Select Language

Search

Insights

No match found

Services

No match found

Industries

No match found

People

No match found

Insights

No match found

Services

No match found

People

No match found

Industries

No match found

Inflation Fixation - Monthly Roundtable

FICC Podcasts June 07, 2022
FICC Podcasts June 07, 2022

 

Margaret Kerins along with Ian Lyngen, Ben Reitzes, Greg Anderson, Stephen Gallo, Dan Belton and Ben Jeffery from BMO Capital Market’s FICC Macro Strategy team bring you their thoughts on the current market tug of war between growth versus inflation risks as the Fed, and many other central banks, are only in the early phase of lift off and balance sheet reduction. While there seems to be decent consensus surrounding Fed action at the five remaining meetings this year, the range of potential outcomes from soft to hard landing in  the backdrop of heightened geopolitical risks, is causing large market gyrations in rates, credit and foreign exchange market.


Follow us on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify or your preferred podcast provider.


About Macro Horizons
BMO's Fixed Income, Currencies, and Commodities (FICC) Macro Strategy group led by Margaret Kerins and other special guests provide weekly and monthly updates on the FICC markets through three Macro Horizons channels; US Rates - The Week Ahead, Monthly Roundtable and High Quality Credit Spreads.

Podcast Disclaimer

Read more

Margaret Kerins:

This is Macro Horizons, Monthly Episode 41: Inflation Fixation, presented by BMO Capital Markets. I'm your host, Margaret Kerins, here with Ian Lyngen, Ben Reitzes, Greg Anderson, Stephen Gallo, Dan Belton, and Ben Jeffrey from our FICC Macro Strategy team, to bring you our thoughts on the market tug of war between growth versus inflation risks as the fed and many other central banks are only in the early phase of liftoff and balance sheet reduction. While there seems to be decent consensus surrounding fed action at the next five remaining meetings this year, the range of potential outcomes from soft to hard landing, in the backdrop of heightened geopolitical risks, is causing huge market gyrations in rates, credit, and foreign exchange.

Margaret Kerins:

Each month, members from BMO's FICC Macro Strategy team join me for a round table focusing on relevant and timely topics that impact our markets. Please feel free to reach out on Bloomberg or email me at margaret.kerins@bmo.com with questions, comments, or topics you would like to hear more about on future episodes. We value your input and appreciate your ideas and suggestions. Thanks for joining us.

Speaker 2:

The views expressed here are those of the participants and not those of BMO Capital Markets, it's affiliates, or subsidiaries.

Margaret Kerins:

Tenure yields attempted to push back above 3% this morning, moving 26 basis points off the recent lows in five short trading sessions. Two year US Treasury yields are following a similar pattern, moving about 22 basis points higher over the same period. The market is pricing in 175 basis points in hikes by mid-December, comprised of two more 50 basis point moves, followed by three 25 basis point hikes. If realized, the Fed Funds Rate should be right around neutral by year end, and slightly restrictive by early 2023. The great debate sparking market volatility centers on the speed at which the economy may be slowing down, as high food and gas prices act as a tax on consumption, while at the same time, the fed rate hikes will not transmit into the real economy for several months due to the long and variable lags in monetary policy.

Margaret Kerins:

That said, clearly rates, credit, IG, and FX markets are pricing the tightening, and the volatility reflects an end point that is highly uncertain where the speed of the pivot from accommodation to restriction has the potential to choke off growth, while inflation remains elevated due to factors outside of the fed's control. In this backdrop, we are seeing downward revisions to GDP. And in fact, our own BMO economics team lowered their GDP forecast for 2022 to 2.4%, and 1.5% for 2023. 1.5% is clearly below the long-run potential. So, Ian, one of the themes that we've seen in this market is the rapid repricing, both up and down, in yields. We have seen bearish momentum hold over the past several sessions, but there seems to be a pretty decent shift this morning. Will tins revisit the interary high of 320, achieved on March 9th, or are we headed back to the 270s?

