Henry James International Management September Market Commentary

Market Overview

As 2019’s third quarter came to an end, the salient thought in our mind at Henry James International Management was ‘growth’, despite raging political, economic and market volatility. The trend evident across markets is that while 2019’s 3rd quarter was a downer, positive September growth partially offset the quarter’s losses. Despite this disappointing quarter, Year-to-Date (YTD) markets are up significantly. MSCI EAFE was +2.92% in September, -1.00% in the 3rd Quarter and +13.35% YTD; MSCI Emerging Markets +1.94% in September, -4.11% in the 3rd Quarter and +6.23% YTD; MSCI World ex USA Small Cap was +2.6% in September, -0.19% in the 3rd Quarter and +13.01% YTD.

Just keeping up with the news has presented enough turbulence to make even those with strongest constitutions feel motion sickness. Some of the prominent market influencing headlines continue to be the US-China trade conflict and a range of other tariff scrums between nations, Brexit, Iran’s provocation of the West and United States (US) President Trump’s subsequent saber rattling. The pro-democracy riots in Hong Kong show no sign of abating and one assumes it is only a matter of time before we see a version of Tiananmen Square again with China’s using its military to put the Special Administrative Region firmly under its thumb. Staying in Asia, North Korea is getting antsy and has resumed missile testing again at the expense of the Sea of Japan. Domestically any chance of short-term political stability was derailed when US Congressional Democrats launched an impeachment inquiry on the back of accusations that Trump encouraged the Ukrainian president to interfere on his behalf in the 2020 US General Election.  Germany, the bellwether of global manufacturing, has seen its output continue to drop; American and Chinese manufacturing has followed suit.

Henry James International Management September Market Commentary
Global Manufacturing is slowing.

And yet, somehow markets – despite personifying the before-mentioned volatility – have pressed forward in a mostly unperturbed fashion. Of course, there is some reason for optimism. The Fed lowered interest rates again by 25 basis points to between 1.75% and 2.00%, which should give domestic and global markets (particularly emerging markets) an excellent spark of positive momentum. Also noteworthy is a new US-Japan trade deal that is set to take effect on January 1, 2020; while it will technically have to be approved by Japanese lawmakers before it is official, it is expected to be ratified without difficulty.

Investment Outlook

James O’Leary, CFA, Chief Investment Officer and Senior Portfolio Manager at Henry James International Management, sees self-inflicted political turmoil as the main factor impeding global economic growth: ‘It seems that politicians globally cannot sit back and enjoy a stable and slowly expanding global economy,’ he said. According to O’Leary, the economic slow down, that we discussed at length in our August Market Commentary, will continue as long as Brexit is uncertain and continues to pull both the United Kingdom and European Union down, the US is mired in political turmoil, the US and China fail to achieve a mutually beneficial trade resolution and Iran continues to destabilize the Middle East and threaten oil through its support of regional terrorism.

Henry James International Management September Market Commentary
Markets have so far push through Iran’s destabilizing influence.

Despite the volatility, O’Leary sees markets as resilient, but to a point. ‘Markets took Iran’s bombing of the Saudi oil processing facility in stride, and were unaffected by Trump’s United Nation’s speech where he lambasted Iran and China,’ said O’Leary. Of course, the world remains awash with oil despite the actions with which Iran has been accused and, in spite of the US President’s bellicose rhetoric, shooting-from-the-hip style, and apparently being ‘locked and loaded’, he has made it very clear that he does not seek war.

At this point – around mid-September – O’Leary believed that markets were cautiously hoping to find some element of terra firma at their feet to use as a sturdy platform to reverse the global slowdown. What they were greeted with was what O’Leary views as Congressional Democrats who could not leave well enough alone and took impeachment action against Trump. Not only does this tremendously damage US-China trade war negotiations before the 2020 General Election – as a distracted, politically impeded President will not be able to negotiate from a position of strength in the face of Chinese Premier Xi Jinping’s absolute rule – it will also push the required robust domestic economic agenda to help stimulate the US economy to the back burner. When combined with the Chinese debt crisis, Hong Kong riots and Brexit taking yet another turn for the worst and paralyzing British business, one wonders how much more markets can take before the global slowdown becomes a global recession. Thankfully, the global economy is still expanding and is projected to grow just below 3% in 2020, though new International Monetary Fund Chief Kristalina Georgieva’s October 8th speech could certainly erode some optimism.

O’Leary is hopeful that the international economy will shake off the political uncertainty and that we will see a globally coordinated fiscal and monetary response. The ray of good news for the US and global economy is this: as pressure turns coal into diamonds, so may Trump’s ardent desire to get re-elected drive him to achieve a trade deal with China and get his own economy back on track with the help of falling Fed interest rates.

