Chief Economist & Political Strategist, CrossASEAN Research

Prasenjit K. Basu

Chief Economist & Political Strategist

CrossASEAN Research

At CrossASEAN Research we strive to produce unbiased and differentiated on the ground insights on companies across South East Asia. Our Research is produced for the most part after face to face meetings and conversations with company management to dig deep into the long term vision and strategy of the companies we cover. We seek to deliver investable and actionable themes on sectors and markets across SE Asia, often in collaboration with other Insight Providers across the region, pooling the vast experience of the analysts within the Smartkarma Ecosystem. We also offer bespoke work and tailor made trips for our clients. 

Insights across South East Asia

Macroeconomics

Trade data for February 2021 (due next week), the first for the Biden era, will be scrutinized for bilateral deficits. In 2020, the US' bilateral deficits with only 3 of its top-10 trade partners declined -- Canada, Japan and Germany -- suggesting that Trump tariffs on steel and aluminium had worked partially. The US deficit with China declined sharply in 2019 and in Jan-Oct 2020, but mysteriously widened in the next 3 months. The US suspects that big deficits with Vietnam, Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia reflect transshipment of mainland-China products via those countries, and they are consequently already coming under some pressure. The trade war may not heat up further under Biden, but it will not cool down anytime soon. The US had a trade deficit of US$916 billion in 2020, 6% larger than in 2019, with exports down 14.1% YoY and imports down 6.6% YoY. But with net tourist and student inflows to the US down sharply, the current account deficit widened by as much as 35% to US$647 billion or 3.1% of GDP in 2020 (the largest in a decade, but much lower than the 2006 peak of 6% of GDP). US bilateral trade deficits with Canada, Japan and Germany (which are among top-5 trade partners) declined in 2020, suggesting that the impact of the steel and aluminium tariffs imposed early in the Trump term were beginning to finally pay off at least partly. Importantly, for the second consecutive year, the bilateral trade deficit with China declined (by a modest 3.6% YoY) to US$311 billion, the lowest since 2011. That bilateral deficit had widened in 2017 and 2018 (while Trump was only threatening but not actually imposing any tariffs). The imposition of tariffs on China's imports in 2019 (extended in 2020 to nearly half of goods imports from China) did contribute to reducing the US bilateral trade deficit with China. However, US imports from China increased 23.8% YoY in November-December 2020 (immediately after the US election), having declined in 9 of the first 10 months of 2020, and rose 17.5% YoY in Jan 2021.  The beneficiaries of export diversion from China were Vietnam, Switzerland, Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia, who saw US imports from them rise significantly in 2020 -- thereby also widening the US' bilateral trade deficits with them in 2020. The US believes that at least some of these countries' widening trade surpluses with the US reflect Chinese exports being transshipped to the US via those countries. So the Biden administration is likely to pay increased attention not only to the bilateral trade deficit with China (which has mysteriously risen sharply again since the election), but also bilateral deficits with Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia, South Korea, etc., which may reflect the impact of transshipment of mainland-Chinese products into the US.

Trade data for February 2021 (due next week), the first for the Biden era, will be scrutinized for bilateral deficits. In 2020, the US' bilateral deficits with only 3 of its top-10 trade partners declined -- Canada, Japan and Germany -- suggesting that Trump tariffs on steel and aluminium had worked partially. The US deficit with China declined sharply in 2019 and in Jan-Oct 2020, but mysteriously widened in the next 3 months. The US suspects that big deficits with Vietnam, Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia reflect transshipment of mainland-China products via those countries, and they are consequently already coming under some pressure. The trade war may not heat up further under Biden, but it will not cool down anytime soon. The US had a trade deficit of US$916 billion in 2020, 6% larger than in 2019, with exports down 14.1% YoY and imports down 6.6% YoY. But with net tourist and student inflows to the US down sharply, the current account deficit widened by as much as 35% to US$647 billion or 3.1% of GDP in 2020 (the largest in a decade, but much lower than the 2006 peak of 6% of GDP). US bilateral trade deficits with Canada, Japan and Germany (which are among top-5 trade partners) declined in 2020, suggesting that the impact of the steel and aluminium tariffs imposed early in the Trump term were beginning to finally pay off at least partly. Importantly, for the second consecutive year, the bilateral trade deficit with China declined (by a modest 3.6% YoY) to US$311 billion, the lowest since 2011. That bilateral deficit had widened in 2017 and 2018 (while Trump was only threatening but not actually imposing any tariffs). The imposition of tariffs on China's imports in 2019 (extended in 2020 to nearly half of goods imports from China) did contribute to reducing the US bilateral trade deficit with China. However, US imports from China increased 23.8% YoY in November-December 2020 (immediately after the US election), having declined in 9 of the first 10 months of 2020, and rose 17.5% YoY in Jan 2021.  The beneficiaries of export diversion from China were Vietnam, Switzerland, Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia, who saw US imports from them rise significantly in 2020 -- thereby also widening the US' bilateral trade deficits with them in 2020. The US believes that at least some of these countries' widening trade surpluses with the US reflect Chinese exports being transshipped to the US via those countries. So the Biden administration is likely to pay increased attention not only to the bilateral trade deficit with China (which has mysteriously risen sharply again since the election), but also bilateral deficits with Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia, South Korea, etc., which may reflect the impact of transshipment of mainland-Chinese products into the US. 