Ian Lyngen:

I think that's the operative question at the moment, Margaret. Have we seen the yield peaks established for the year, or was that just a taste of what will ultimately be a decidedly bearish year for treasuries? All else being equal, we'll argue that 320 in tins will represent the yield peak, at least in the medium term. Now medium term, in this context, gets us through the summer, and frankly probably through the midterm elections as well, with the first reasonable probability that we're going to get above 320 to 326, because from a technical perspective, 326 is really the level to beat. That really isn't going to come into play from our perspective until the latter part of this year and the beginning of 2023. And I'll offer the caveat that that assumes that everything goes well in terms of the fed's ability to orchestrate a soft landing.

Ian Lyngen:

There are certainly a lot of risks evident already when we look at credit spreads or the equity market, but at the end of the day, the fed has made it abundantly clear that they're going to push forward with the process of normalization, both in terms of policy rates, as well as a balance sheet. I would offer an observation regarding the earlier comment about pushing to neutral by the end of the year. That certainly is on the fed's agenda. And I'll just note that neutral is a moving target when we put it in the context of financial conditions, and we've been characterizing neutral as a level that you won't know once you've gotten there, but after you've passed it, and that represents a meaningful risk to the fed. It's not difficult to envision a situation where the perception that there's an increasing chance of a recession leads to more conservative hiring practices. And ultimately, some of the upside is taken out of the jobs market.

Ben Jeffery:

And Ian, I would just add, to me, that's the critical difference that we've seen enter the market discourse, since we saw tenure yields peak at that 320 level Margaret highlighted, and now. And what that suggests is that any further dip in treasuries or increase in yields is going to look increasingly attractive to a global investor base that spent the bulk of the first half of the year waiting for an increase in rates to get invested. And now we've seen a material increase in rates, combined with this rising recession risk and increased discussions, at least among our client base, that maybe we're already approaching the end of this economic expansion.

Ben Jeffery:

And given treasuries position within the financial system and their characteristic as something of an insurance product, if in fact, we're already discussing the chances of a recession, even if that's just a textbook one into back to back negative quarters of growth, we're already talking about a turn in the labor market, whether that be hiring freezes, or even the rightsizing of total workforces. And already, risk asset valuations have come under pressure, whether that be in the form of equities or widening credit spreads. All of these factors combined point to a late cycle market. And late in the cycle, it's proven beneficial to own treasuries, which I think is exactly, to Ian's point, that we're reaching the moment when starting to own the long end of the treasury curve is becoming increasingly compelling.

Margaret Kerins:

So Ben, you mentioned that we could already be approaching the end of the cycle. We've got a fed funds rate at 1%. Presumably, we'll be at 150 next week. The neutral rate is the rate that is neither accommodated nor restrictive. So I think what you're implying here is that a 275 by year end might no longer be considered neutral.

Ben Jeffery:

Margaret, that's a great point. And one of the most interesting aspects of this cycle is how quickly it's played out, and just how fast the fed is trying to get fed funds too neutral. Now, obviously the fed, and certainly the market, does not have a precise estimate of where neutral lies, but I do think something in the realm of 2% in nominal terms would mean that the Fed's upcoming tightening will bring policy into at least slightly restrictive territory. And taking that fact, combined with the lagged impact of the rate hikes we've already seen, should only add to the slowing growth profile that we've already seen become very common in terms of the market discourse.

Ian Lyngen:

I would just quickly make the observation that we're having a conversation about a fed led recession, or a fed triggered recession. We can go into a recession that isn't a function of monetary policy, so it's not necessary to get the fed past whatever estimate of neutral it is that we might have to see some of the residual fallout on the other side of the pandemic run its course. So when we think about inflation, I think it's very meaningful to look at some of the components. In the month of April, we saw a massive spike in airfares. Now, that's follow through from energy, and that will eventually further serve to undermine consumers spending power in real terms. And that brings into question the type of trade offs that consumers are willing to make when we think about their consumable basket of goods.

Margaret Kerins:

Ian, it's a very valid point, that there are other factors impacting the consumer outside of the fed. And as you mentioned, it's energy, it's food, it's housing. And some of these are attacks on consumption and should slow demand regardless of what the fed is doing, which has potential implications for what neutral ends up looking like over the next several months.