Disclosures

This material is prepared by Henry James International Management and is not intended to be relied upon as a forecast, research or investment advice, and is not a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy. The information and opinions contained in this material are obtained from proprietary and nonproprietary sources believed by Henry James International Management, to be reliable, are not necessarily comprehensive and are not guaranteed as to accuracy. No warranty of accuracy or reliability is given and no responsibility arising in any other way for errors and omissions is accepted by Henry James International Management, its officers, employees or agents. This material is based on information as of the specified date and may be stale thereafter. We have no obligation to tell you when information herein may change. Reliance upon information in this material is at the sole discretion of the reader. Certain information contained herein may constitute forward-looking statements. Estimates of future performance are based on assumptions that may not be realized.

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of current or future results and should not be the sole factor of consideration when selecting a product or strategy.

Any indices chosen by Henry James International Management to measure performance are representative of broad asset classes. Henry James International Management retains the right to change representative indices at any time.

Henry James International Management and its’ representatives do not provide legal or tax advice. Each client should always consult his/her personal tax and/or legal advisor for information concerning his/her individual situation.

Henry James International Management June Market Commentary

Market Overview

There is a lot of turmoil facing global markets these days, but – despite a shaky May – two quarters into 2019 there is a lot to be positive about. So far this year, we have seen a great deal of drama involving the world’s two superpowers on the verge of a bare-knuckle trade war. Despite the many reasons to be pessimistic, Year-to-Date (YTD) markets have performed brilliantly: Developed Market (DM) equities are up a roaring 14.49% as measured by the MSCI EAFE index; Emerging Market (EM) equities stiffed armed 2018’s woes, up 10.76% and the MSCI World ex USA Small Cap is up an impressive 13.22%. For the Second Quarter these indices are in positive territory: the MSCI EAFE +3.97%, the MSCI Emerging Markets +0.74% and MSCI World ex USA Small Cap +1.97%. Both the YTD and Second Quarter figures have a stellar June to thank for such happy reading, as the month that just finished clawed back the devastation wreaked by May with the MSCI EAFE up 5.97%, the MSCI Emerging Markets +6.32% and MSCI World ex USA Small Cap +4.59%.

Just as 2019’s second fiscal quarter transitioned to its third, US President Donald Trump was behind the scenes at the G20 summit with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping banging out a shiny new trade truce. This was unveiled on July 1st and markets erupted in elation, but were brought back down to earth when everyone realized that ‘trade truce’ does not actually mean a sweeping resolution to the damaging trade dispute, nor does it end the costly tariffs both sides have enacted on the other’s goods. Moreover, Chinese tech giant Huawei remains a blacklisted company in the US and President Trump has not exactly signaled that he will back down from his desire to see his allies also eradicate Huawei technology from their borders. And yet, there were good will overtures galore, including Trump agreeing to ease restrictions on Huawei’s US technology purchases and to halt a fresh round of tariffs that would hit another $300bn of Chinese goods. President Xi responded with positive gestures of his own, promising to purchase an unspecified amount of US farm products and to resume trade talks immediately.

Henry James International Management June Market Commentary
Is trade between the US and Mexico stable?

It seems that Trump has frightened Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrado (AMLO) into submission through the threat of quickly escalating tariffs, the new free trade deal known as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (which is agreed to but not yet ratified), notwithstanding. While early June was a worrying period for markets impacted by US-Mexico trade, normality resumed when Trump called off the 5% tariff on all Mexican goods on June 8th. As a result of this spectacle, trade along the southern US borders seems stable for both countries, but one wonders what the impact may be for such blatant disregard of this free trade agreement and if it may alter the way in which other nations (chiefly China) view the value of a trade deal with the US.

June saw the US and Iran on the brink of genuine military conflict when on Thursday June 20, 2019 President Trump called off an air strike on 3 Iranian targets. It is reported that the mission was aborted at the last moment as the President was advised that the strike would cause upwards of 150 casualties, which was deemed a disproportionate response to Iran shooting down a US drone. US-Iranian tensions had already been at boiling point even since an incident in the Gulf of Oman involving two oil tankers, which the US says were victims of an Iranian mine attack, which the Islamic Republic has vehemently denied. Far from being on the mend, since then US-Iranian relations have only worsened and Iran has taken dramatic steps to put pressure on the rest of the international community to re-embrace it: on Monday July 1st Iran declared that it breached the 300-kilogram limit for low-enriched uranium that was agreed in the Iran Nuclear Deal. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani warned on July 3rd that Iran would also be increasing its enrichment capacity to above the pre-agreed limits, too, and would not comply with the agreement unless it received relief from US sanctions provided by the other signatories.