US: Trump's Record Card on Trade Mixed; China Trade Already Challenging Biden

Founder & Chief Market Strategist - SAV Markets, SAV Markets

Shyam Devani

Founder & Chief Market Strategist - SAV Markets

Technical Analysis

Chicago Board Options Exchange Volatility Index / Technical Analysis

Chicago Board Options Exchange Volatility Index

The VIX Index has made three lower lows while momentum has made three higher lowsThis divergence is a short term warning sign that the days ahead may well see a “pop” on the IndexSuch a development, if it unfolds, would almost inevitably be seen with a fall on the S&amp;P 500, even if briefly.

The VIX Index has made three lower lows while momentum has made three higher lowsThis divergence is a short term warning sign that the days ahead may well see a “pop” on the IndexSuch a development, if it unfolds, would almost inevitably be seen with a fall on the S&amp;P 500, even if briefly.

Cross Asset Strategy

A discussion at the end of this week on Singapore’s Money FM rounds up some thoughts on FX and other financial markets.Below is an elaboration of some points made on the US, Europe, China, Commodities, Bonds, and India as well as a link to the radio interview.

A discussion at the end of this week on Singapore’s Money FM rounds up some thoughts on FX and other financial markets.Below is an elaboration of some points made on the US, Europe, China, Commodities, Bonds, and India as well as a link to the radio interview.

Global Economist, DeSaque Macro Research

Said Desaque

Global Economist

Delivering Global Macro Investment Insights

DeSaque Macro Research

DeSaque Macro Research Limited was formed by Said DeSaque in April 2012 with the view to delivering global macro investment insights aimed at providing new ideas to clients.

Said DeSaque has over 26 years of experience working as a professional economist in financial services. Prior to establishing DeSaque Macro Research, Said held positions as Senior Economist at Robert W Baird and William Blair. He began his career as a graduate at PaineWebber in 1986, where he eventually became Head of the London Economics Department.

Said takes a very keen interest in international relations, along with their implications for economic development. His research interests include the economic transformation of China and its implications for global capital markets, particularly in the United States. He is a member of Chatham House in London.

The US economy and capital markets have historically been Said’s main focus of attention. He frequently presents his views to institutional investors in diverse geographic locations. In recent years, Said has also been carefully monitoring economic developments in Asia, particularly China and Japan.

The steepening US Treasury yield curve reflects expectations of a normalisation of economic activity, boosted by fiscal and monetary stimulus, as well as doubts that the Fed's current forward guidance can be maintained. Media concerns about the impact of rising Treasury bond yields on risky assets appear to overlook the fact that the yield curve typically steepens at this stage of the economic cycle.
The relationship between the yield curve slope and equities is complex: expectations of stronger growth should produce higher corporate profit estimates that can offset the impact of rising yields if the interest rate term structure steepens. Increases in secular corporate profit growth estimates can also help to support higher valuations in the wake of higher bond yields, as testified by events in the late-1990s. Current profit forecasts for the next year remain in firm uptrend and should support equity prices.
This early stage of the current economic expansion makes comparisons of Fed policy concerns with the late-1990s inappropriate, whereas the events of 1994 demonstrate the damage that a sudden change in Fed policy can inflict on financial markets. Prior to February 1994, the Fed had not commenced a tightening cycle for six years and, consequently, investors were complacent about the risks of a change in policy course. There are, however, some notable differences between the current environment and 1994, notably less dogmatic adherence by the Fed to the predictions of the Phillips Curve and greater awareness of the pitfalls of tighter financial conditions on the real economy due to the rapid growth of the capital markets.
<div>History and current forward guidance by the Fed suggest further steepening of the yield curve, an outcome still consistent with positive equity returns. Since 2001, rising yields commencing below 3% have not prevented higher equity prices, whereas starting points above this level have presented headwinds.  </div>