Dan Belton:

Yeah. Margaret, you raise an interesting point. We're starting to see a lot of negativity coming out of corporate executives and hiring freezes and negative outlooks. And one of the questions we're most commonly asked deals with what the credit market is currently pricing to, whether these negative outlooks are being reflected in credit markets. And I think it's a really interesting question, because on one hand, credit spreads have widened about 40 basis points year to date, including a trough to peak move in credit spreads of 60 basis points. And we've only seen such a significant widening in the first half of the year two times since the financial crisis, first, in 2016, when credit spreads moved about 60 basis points wider to start the year, and then obviously in 2020, we had credit spreads move a couple hundred basis points from trough to peak in March.

Dan Belton:

But at the same time, we think that spreads probably have a ways to go, just given that they started the year so low at around 95 to a hundred basis points. And where they are currently today, at 137 basis points in the ICE BofA corporate index, we're still seven basis points narrower than the post financial crisis average of 144 basis points. And if you look at the yield ratio, we're at even more extreme measures of richness and credit spreads. So the yield ratio looks at the ratio of corporate yields to match maturity treasury yields, and we're currently at a seventh percentile observation by that metric. So spreads are extremely rich when you look at the ratio of corporate yields to treasury yields, and that's not even to mention the macro and economic risks that are heightened right now in the market. And more recently, our view for wider credit spreads has really been underpinned by primary market demand.

Dan Belton:

We had pretty light supply in May, April was roughly average in terms of gross issuance, but we're seeing some of the worst primary market demand metrics on record since our data started in 2016. So in 15 of the last 17 weeks, we've seen double digit new issue concessions on average, which is a streak that we have not seen before, even in the spring of 2020, when concessions normalized after just about nine weeks of double digits, on average. And to me, this highlights that secondary spreads are probably not on as firm footing as you might suspect, given the narrowing that we've seen over the past couple weeks, and borrowers are consistently having to pay up to price new debt. And the divergence that we're seeing between primary and secondary market spreads is not likely to persist for much longer. We're either going to see an improvement in primary market demand, which would likely have to be brought on by a reduction in broad market volatility, or more likely, secondary spreads will have to start to reprice wider.

Margaret Kerins:

So Dan, at a minimum, do you think secondary market spreads should widen out by the new issue concessions that we're seeing in the primary market? And if so, what exactly are those levels?

Dan Belton:

Yeah, Margaret, it's a great question. And that's how we're starting to look at the market. When you have this elevated uncertainty and secondary spreads that are stable , or even moving slightly narrower, that seems very much at odds with primary markets, which are seeing 10, 15, even 20 basis points of new issue concessions day over day for a very prolonged period of time. And so we're looking for spreads to move to somewhere in the range of about 150 to 160 basis points. So that implies about 15 to 25 basis points wider than current levels. And I think that's when we would start to see secondary and primary spreads move more in line with one another. And that would allow for concessions to start to normalize, just given that investors willing to take on this new debt are going to be compensated adequately for the risks that they're incurring.

Margaret Kerins:

So Dan, you mentioned this divergence between primary market, IG spreads, and secondary market spreads. When the secondary market, there's quite a bit of transparency, relative to what we had several years ago, with the advent of trace. So we can see exactly where secondary markets price are clearing. With the wider new issue concessions in the primary market, are you seeing wider bid offer in the secondary market?

Dan Belton:

Yeah, I think that's part of the reason that we're seeing these persistently elevated new issue concessions. And a lot of it has to do with the intraday volatility that we're seeing become a more regular phenomenon in today's market. If you look at, for instance, yesterday's deals, we had a pretty heavy supply to start the week this week. And new issue concessions averaged 14 basis points. It's much harder to gauge the fair value pricing for new issue credit when treasuries are selling off 13 basis points. So some of the volatility that we've seen has led to some liquidity issues in the market. And I think that's part of the reason that we've seen these persistently elevated concessions, but it probably doesn't tell the whole story. I think there's also an element of weakness in demand that's going on here.

Margaret Kerins:

Yeah. Dan, I think your point about the volatility in the treasury market sort of feeding through to the uncertainty in how IG is trading in the primary market clearly makes a lot of sense.