Despite President Trump increasing pressure on the Federal Reserve to slash interest rates, Chairman Jerome Powell was unperturbed and announced that he would keep rates unchanged, between 2.25% and 2.5%. Trump has been a critic of Powell on Twitter and has apparently been privately threatening to fire him for failing to lower interest rates. Trump denies this rumor and Powell says he fully intends to serve his full 4-year term as the Federal Reserve’s Chairman; moreover, the President sacking Powell would be an unprecedented action that almost certainly does not have a legal basis.

Henry James International Management June Market Commentary
The EU has already confirmed that it is Prime Minister Theresa May’s deal or no deal at all.

In Britain the final two candidates for Conservative Party Leader and Theresa May’s replacement as Prime Minister (PM) are Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt. While both candidates appear to be lusting after the highest office in Britain, the winner will inherent a government that simply does not have the Parliamentary math to resolve the most pressing topic: Brexit. Johnson – who is by far the favorite – says that, while a no deal Brexit is not ideal, he will push Britain out of the European Union (EU) on October 31st, 2019 no matter what. His rival Hunt – who campaigned for Remain in the 2016 referendum – said he would deliver Brexit but would be open to extending the deadline if a deal was nearly complete. The EU and its Parliament are essentially closed for the summer, which means that when business resumes it will be very difficult for whoever wins the leadership contest to have the required time to renegotiate a Brexit Deal; besides which, the EU has already confirmed that it was Mrs. May’s deal or no deal at all.

Investment Outlook

According to James O’Leary, our Chief Investment Officer and Senior Portfolio Manager at Henry James International Management, the trade sanctions of which President Trump has become so partial have become the greatest headwind to global markets, specifically the uncertainty it forces the US economy and its businesses and consumers to face. ‘When there is uncertainty, long-term investments are not made. This slows economic growth as investment into the future is not made and decisions are deferred,’ O’Leary says. Amongst other items, this has a significant effect on job creation and retention, which subsequently affects the consumer spending power that drives the economy. O’Leary points to two sectors that have been dealt unenviable blows by the tariff uncertainty: agriculture and technology. The former has been a victim of the US-China dispute as Beijing has dramatically reduced its purchases of soybeans and other items in response to US tariffs; the latter, namely Qualcomm and Intel, has seen it coerced to end selling computer parts to China by way of a Trump executive order.

While there is clearly much lasting damage that a prolonged trade dispute would do to the American economy, the positive news is that the sting will eventually subside as supply chains are moved away from China and to other EM economies like Vietnam, India and Myanmar. While China boasts the ability to manipulate its monetary policy in a way envied by Trump, O’Leary believes that China is in a more precarious situation than the US as once American businesses move their supply chains away from China there will be minimal incentive to move them back, even after a trade deal has been realized. ‘The problem for China,’ says O’Leary, ‘is that there is a chance that these losses will be permanent.’ He continues: ‘There is a positive for other EM countries who inherit this manufacturing as it may help increase longer-term economic growth. It is also a positive for the US in that production will have been diversified away from China.’ Despite this, O’Leary believes that President Xi will simply wait out the end of the Trump presidency to see if he can get a better deal from a less bellicose Democratic president who may well assume the keys to the White House in 2021 – as China does not suffer from the inefficiencies of party politics Xi and his party arguably have time on their side.

Despite the market anxiety of the eight-day period during which Mexico faced escalating US tariffs, both countries appear to have emerged on the other side of what could have been a fraught trading relationship. Mexican President “AMLO”came into office on the back of some bold and ambitious economic promises to his electorate; despite this, the economy over which he presides has been doing very poorly. Mexican Gross Domestic Product (GDP) shrank by 0.2% in the first quarter of 2019 from the previous three months, which was below estimates a panel of economists surveyed by Bloomberg predicted. Mexico is in dire straights and the threat of tariffs offered a layer of instability that AMLO could have done without.  Consequently O’Leary believes that AMLO will do anything – within reason – to stay on Trump’s good side to avoid any future tariffs.

The industry most affected by the threat of tariffs was the automobile sector, says O’Leary, which experienced plenty of equity volatility in June. European, Japanese and even American car manufacturers have opened up factories ‘south of the border’ to take advantage of the reduced cost of doing business in Mexico. While Trump’s tariffs were almost completely political in nature and focused squarely on immigration concerns, O’Leary is fascinated by a certain hypothetical: he imagines a scenario in which tariffs were enforced, which may compel car companies to bring their factories from Mexico to within America’s borders. Such a situation, which would no doubt be brilliant for the US economy, would face Mexico with one issue with which AMLO is not currently dealing; i.e. high unemployment. Historically higher Mexican unemployment means heightened illegal migration through the US-Mexico border so one wonders which political goal is the more salient for Trump: US manufacturing and jobs or thwarting illegal immigration?

