A New Cycle for International Markets

American stocks have experienced a stratospheric rise since the Great Financial Crisis, while foreign stocks have languished. This long period of “American Exceptionalism” was marked by enormous inflows of foreign capital into the U.S., which boosted the value of the dollar and U.S. assets to altitudinous levels. However, recent political shifts and new market trends point to a tidal change that could lead to a sustained reversion in U.S. asset prices and a relative outperformance of international assets.

In recent American financial history, periods of “American Exceptionalism” have been followed by bouts of “American Malaise.” These cycles—from euphoria to despair and back—are typically marked by the relative GDP growth of the United States compared to the global economy. During periods of American Exceptionalism, strong U.S. GDP growth relative to the global economy is usually driven by political and technological trends. Conversely, during periods of American Malaise, relatively weak U.S. growth is typically driven by a reversion of previous trends and by the rise of foreign economic powers, such as Germany in the 1970s, Japan in the 1980s, and China and emerging markets in the 2000s. Importantly, these cycles have significant effects on monetary flows, currency valuations, and asset prices. During periods of American Exceptionalism, capital is attracted to the United States, driving up the value of the dollar and U.S. asset prices. During periods of American Malaise, capital flows out of the U.S. into foreign markets, driving their currencies and markets higher.

Since the mid-1960s—a period that includes the turbulence of the final years of the Bretton Woods dollar/gold fixed exchange rate system and over five decades of a U.S. dollar-centric fiat currency global monetary system—the U.S. has experienced three full cycles of sentiment, moving from pessimism to exuberance and back. Conveniently, these cycles can be marked by the rise and fall of the dollar in a fiat currency system such as the one we’ve had since 1971. The chart below highlights these four phases:


Cycle 1

American Malaise (1966–1980)
By the mid-1960s, both Europe and Japan had recovered from World War II, and the U.S. began to run current account deficits, leading some countries—such as France—to decry the “exorbitant privilege” enjoyed by the U.S. and to repatriate gold. This led President Nixon to end the convertibility of the dollar to gold in 1971, breaking the Bretton Woods system established in 1944. The collapse of the dollar and the stagflation of the 1970s ensued. This period of American Malaise was marked by the rise of Germany as an economic power and the embrace of the Deutsche Mark and gold as alternative “safe haven” assets. In 1979, President Carter’s famous “Malaise Speech” expressed a general feeling of national frustration and pessimism following Vietnam, Watergate, and the Iranian Revolution. He warned that “the erosion of our confidence in the future is threatening to destroy the social and political fabric of America.”

American Exceptionalism (1979–1986)
President Reagan (1981–89) embodied American Exceptionalism with his “Morning in America” rhetoric and his vision of America as a “shining city on a hill,” a moral lighthouse to inspire the world. An extremely hawkish monetary policy, executed by Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, triggered debt crises in Latin America and Eastern Europe, collapsed commodity prices, and set off huge capital inflows into U.S. assets, driving the dollar upward. The Plaza Accord in 1985 aimed to weaken the dollar through coordinated market intervention. Reagan also restrained Japanese car exports (1981), requiring automakers to build factories in the U.S. to maintain market share.


Cycle 2

American Malaise (1986–1992)
During the second half of the 1980s, Japan was heralded by magazines and best-selling books as the new economic power threatening U.S. hegemony. Japanese companies—such as Toyota, Sony, Panasonic, and Honda—were believed to be outperforming U.S. competition by being more efficient, more innovative, and offering better quality. This aura of Japanese dominance was punctuated by a wave of Japanese acquisitions of Western trophy assets, such as Rockefeller Center, Pebble Beach, and iconic Western artworks. Moreover, this was a period of strong recovery for emerging market economies, which once again attracted significant speculative capital. America’s despondency was further punctuated by the First Gulf War and a rise in oil prices, which drove the U.S. economy into recession and led to the election of President Clinton.

American Exceptionalism (1992–2001)
President Clinton (1993–2001) presided over a remarkable period of American Exceptionalism. The Cold War ended in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Francis Fukuyama’s book The End of History (1992) expressed the widely held belief that Western liberal democracy and capitalism had permanently won the battle of ideas. The “peace dividend” allowed Clinton to cut defense spending from 6% of GDP to 3% and, along with tax increases, run fiscal surpluses from 1998 to 2001. The 1990s saw a productivity boom driven by the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) revolution—computers, software, and networking technology—and a stock market boom, particularly in tech and internet companies. Concurrently, emerging markets suffered a long series of financial meltdowns, beginning with Mexico in 1994, Asia in 1997, and Russia in 1998.


