – can not afford to lose in a landslide.

This is why Kolanovic concludes that “an escalation will likely be averted and that a trade resolution and weaker USD will lead to a ‘risk on’ convergence.” That conclusion however, is contingent on one big assumption: that Trump will observe events playing out around the globe rationally, ignore the record stock market, and engage China with the intention of ending the trade war even though – in his mind – Trump is still winning the war.

That is a big assumption.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2MEejdY Tyler Durden