Henry James International Management June Market Commentary
In June the automobile industry was extremely affected by Trump’s threat of Mexico tariffs.

Despite the roaring headwinds caused by tariff-induced uncertainty, at Henry James International Management our unbiased and disciplined country allocation system allows us to ignore the noise and focus on the facts with which our data present us. Our research is currently bullish on France, Germany and Sweden, as well as Latin America and Asia. According to our Senior Portfolio Manager O’Leary, our quantitative stock selection process will continue to flow in this direction.

The saber-rattling between the US and Iran has caught our attention, but only in so far as it is increasing our exposure to energy stocks. ‘The combination of reduced OPEC production and restricted supply from Iran has caused the price of oil to increase,’ says O’Leary. As long as the conflict persists, the price of oil will stay up, he says. While Henry James International Management is happy to enjoy the gains from rising oil prices, we believe the downside is that expensive energy will negatively impact global economic growth and pressure on consumers and businesses.

Despite Senior Portfolio Manager O’Leary closely monitoring the Federal Reserve’s near complete about-face when it comes to their projected monetary policy, he says that Henry James International Management has not had to change its own strategy as a result; rather, our quantitative growth strategy and targeted data analysis guides us safely through ‘bumpy stock market terrain’. According to O’Leary, this remains the case even in recession: ‘We generally underperform at the initial market drop and recover after a few months as valuations normalize. The portfolio naturally moves to a more defensive posture over time in a bear market while keeping its growth bias,’ he says.

O’Leary predicts that Powell will keep interest rates flat for the rest of 2019 and probably for 2020, too. While Republicans and President Trump will be keen to see interest rates lowered to spark the economy into high gear ahead of the 2020 election, according to O’Leary to see the effects of compromising the independence of a country’s national bank one only has to look to Venezuela and Turkey. ‘There seems to be a power struggle between Trump and the Federal Reserve Board,’ says O’Leary. ‘The Federal Reserve is supposed to be set up to serve the long term interests of the USA, whereas Trump wants it to serve his interests.’ O’Leary says that in 2018 the Federal Reserve’s medium term goal was to increase interest rates steadily so that when the next recession comes, they would have some stimulus tools; i.e. lowering rates, to deal with it. However, with such unstable market conditions, mostly due to tariffs and other trade issues, Powell may have to live with the existing cushion of 2.50%. O’Leary adds: ‘If the economy remains strong there will be an upward interest rate bias to hold inflation down while maintaining orderly growth.’ However, if future rising rates cause Trump to get into a battle with Powell, the American people will become the big losers, says O’Leary. In the event that rates are maintained at 2.50% – or are even lowered – EM economies may benefit tremendously as low interest rates allow them to borrow in US dollars (USD) at a low borrowing rate. Of course, this comes with a significant risk: strong USD against a weak EM currency can cause major problems in repaying loans which can result in defaults and bankruptcies.

Henry James International Management June Market Commentary
In the short term, there are no positive Brexit outcomes for investors.

Regarding Brexit, O’Leary says that he sees no good solutions on the horizon. ‘Once uncertainty entered the British economy prior to Brexit our system made us reduce our exposure to the UK and it has remained underweight relative to EAFE,’ he said. The UK equities to which Henry James International Management has exposed its portfolios receive a greater portion of their revenue from outside the UK rather than being domestic orientated companies. According to O’Leary, in the short-term, the question is not whether or not Brexit is a wise move for the UK as much as it is the case that it has created raging market uncertainty with dire consequences. He said: ‘We believe the UK will underperform until there is certainty; once there is certainty, UK equities will lag until it is clear whether or not the resolution to the mess that is Brexit is determined to be good or bad for the UK economy.’ In short, we believe difficult days lie ahead for UK equities.

In summary, with half of 2019 in the books there are clearly plenty of headwinds to keep investors up at night; but such anxiety belies the many reasons for optimism, not least of which markets’ apparent ability to breeze past the geo-political turmoil that can subdue them. Moreover, we believe that our quantitative strategy for growth gives Henry James International Management the ability to perform well relative to the benchmark in all market conditions.

Disclosures

This material is prepared by Henry James International Management and is not intended to be relied upon as a forecast, research or investment advice, and is not a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy. The information and opinions contained in this material are obtained from proprietary and nonproprietary sources believed by Henry James International Management, to be reliable, are not necessarily comprehensive and are not guaranteed as to accuracy. No warranty of accuracy or reliability is given and no responsibility arising in any other way for errors and omissions is accepted by Henry James International Management, its officers, employees or agents. This material is based on information as of the specified date and may be stale thereafter. We have no obligation to tell you when information herein may change. Reliance upon information in this material is at the sole discretion of the reader. Certain information contained herein may constitute forward-looking statements. Estimates of future performance are based on assumptions that may not be realized.