Cycle 3

American Malaise (2002–2012)
Clinton’s deregulation of the financial sector (the repeal of Glass-Steagall and deregulation of derivatives) laid the groundwork for the dot-com and housing bubbles, which burst in 2000 and 2007, respectively. The stock market crash and the Great Financial Crisis brought forth unorthodox monetary policies, which undermined the dollar and revived interest in gold. The accession of China to the WTO (2001) and the launch of the euro (2002) also sparked dollar outflows. China’s economic miracle (2000–2012) caused a commodity super-cycle and enormous inflows into emerging market assets, which created massive stock market and credit bubbles.

American Exceptionalism (2012–2024)
The GFC left most of the global economy in a semi-depressed state, including China, which was burdened with excess debt, a housing bubble, and diminishing returns on infrastructure investment. However, starting in 2012, the U.S. experienced a relative resurgence based on four pillars: (1) a rising dollar, (2) the shale oil revolution, (3) the remarkable success of its winner-take-all global tech titans, and (4) a cycle of fiscal expansion and debt accumulation. These factors led to massive inflows of capital into American financial assets and a singular “wealth effect” for  America’s moneyed classes.


Cycle 4

American Malaise (2025–?)
President Trump has articulated a darkly negative vision of a country mutilated by elites—both domestic and foreign—who have “sold out the country” and caused “an American carnage” of crime, poverty, and decaying infrastructure. He aims to dismantle both domestic institutions (public programs, the courts, universities) and the American-led world economic order—its liberal foundations and its system of alliances—which has long buttressed American leadership and soft power. Unsurprisingly, Trump’s wrecking-ball tactics are unsettling investors and raising questions about the reliability of the U.S. as a partner in military, financial, business, and educational matters.

Initial reactions to Trump’s second-term agenda point to the start of a new phase of American Malaise. A weakening dollar, rising long-term interest rates, declining U.S. stock prices, and a surge in the price of gold indicate significant capital outflows from U.S. assets. Moreover, the drivers of the past decade of American Exceptionalism appear tired. First, the administration is ambivalent about the dollar’s reserve status and is considering measures (e.g., a new Plaza Accord) to bring it down from its  high level. Second, the shale revolution appears to have peaked, with output now expected to stabilize. Third, high valuations, saturated markets, deglobalization costs, regulatory hurdles, and increasingly capital-intensive business models for the tech titans point to more moderate return prospects. Fourth, bond markets are showing low tolerance for further fiscal largesse.

A phase of American Malaise can be expected to last 5–10 years. Outflows from U.S. markets into foreign markets drive the dollar lower, raise commodity prices, and unleash credit, boosting GDP growth and asset prices outside the U.S. These flows create a virtuous cycle of rising confidence, growing liquidity, and higher asset prices abroad.

A Tales of Two Decades for Emerging Markets and the S&P 500 (Part 2)

Emerging market stocks have suffered a decade of dismal returns while American stocks have soared. In a previous post (link),  this divergence was  explained by valuations (high in EM and low in the U.S. in 2012) and the appreciation of the U.S. dollar over the past ten years. In addition, U.S. corporations have  benefited from historically low interest rates and tax cuts. All of the factors that benefitted U.S. stocks are likely to eventually revert, which  would lead to a new period of outperformance for international assets. In this post, we look  at this matter in further detail.

The chart below shows the twenty-year performance of the primary emerging market country MSCI indices, as well as the MSCI EM index and the S&P 500. During the 2002-2012 decade, the S&P500 underperformed the MSCI EM Index as well as every major country in the index. The opposite occurred from 2012-June 2023, as the S&P500 soarer while EM languished. Only tech-heavy Taiwan and India managed positive returns over this period.

Two Decades of Index Returns for Emerging Markets and the S&P500

In the chart below,  this divergence of returns is explained in detail by changes in valuation parameters (CAPE ratios, cyclically adjusted price earnings) and dollar-denominated earnings growth. There are two primary conclusion from this analysis. First, CAPE ratios have gone full circle.  S&P500 CAPE ratios started high in 2002, edged down through 2012 and then soared back to very high levels over the past decade. Global EM CAPE ratios started low, went up to high levels in 2012 and then went right back to where they started. As for earnings, for the S&P500, coming out of recession in 2002, earnings growth for the first decade was high and then moderate for the second decade (propped up by low interest rates and tax cuts). EM earnings were very high for the first decade and flat to negative for the second decade, with the exception of tech-heavy Taiwan. (Argentina should be taken with a grain of salt, as numbers are distorted by exchange controls)

The last column to the right in the chart above shows expected returns for the next seven years. The three countries with the highest expected return -Colombia, Chile and Turkey – have returned to the valuation levels they had in 2002 after reaching very high levels in both 2007 and 2012. Brazil’s CAPE ration went from 5.1 in 2002 to 12.9 in 2012 (after peaking at 32.1 in 2007!) and is now at 9.7. Similar to Brazil, the Philippines and Peru now have CAPE ratios well below 2012 but not nearly as low as in 2002. The two most expensive markets – the S&P500 and India – have CAPE ratios well above 2005 and 2012, both at near record levels.