Ben Reitzes:

Changing gears a little bit, I think the topic of conversation thus far has really been focused on the economy and a slow down and a recession, but what we haven't focused on is much, thus far, and what central banks are only focused on, is inflation. And that really is still the driver of policy for now, even if there are signs that the economy might be slowing, I mean, is slowing, depending on where you are and depending on different degrees of slow down in different countries, but inflation is still key here. And we'll get a big Canadian inflation number in a couple of weeks. And the debate in Canada now has shifted to, will the next rate hike in Canada be 50 basis points or 75 basis points, as the bank in Canada really has been a leader among central banks from a tightening perspective? We've already tightened 50 [inaudible 00:15:31] a couple of times, and the bank has said they could be more forceful.

Ben Reitzes:

They could act more forcefully here. And that was a clear hint that 75 basis points is on the table, and the next CPI print is going to be, by my calculation, exceptionally strong. And so the door is wide open to a 75 basis point move and a more aggressive bank of Canada. Beyond that, I think it's 50s or 75s is still a question, but same as the fed, the bank wants to get to neutral as quickly as they can, and then they will determine where to go from there. I guess the question I'd have for the group, and maybe I'll start with Mr. Stephen Gallo is, if the bank of Canada is willing to be that aggressive, are there other central banks that are going to follow suit and ramp up their aggressive tone over the next weeks and months, because oil prices have seemingly gone only in one direction, and natural gas prices as well. And that just means stronger inflation pressure.

Stephen Gallo:

Yeah, that's right, Ben. I'm not so sure about that. Aggressiveness. Let me start with the ECB, because the June rate decision is on Thursday. And I'll weave the exchange rate into it because the FX market is really where I put most of my attention. I don't think we can be a hundred percent sure that the DXY has peaked for the cycle, but we can probably assume that most within the ECB are happy with the bounce in Euro dollar from its 103, 50 low in mid-May to the 106, 107 range where it is now. So in terms of expectations, I can't imagine the ECB wants to unravel that on Thursday with major [inaudible 00:17:03]. So I think the interest rate guidance from the ECB, they'll aim to keep market rate hike expectations in the 2022, 2023 portions of the curve roughly where they are, which is pretty aggressive. That, in my mind, means cementing a core point hike in July, confirming that QE net asset purchases under the APP will finish at roughly the same time.

Stephen Gallo:

I think they'll flag the potential for bigger than 25 basis point rate hikes, but also avoid pre-committing to more rapid tightening at this stage. I'll get to that in a moment. They may also shorten their QE reinvestment timetable, but I think if they do that, they'll make it very conditional, and I don't think they'll be talking about balance sheet run off until tentatively at some point in 2023, maybe even late 2023. We've got new economic forecast, and I think that's going to shed a lot of light on what message the bank is trying to convey. They'll probably reflect a higher peak in 2022 inflation, slower growth in 2023 and 2024, but not a high risk of a recession. So I think they want to give the message that inflation will be brought back under control with the amount of tightening that's roughly priced into the curve without causing a recession in a process.

Margaret Kerins:

So Stephen, we're talking about the possibility of central banks moving more rapidly in the backdrop of inflation. And Ben Reitzes, as you mentioned, higher oil prices and gas prices and how that feeds through to the consumer. But even if, say the bank of Canada moved more aggressively due to inflation from higher oil prices, can they really control this? Oil's a global product. We've got this backdrop of the Russian war in Ukraine causing supply issues. So how could this potentially evolve if you get fed tightening to slow demand for oil in the backdrop of these supply issues?

Ben Reitzes:

Margaret, I mean, you make a good point. Central banks can only control so much, and oil prices are definitely not one of those variables. But what they are really concerned about, and this really only worsens as inflation picks up steam, is inflation expectations. And if you consider the fact that oil prices have gone up substantially at this point, what's happened is, a lot of businesses, their margins have been under consistent pressure.