The steepening US Treasury yield curve reflects expectations of a normalisation of economic activity, boosted by fiscal and monetary stimulus, as well as doubts that the Fed's current forward guidance can be maintained. Media concerns about the impact of rising Treasury bond yields on risky assets appear to overlook the fact that the yield curve typically steepens at this stage of the economic cycle.
The relationship between the yield curve slope and equities is complex: expectations of stronger growth should produce higher corporate profit estimates that can offset the impact of rising yields if the interest rate term structure steepens. Increases in secular corporate profit growth estimates can also help to support higher valuations in the wake of higher bond yields, as testified by events in the late-1990s. Current profit forecasts for the next year remain in firm uptrend and should support equity prices.
This early stage of the current economic expansion makes comparisons of Fed policy concerns with the late-1990s inappropriate, whereas the events of 1994 demonstrate the damage that a sudden change in Fed policy can inflict on financial markets. Prior to February 1994, the Fed had not commenced a tightening cycle for six years and, consequently, investors were complacent about the risks of a change in policy course. There are, however, some notable differences between the current environment and 1994, notably less dogmatic adherence by the Fed to the predictions of the Phillips Curve and greater awareness of the pitfalls of tighter financial conditions on the real economy due to the rapid growth of the capital markets.
History and current forward guidance by the Fed suggest further steepening of the yield curve, an outcome still consistent with positive equity returns. Since 2001, rising yields commencing below 3% have not prevented higher equity prices, whereas starting points above this level have presented headwinds.  

Steeper US Yield Curve: Equity Prices To Be Supported by Corporate Profits Unless Yields Breach 3%

The past few weeks have raised many questions about what is driving what. As yields have risen aggressively due to higher inflation expectations, there have been some concerns about the potential knock-on impact on financial markets generally, including some corners of the stock markets and emerging markets. However recent developments in Oil and stocks suggest we may go back to a more basic relationship between the different financial markets and that Bonds may even outperforming in the short term.

The past few weeks have raised many questions about what is driving what. As yields have risen aggressively due to higher inflation expectations, there have been some concerns about the potential knock-on impact on financial markets generally, including some corners of the stock markets and emerging markets. However recent developments in Oil and stocks suggest we may go back to a more basic relationship between the different financial markets and that Bonds may even outperforming in the short term.

United States

The S&P 500® is widely regarded as the best single gauge of large-cap U.S. equities and serves as the foundation for a wide range of investment products. The index includes 500 leading companies and captures approximately 80% coverage of available market capitalization.

S&P 500 INDEX (SPX INDEX)

US: Trump's Record Card on Trade Mixed; China Trade Already Challenging Biden

The US bilateral trade deficit with China declined in 2019 & Jan-Oct 20, but rose in the 3 post-election months. Focus is turning to transshipment...

Prasenjit K. Basu

Top of The "Pops"

Fresh signs warn of a "pop" on the VIX Index which in turn suggest a decline on the S&P 500, even if briefly, as we approach Q2, 2021.

Shyam Devani

FX Summary Discussion at End of Q1

A summary radio discussion on foreign exchange and other financial markets as we approach Q2. Topics include the US, Europe, China, Oil, Bonds, and...

Shyam Devani

Steeper US Yield Curve: Equity Prices To Be Supported by Corporate Profits Unless Yields Breach 3%

A steeper yield curve due to rising bond yields is not always disastrous for US equities. Rising corporate profit estimates and bond yields staying...

DeSaque Macro Research

Oil, Stocks, Bonds - Back to Basics

The recent weakness in Oil coupled with the bearish indication in equities may create a near term bid for Bonds as a more 'traditional'...

Shyam Devani