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of current or future results and should not be the sole factor of consideration when selecting a product or strategy.

Any indices chosen by Henry James International Management to measure performance are representative of broad asset classes. Henry James International Management retains the right to change representative indices at any time.

Henry James International Management and its’ representatives do not provide legal or tax advice. Each client should always consult his/her personal tax and/or legal advisor for information concerning his/her individual situation.

Henry James May Market Commentary

Market Overview

An Irish poet once wrote, ‘Things fall apart’. While William Butler Yeats’s words were illuminating the terror and awe of the second coming of Christ, it would be easy to see how investors might consider them rather apropos for the way in which May managed to thwart and consume 2019’s positive market momentum. Just as the S&P 500 reached its record high at the end of April, May saw the index fall by -6.35%. Developed Market (DM) equities were also victims to the blood-dimmed tide: as measured by the MSCI EAFE index their value tumbled by -4.66%. While such losses will trouble investors, particularly as most indicators point towards a daunting, uphill climb for markets for the rest of 2019 and beyond, it would be wise to remember that year-to-date the S&P 500 and MSCI EAFE not only remain well into positive territory, they are both exceeding the expectations set during the dismal days of December 2018. While American and DM equities have been left merely bruised, May brought Emerging Market (EM) equities to their knees. Their stellar 2019 returns were overrun and eliminated, falling by -7.22% as measured by the MSCI EM index, practically down to where they were at the end of 2018.

The main protagonist who pitilessly turned markets upside down in May was the United States (US)-China trade war. Just over two months after US President Donald Trump indefinitely postponed the tariff raise from 10% to 25% on over $200bn of Chinese goods, on May 10, 2019 he suddenly enacted them with no more than a few days’ notice. The following Monday, May 13th the Chinese retaliated with their own tariff increases on over $60bn of US goods. The freshly realized trade war had begun and its impact was swift and immense: the Dow fell 617 points and the S&P 500 and Nasdaq both dropped a shocking 2.4% in just one day of trading. Those hoping that Trump’s hard nose tactics would yield an immediate result and that the tariffs would be short-lived may well have been thinking naively: we are a lot closer to new increases than to a cooling of trade hostilities. More than $300bn of fresh Chinese goods – mostly consumer goods, including automotive vehicles, some of which rather ironically bearing the name ‘General Motors’– are only a signature away from being enacted by Trump. More tariffs would likely incur a further retaliation from China and suck both countries deeper and deeper into a trade war from which it will not be easy to escape. According to the International Monetary Fund the trade war will cost the US around $455bn in the short term, a round number that is more than the total size of the South African economy, which is the entire continent of Africa’s largest. While it will hit China hard, too, the one party-state has the greater ability to manoeuvre and pull levers to stimulate its economy through monetary and fiscal easing and by lowering taxes. Furthermore, unemployment is not an issue in China; but despite its resilience, China’s businesses and consumers will feel plenty of trade war-induced pain. Despite this being a bilateral issue, all international markets will feel the trade war’s strain and stress.

Henry James International Management May 2019 Market Commentary
More than $300bn of fresh Chinese goods – including automotive vehicles rather ironically bearing the name ‘General Motors’– are only a Trump signature away from being enacted.

Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei is currently stuck between its lofty capitalistic aspirations and ownership links to the Chinese one-party Communist state. On May 15, 2019 Trump banned Huawei products from the US through a national security order, claiming that Beijing is using the company to conduct international espionage. Both China and Huawei vehemently deny the accusations; it has also been suggested that this is a power play by the US to make the Chinese more pliable at the trade negotiating table. This accusation was first levied against Washington back in December 2018 when Huawei Chief Financial Advisor Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada at the request of the US on 13 criminal charges including conspiracy to violate US Iranian sanctions, fraud and obstruction; she remains in Canada under partial house arrest where she is battling extradition. According to the US, Wanzhou’s arrest and its banning of Huawei products are both completely unrelated to the trade war. In the meantime, Huawei is suffering as computer chip behemoth Arm has set them adrift and Google is on the verge of withholding its signature Android mobile and tablet operating system. At the same time, Trump is pressuring US allies to also ban both Huawei products and technology – which presents difficulty for countries like Britain and Germany who are using the tech company to build their new 5G networks. If Huawei were tempted to think that their plight could not get any worse and that it was only up from here, they would be crestfallen by the news that Britain has dropped the Huawei Mate 20 X from its forthcoming 5G launch and that – as long as Trump has his Chinese vexation aimed at Huawei – more disappointments are likely to follow.