Ben Reitzes:

They can only absorb so many cost hikes. And so as oil prices continue to rise, they're more likely to pass those costs through to consumers, and that keeps inflation elevated for that much longer. And then the longer this plays out, the longer we get periods of 4, 5, 6, 7% inflation, the greater the odds, the greater the risk that inflation expectations become de-anchored, and that is... Frankly, according to the bank of Canada, if you listen to their host statement speech last week, you would've heard one of the deputy governors say that he's scared, at the moment, with where inflation is, and what that could do to inflation expectations. That scenario of inflation expectations becoming de-anchored is central bankers' worst fear. And that's a risk in Canada, in the US, in Europe. Each geography has their own idiosyncrasies, but they all share that same risk.

Stephen Gallo:

Ben, that's a fantastic point about high inflation expectations becoming embedded in second round effects, and I think allows me to highlight the needle that the ECB needs to thread. It's different from most central banks because currency union, without a full fiscal union, as the ECB stops QE, eventually at some point, domestic, private, and foreign investors are going to need to absorb more government issuance. And Dan Belton referred to this earlier, they need higher compensation for the risks they're taking with the ECP stepping aside. And there is a risk that this process of adjustment is messy in parts of Europe. And so I think that's why I'm a bit cautious about making the call that we won't revisit the lows in your dollar. And that brings me to the bigger picture of the US dollar. So with these factors in mind, I think we really need convincing evidence of something materially negative on the US side. And maybe that's where I'll pass things over to Greg, if you can talk about the dollar and where the dollar is moving in other parts of the FX space.

Greg Anderson:

Actually, Stephen, before talking about the big dollar, just kind of been biting my tongue, waiting to respond to a couple things that Ben said. So first off he, he said central banker's biggest fear is unanchored inflation expectations around the globe. And I agree with one exception, and that exception is Haruhiko Kuroda, governor of the bank of Japan, he has been fairly forceful in making the argument several times over the past few weeks, that it's not appropriate to respond to a supply shock caused by higher energy prices by tightening policy. And that has generally been the mantra of central bankers in past cycles, but they weren't looking at inflation numbers this high. Kuroda's just not shocked. He's not going to raise rates. He's not going to end the BOJ's version of QE. And so as a result, the biggest movement in the foreign exchange market this year has been in dollar yen.

Greg Anderson:

And we kind of blew through the highs in dollar yen this week. So where Ian had mentioned 10 year yields, topped out at 320, unlikely that we get back there. When that happened a few weeks ago, dollar yen hit a high of 131, pulled back with treasuries. And this time, even though treasury yields, haven't pierced above 3% dollar yen's at new highs. And Kuroda's comments and the price of oil are, are the reasons why I think it's going considerably further. So one other thing that Ben asked is, are other central banks prepared to go 75 alongside of the bank of Canada, if they did. Overnight, we had the RBA hike more aggressively than expected, by 50 basis points. And no, I don't think the RBA will go by 75, nor the RBNZ or the fed. But with the RBA, there's kind of an asterisk, they meet every month. So if they were to hike 50 basis points a month for the next six months, they would in fact be hiking faster than the bank of Canada moving in 75 basis point increments.

Greg Anderson:

I didn't know that they will continue at that pace, but the curve now has it priced in basically almost 50 at every meeting. With all these other central banks raising rates, and I'm coming back to Steven's question, does that offset the fed? And does it bring us ultimately to a lower US dollar? I think it does if we are able to engineer a soft landing. But if we are not, and in fact, we overtighten and end up with a global recession, everybody will be scrambling to figure out how they take back some of their rate hikes, but in the interim, the US dollar would just search to new highs on risk off sentiment. So you'd face one of those environments where treasury yields are dropping and the dollar is [inaudible 00:24:39] anyway.

Margaret Kerins:

Greg, you mentioned that oil prices could move considerably higher. We are already looking at record gasoline prices, which, of course, are tax on consumption. If oil prices move substantially higher, obviously that'll be transmitted through to the consumer. Is there a scenario where you see oil prices remaining stable or falling from here over the medium term?

Greg Anderson:

So Margaret, I'll admit I'm one of the big oil bowls. I just look at inventories being so lean. And summer demand season, plus hurricane season in North America, and I just think the risks of a huge spike higher still in oil are very high. But what would soften it up, I suppose if global GDP growth slowed below 2%. Typically, the global industrial demand for oil softens enough in that type of environment that we might slide back under a hundred for oil. The thing that I would argue, we had an equilibrium in oil that was caught 90 to a hundred dollars a barrel in 2011 to 2014. And then we hit the US production miracle.