Earnings growth in dollars for most EM countries was extraordinarily good between 2002 and 2012 and dismal in the 2012-June 2023 period, even considering the big surge in earnings in 2022 experienced by commodity producers (Chile and Brazil.)  Poor earnings growth is explained by a strong dollar, low commodity prices and intense competition for manufacturing nations  in a depressionary global environment. Surprisingly, despite an appreciating currency and a significant tech sector, China had negative 0.7%  annualized earnings growth during this period.

The expected returns displayed in the chart above assume that earnings will grow in line with nominal GDP growth for all countries. This also assumes that the currencies will be stable relative to the dollar. Given the current direction of China and its large weight in the MSCI Index, this may be an overly optimistic assumption which exaggerates potential returns for global emerging markets.

2Q 2023 Expected Returns for Emerging Markets

Emerging market stocks once again are lagging U.S. stocks in 2023, as they have consistently over the past decade, rising by 3.5% during the first semester compared to 16.8% for the U.S. market. The strength of U.S. stocks can be attributed to the resilient American economy and a return of speculative fervor for tech stocks, this time driven by the sudden discovery of the transformative power of “Artificial Intelligence.” Nevertheless, below the surface conditions are also positive for emerging market stocks. Almost all the underperformance of EM stocks can be attributed to China, while most other markets are not doing badly at all. Moreover, EM stocks are now very cheap compared to the U.S. market and value is being rewarded. Also, the U.S. dollar has been on a significant downtrend which, if sustained, will provide a significant tailwind for international assets, including emerging market stocks.

The chart below shows the current expected returns for EM markets and for the S&P500 based on a CAPE ratio analysis. The Cyclically Adjusted Price Earnings Ratio (CAPE) is based on the average of inflation-adjusted earnings for the past ten years, which serves to smooth out the cyclicality of earnings. This is a particularly useful tool for highly cyclical assets like EM stocks.   This methodology has been used by investors for ages and has been popularized more recently by Professor Robert Shiller at Yale University. We use dollarized data to capture currency trends. Seven-year expected returns are calculated assuming that each country’s CAPE ratio will revert to its historical average over the period.  Earnings are adjusted according to each country’s current place in the business cycle and then assumed to grow in line with nominal GDP projections taken from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook.

As expected, “cheap” countries (CAPE ratios below their historical average) tend to have higher expected returns than “expensive” ones (CAPE ratios above the historical average). These expected returns make two huge assumptions: first, that the current level of CAPE relative to the historical level is not justified; second, that market forces will correct the current discrepancy.

The second assumption is well supported by historical data if seven-to-ten-year periods are considered, but not over the short term (one to three years).

However, when during certain periods “cheap” markets on a CAPE basis are enjoying short-term outperformance investors should take note, as the combination of value and momentum can be compelling. As the chart below shows, we are currently in such a period. Over the past twelve months, holding the “cheapest markets” would have provided very high returns, even considering negative returns from Colombia. The chart shows Expected Return rankings from one year ago and, in the last column to the right, the total returns over the past year.

That cheap markets are now performing well is very encouraging for EM investors.  To cheap valuations, momentum, and a weakening U.S. dollar we can add the improvement in global business conditions. Almost all EM countries are now in the upswing of the business cycle, a time when they tend to outperform significantly. Moreover, the global economy is also recovering, and the U.S. is expected to achieve a soft landing later this year. This synchronized global recovery should be supportive of cyclical assets like commodities, value stocks and emerging markets.

The Return of Deflation Raises Caution in Emerging Markets

All signs point to an imminent recession in the U.S. and the return of deflationary forces. The markets are pricing this in, forecasting that the Fed will begin to cut interest rates this summer. The debate is now between the soft-landing and hard-landing camps and on the length of the coming downturn, and on whether Jeremy Powel has the stomach for austerity or whether he will happily return to ZIRP and money printing.

In this environment, safety will trump risk. The recent surge in the infallible FAANG stocks — the current preferred safe haven for global investors — and the poor returns for value, small cap and cyclical stocks shows that we are in the very late stage of the business cycle or already in recession. Emerging market assets are not likely to do well at this time.

Commodity prices are leading the way in this deflationary push. As the chart below shows, oil and lumber, which are the two most significant economic indicators in the U.S. are down sharply relative to inflation (CPI). Oil is down 37% over the past year and natural gas is down 74%.  Lumber prices have fallen 50% more than the CPI. Even copper, which is supported by tight supplies and rising demand from “climate change” policies, is  still down 13% and supporting the deflationary push.

 

We also see broad deflationary forces in the broad commodity indices. forces. The S&P GSCI Commodity Index (GTX) and the S&P GSCI Industrial Metals Index are down 18% and 15%, respectively, over the past year, while the CPI has risen 6%.

The Industrial metals index is most significant for emerging markets because historically it has led the way for EM stocks. We can see this below.

Investors should keep their powder dry for the beginning of a new cycle in 2024.