After a brief and thoroughly restful April slumber, a reinvigorated Brexit is poised to join ranks with the US-China trade war and become a serious thorn in markets’ side. To the delight of investors, late March saw a ‘No-Deal’ Brexit temporarily averted; regrettably the new October 31, 2019 deadline is rapidly approaching. April and May hoisted a range of existential and practical questions upon Britons, their government and their Members of Parliament (MP): what kind of Brexit the United Kingdom (UK) wants, how it will get there and whether it still even wants to leave the European Union (EU) at all. While these introspections have resulted in plenty of discord in the main opposition party, Labour, the ruling Conservatives have manifested their unrest by forcing their party leader and the Prime Minister (PM) Theresa May to resign. Mrs. May is wildly unpopular among Brexiters for failing to arrive at the hard Brexit the more dogmatic among them desired; she is disliked by Remainers for her dogged pursuit of Brexit despite what they believe is copious evidence that remaining in the EU is the far more sensible option. As a result, very few people will be shedding a tear for the PM, and yet markets may be quaking in their boots. While equities have been tortured by the instability and lack of clear direction fostered by Mrs. May’s inability to successfully manage Brexit, it was none other than the PM who saved them from the ruinous ‘No-Deal’ Brexit by postponing the deadline to October 31. Furthermore, any deal under Mrs. May would have probably been an equity-friendly soft-Brexit – now that she is leaving her post it is a near certainty that her successor will come with the most robust of Eurosceptic credentials and could have minimal problem steering Britain and markets off a ‘No-Deal’ cliff to achieve Brexit by October 31.

As Mrs. May has abdicated, the Conservative Party is currently in the midst of a leadership contest and the result will bring the UK its next PM. Boris Johnson, MP, is the leading candidate and he has already declared he has no problem with a ‘No Deal’ Brexit if a suitable agreement cannot be made before October 31, 2019. While Johnson is bold, brash and prone to the occasional gaff – a bit like a subdued, British equivalent of President Trump – his words will likely prove easier to say than to effect: there simply is not a majority for a No-Deal Brexit in Parliament and Johnson will inherent from Mrs. May a minority government from which it is very difficult to do anything significant, particularly when so many members of his own ruling Conservative Party are dead set against a ‘No Deal’ Brexit. While leaving the EU without a deal remains the default legal position regardless of Parliamentary math, if it appears that the UK is headed in that direction it is a near certainty that a no-confidence vote in the government would be triggered, which would result of a new general election. In this very plausible scenario, unless things drastically improve for Johnson’s Conservative Party, particularly after the way in which it got hammered at the recent European Parliamentary elections, they would likely lose the keys to 10 Downing Street to Labour. As such, Johnson will likely have no interest in a fresh general election and will therefore be keen to avoid a situation that would see his government dissolved through a no-confidence vote. Therefore, it seems sensible that even with a Hard-Brexit PM all options remain on the table, including a second ‘People’s Vote’ referendum that could break Parliament’s Brexit deadlock and give the a final decision about what kind of Brexit is desired – or if it is still desired at all – back to Britons. While markets may optimistically decide to take this as a news teetering on ‘positive’, even with rose-tinted glasses it is clear that the raging political uncertainty that would accompany avoiding a ‘No Deal’ Brexit in this convoluted, dragged-out fashion would punish the British economy and equities within and beyond the UK.

Already a diabolical month for markets, there was more bad news for investors on its final day – on May 31st Trump announced plans for a 5% tariff on all imported Mexican goods to begin on June 10, 2019 as a way to pressure Mexico into taking action to help manage the illegal migrant crisis. As discussed in last month’s Market Commentary, the Mexican economy is already in bad shape and tariffs would have been a crushing blow, particularly as they were scheduled to increase incrementally:  up to 10% in July and possibly as high as 25% by October. Thankfully Trump announced on Saturday June 8th that he would cancel the tariff increase as Mexico agreed a host of new measures: to clamp down on migrants crossing its northern US border, to deploy its national guard to the southern Mexican border to thwart fresh migrants moving north and to work to abate human smuggling. The result of this drama – an 8 day period that saw American equities, consumers, businesses, investors and the Mexican economy all squirm in uncertainty and fear– may be painted as a political victory for Trump as Mexico obliged to his wishes without any tariff ever having been introduced. But the question must be asked, particularly in light of the on-going issue of the US-China trade war: is it wise to use tariffs in the way in which the President is quickly becoming a fan?