Greg Anderson:

And that equilibrium in oil, it dropped by about $20 a barrel. Okay, so the US production miracle is... It's kind of in the rear view mirror now, and that's the way the market views it. And meanwhile, the prices of everything else went up 2% a year times 10 years, so 20, 25%. New equilibrium for oil should probably be somewhere around 120, and we just barely got there. So softening up from here, I think it takes a recession.

Ben Reitzes:

I'd have to agree with Greg on that one. If you consider the past few months or so, and with China under lockdown and oil prices still didn't come under any real pressure in that environment and stayed very elevated. It's just very difficult to see oil prices back off meaningfully absent a deep global recession at this point that the supply and demand fundamentals are just too strong, unfortunately.

Margaret Kerins:

Do you think a resolution to the Russian-Ukrainian war would bring oil prices back down?

Ben Reitzes:

I guess it would depend on what kind of resolution, but it's going to be very difficult for Europe to back down from what they've done, and same with North America. I don't know how you take Russia out of the box that they're currently in. They need to be penalized, and that's what's happening. And even if they were to back off immediately, it'd be difficult to rationalize backing off from the sanctions and giving Russia a free pass for what they've done.

Margaret Kerins:

So Greg and Ben, you mentioned that the equilibrium price of oil might be around $120 a barrel oil prices were near this level in 2011 through 2014, but gas prices weren't as high back then. How should we be thinking about gas prices and their impact on the economy if oil prices continue to increase?

Greg Anderson:

I think, Margaret, that gas prices will go up. And just on that point, it was the CEO of Chevron who said earlier this week, "There will never be another refinery built in the United States again." And that's kind of the bottleneck and the problem, and the price of all the components, including labor of refining has gone up and awful lot from where it was the last time that oil was $120 a barrel.

Margaret Kerins:

Thanks, Greg. Well, we've covered a lot of topics today, so let's end with a rapid fire summary from each of you, beginning with Ian. Ian?

Ian Lyngen:

So I think that the next stage in the treasury market is going to be coming to grips with a balance of risk that are currently facing not only the US, but also the global economy. And that's going to result in elevated breakevens as energy prices remain high, but a compressed curve and increasing odds of some type of slowdown. Whether one wants to attribute it to the fed or simply a continued fallout from the global pandemic, the reality is there will be a recession. Whether it's this year, next year, or beyond is what the market is debating right now. And in that context, we'd be a buyer of 10 year yields above 320 to 326.

Margaret Kerins:

Dan Belton?

Dan Belton:

We expect credit spreads to start to migrate modestly wider over the medium term, setting targets of around 150 to 160 basis points in the broad index for many of the same reasons that Ian just touched on, primarily heightened recession risk and macro uncertainty, in the near term, we're looking for primary market metrics to start to come in line with secondary market metrics, likely through wider credit spreads in the weeks ahead.

Margaret Kerins:

Ben Reitzes?

Ben Reitzes:

Rate hikes, lots of rate hikes, aggressive rate hikes, probably. Inflation's going to remain very strong, especially in the very near term. That, combined with a softening economic backdrop, points to a consistently flatter curve. The front end's going to continue to struggle here as we continue to push toward at least having 75 price for the July meeting, and the longer end will benefit from the weaker economic backdrop. And so a flatter curve here, and likely ongoing significant volatility.

Margaret Kerins:

Stephen Gallo.

Stephen Gallo:

Yeah, Margaret, I think tentatively, there are signs that the low for the cycle in European currencies versus the dollar is in, but I'm cautious about that, and I'm leaning towards a retest of those lows. Until we get clear evidence of a peak in European inflation rates is in, and this adjustment in long term yields, risk premia in Europe is over, I think that there are issues with a number of European central banks moving as aggressively as central banks in net commodity exporting economies have moved. So that is a concern. And I also have to pinpoint Sterling, particularly bearish on Sterling. Given the high inflation backdrop drop, I think the outlook for the public sector fiscal account, I think there's a risk that it could worsen. Structurally, I think the UK has a lot of growth potential problems, and there are also potentially more drags coming from trade. So regardless of whether the US dollar peak is in or not, I think Sterling is going to be an underperformer.