According to Trump, ‘Tariffs are a “beautiful thing when you’re the piggy bank,”– but what happens to this bold assertion when it is scrutinized? Investors and equities should all delight in the fact that President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) recognized the genuine damage that quickly escalating tariffs would do to his country’s already fragile and floundering economy and acquiesced to the US President; the problem from an American perspective vis-à-vis Make America Great Again is that tariffs would have done arguably more damage to the US economy (and those who rely on it), its vastly superior strength, notwithstanding. Indeed, Mexican tariffs would be a blow for US businesses with supply-chains running through Mexico and the resulting products – from car parts to avocados – would bear what is effectively a sales tax that would be passed on to American consumers. As such it is no surprise that the Republican Party was unable to rally behind the President, with both Senators Mitch McConnell and Ted Cruz speaking out in opposition to the Mexican tariffs. Moreover, to view Trump’s thoughtless words on his love of tariffs through a historical prism, one need only look back to the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act to see the effects of over-reliance on tariffs that saw them implemented on over 20,000 imported goods, which subsequently incurred punitive retaliatory measures, which resulted in American exports and imports being reduced by more than half during the Great Depression. There is near consensus that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act – effected in 1930 – greatly exacerbated the Great Depression; it is a bit of history that confirms that excessive tariffs have the ability to cause economic shrinkage, spiral out of control and cause a deep and painful recession. The President may wish to consider this if he is to stand a chance at re-election in 2020.

Henry James International Management May 2019 Market Commentary
Mexican tariffs would be a blow for US businesses with supply-chains running through Mexico and the resulting products – from car parts to avocados – would bear what is effectively a sales tax that would be passed on to American consumers.

Like Trump, the Federal Reserve would also like to see a recession avoided; indeed, we believe its Chairman Jerome Powell is all too aware of the likelihood of one barrelling towards the US. Not only has he spontaneously climbed down from a more-or-less set policy of increasing interest rates throughout 2019, he has even given signs that he is open to lowering them. During a speech on June 4th in Chicago, Powell said that he would be ‘closely monitoring’ trade negotiations and ‘other matters’ – that one might suggest could be tariffs – for the US economic outlook and to act appropriately to sustain its expansion. Naturally, lowering interest rates would not only be a trick to fighting back recession, it would also provide relief to US businesses and consumers from tariffs.

In the Middle East, US-Iranian tensions have flared up to the point where a bona fide war has become a genuine possibility. Since leaving the Iran Nuclear Deal, Trump’s administration has followed a policy of maximum pressure – apparently this has so far failed as Iran is not succumbing to sabre rattling or threats and they have even defiantly said they may soon cease complying with the Nuclear Deal. Moreover, according the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Iran is using mines to attack oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. In short, through Trump’s treatment of Iran, not only are we closer to a war, we are also closer to Iran choosing to resume its nuclear weapons program. Despite Trump saying that his only desire is to get Iran back to the negotiating table to prevent it from developing these weapons, in May the President deployed military assets to the region, which may suggest a somewhat more hawkish stance.

Ever since Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro managed to get his ambitious and necessary pension reform through the Lower House Constitution, Justice Committee and subsequently on the doorstep of Brazil’s Congress, there has been little movement. However, as this was always going to be a long process, Bolsonaro’s administration remains positive. However, according to credit rating agency Fitch, while the pension overhaul is absolutely necessary, there is no scenario in which it will single-handedly stabilize Brazil’s public debt, much less kick its economy into the high gear the reforms supposedly promised. Consequently, it would seem that the market’s original enthusiasm for President Bolsonaro may have been unjustified.

In India, despite failing to realize his wide-ranging reform program in his first term and the disaster that was his currency redenomination, Narendra Modi won a decisive election victory to see him remain the PM for another 5 years. Indian equities enjoyed this tremendously, surging to record highs on the back of Modi’s new potent political mandate. Despite India’s Sensex’s recent success, there are concerns that the index is overvalued, with a forward PE of 18 compared to its EM Asia peers who average 12. Moreover, the Indian economy is facing high unemployment and its lowest GDP growth in 5 years.

A bright spot that stands in relief to the ruin of May is Vietnam, who is rather enjoying the US-China trade war. The Southeast Asian country is capitalizing on supply chain disruptions as more and more manufacturers move from China to within its borders to escape Trump’s tariff. In no small part due to this, its economy is expected to grow to just under 7% in 2019 and is poised to exceed 7% in 2020. While Vietnam’s economic success bodes well for other Asian EM economies, it is set to reap the most benefits from the US-China trade war given its proximity to China, well regulated and high quality labor conditions and affordable wages.

Henry James International Management May 2019 Market Commentary
Vietnam is set to benefit from the US-China trade war given its proximity to China, well regulated and high quality labor conditions and affordable wages.