Margaret Kerins:

Greg Anderson?

Greg Anderson:

Oil price spike over the next several months and probably one last leg of dollar spike alongside of it, US dollar. Worst G 10 performing currency over the next few months should continue to be yen, and the best performer, kind of attached it to the hip with the USD, Canadian dollar.

Margaret Kerins:

Okay. And that's a wrap. Thank you to all of our BMO experts, and thank you for listening. This concludes Macro Horizon's Monthly Episode 41: Inflation Fixation. As always, please reach out to us with feedback and any ideas on topics you'd like us to tackle.

Margaret Kerins:

Thanks for listening to macro horizons, please visit us at bmocm.com/macrohorizons. We'd like to hear what you thought of today's episode. You can send us an email at Margaret.kerins.com. You can listen to the show and subscribe on Apple Podcasts or your favorite podcast provider. And we'd appreciate it if you could take a moment to leave us a rating and a review. This show and resources are supported by our team here at BMO, including the FICC macro strategy group and BMO's marketing team. This show is produced and edited by Puddle Creative.

Speaker 2:

This podcast has been prepared with the assistance of employees of Bank of Montreal, BMO Nesbitt Burns, incorporated, and BMO Capital Markets corporation, together BMO, who are involved in fixed income and foreign exchange sales and marketing efforts. Accordingly, it should be considered to be a product of the fixed income and foreign exchange businesses generally, and not a research report that reflects the views of disinterested research analysts. Not withstanding the forgoing, this podcast should not be construed as an offer or the solicitation of an offer to sell or to buy or subscribe for any particular product or services, including without limitation, any commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. We are not soliciting any specific action based on this podcast. It is for the general information of our clients. It does not constitute a recommendation or a suggestion that any investment or strategy referenced herein may be suitable for you.

Speaker 2:

It does not take into account the particular investment objectives, financial conditions, or needs of individual clients. Nothing in this podcast constitutes investment, legal, accounting, or tax advice, or representation that any investment or strategy is suitable or appropriate to your unique circumstances, or otherwise constitutes an opinion or a recommendation to you. BMO is not providing advice regarding the value or advisability of trading in commodity interests, including futures contracts, and commodity options or any other activity, which would cause BMO or any of its affiliates to be considered a commodity trading advisor under the US commodity exchange act. BMO is not undertaking to act as a swap advisor to you or in your best interests in you. To the extent applicable, will rely sole on advice from your qualified independent representative in making hedging or trading decisions. This podcast does not to be relied upon in substitution for the exercise of independent judgment.

Speaker 2:

You should conduct your own independent analysis of the matters referred to herein, together with your qualified independent representative, if applicable. BMO assumes no responsibility for verification of the information in this podcast. No representation or warranty is made as to the accuracy or completeness of such information, and BMO accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss arising from any use of or reliance on this podcast. BMO assumes no obligation to correct or update this podcast. This podcast does not contain all information that may be required to evaluate any transaction or matter, and information may be available to BMO and or its affiliates that is not reflected herein. BMO and it's affiliates may have positions, long or short, and affect transactions or make markets insecurities mentioned herein, or provide advice or loans to, or participate in the underwriting or restructuring of the obligations of issuers and companies mentioned herein. Moreover, BMO's trading desks may have acted on the basis of the information in this podcast. For further information, please go to bmocm.com/macrohorizons/legal.

Margaret Kerins, CFA Head of FICC Macro Strategy
Ian Lyngen, CFA Managing Director, Head of U.S. Rates Strategy
Benjamin Reitzes Managing Director, Canadian Rates & Macro Strategist
Greg Anderson Global Head of FX Strategy
Stephen Gallo European Head of FX Strategy
Dan Belton Vice President, Fixed Income Strategy, PHD
Ben Jeffery US Rates Strategist, Fixed Income Strategy

You might also be interested in