Investment Outlook

No matter the direction from which you approach it, May was an appalling month for equities. Beyond its poor performance, a range of intimidating headwinds appear to be here for the long haul to stymie or at least frustrate positive market momentum. The only bit of lipstick we can put on this is really two fold: DM equities remain well above expectations so far in 2019 and they are in positive territory year-to-date. Secondly, despite EM equities losing all their 2019 gains in a single month, there are still fine investment opportunities to be had – one just might have to look a bit harder to find them.

We had repeated to ourselves ad nauseum that cooler heads would prevail in the US-China trade war. We were wrong and we are now immersed in a full-fledged trade war which – despite arguably some virtuous motivations – will damage both the US and Chinese economies and will cause pain for many others. While it is at best wishful thinking, we can only hope that there will be a somewhat swift resolution that will see all tariffs gradually rolled back while both countries work toward a new, mutually beneficial trade deal to mitigate the ways in which American businesses, consumers and the economy have to suffer. What is more, even without a trade war, both the US and China have been in the midst of worrying economic slow downs, so one wonders how much deeper the plunge will be now? Our lone hope is that Trump’s survival instincts will kick in and he will remember that he has an election to win in the next calendar year, which may be a tall order if he has single-handedly driven the US into a trade-war-induced recession.

We are delighted that Trump called off his Mexico tariffs at the last moment, something that equities at least momentarily enjoyed; however, we believe untold damage has been done to the American economy and its trading relations as a consequence of the 8 days during which the 5% tariff threat appeared to be an imminent and palpable reality. From an American business perspective, only the most optimistic persons will think that the trade hostilities are done and dusted and that we have emerged on the other side into a new stable trading relationship between the US and Mexico. In many ways, American businesses who rely on Mexico for their supply chains or materials are faced with a similar predicament as their UK counterparts with Brexit. The threat of future tariffs popping up again creates a most uncertain environment for businesses with links to Mexico, and such conditions impede the ability to make medium- to long-term business plans and also make it difficult to invest in new infrastructure and make new hirings; it also makes these businesses far less attractive investment opportunities.

We also wonder what damage the threat of tariffs has done to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) replacement between United States, Mexico and Canada vis-à-vis the recently signed (but have not yet ratified) United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)? One may ask whether this new free trade agreement is worth the paper on which it is written if tariffs can be thrown into the equation whenever Trump is feeling trigger-happy. It does not just hurt the US’s reputation with its northern and southern neighbors, we believe it sends the wrong message to the Chinese about the potential value of a new US trade deal. Furthermore, the US brazenly devaluing the meaningfulness of its trade deals does not exactly encourage the Communist state to make any of the dramatic concessions that Trump is justifiably demanding.

Henry James International Management
Despite Brexit, Britain remains an economic powerhouse and is filled with some of the biggest, best and most innovative businesses in the world.

Our expectations for Brexit are not overwhelmingly positive. We see a ‘No-Deal’ leaning PM replacing Mrs. May, and we see this person (probably Mr. Johnson) being thwarted and frustrated by his lack of Parliamentary majority, the Remainers in his own party, the opposition parties and maybe even the House Speak John Bercow (who has been transparent about his desire to block Brexit). Britain is at a Brexit stalemate which means that markets should be braced for more uncertainty and any residual positive momentum may gradually evaporate and grind the UK economy to at best a halt, at worst, recession. If there is any hope, it is that Britain remains an economic powerhouse and is filled with some of the biggest, best and most innovative businesses in the world who may be able to keep the country afloat and heading in the right direction while Britons and their MPs duke it out over a Brexit resolution.

Regarding EM markets, while they will largely be victimized by the fall out of the US-China trade war – which is most worrying – it is not all bad. The Fed’s decision to freeze interest rates is very good news for EM equities; Powell deciding to lower rates would be an early Christmas present. Furthermore, while China is clearly in a worse place while embroiled in a trade war, its President Xi Jinping has the ability to manipulate his monetary policy in a way that can soften the damage through continuing a strategy of monetary and fiscal easing. China also recently delivered over $298bn of tax cuts and company fees savings, which will only help further. Of course, lowering taxes will not help Chinese businesses retain the manufacturing they will lose to other Asian EM economies to avoid Trump’s tariffs. Vietnam is already benefitting tremendously from this and will likely continue to do so; and Bangladesh, Myanmar and the Philippines will also likely enjoy benefiting from China’s manufacturing losses. We believe all these markets offer interesting opportunities for investors, but of course rising US interest rates and an even stronger US dollar could bear negative consequences. Lastly, while India’s market may be overpriced, it is likely that their equities may offer better value than US or other DM equities stifled by Brexit or stagnant EU growth.

In conclusion, May has not been a positive month for investors – a trade war is waging without an end in sight between the world’s two largest economies, Brexit is a disaster and is impeding both the UK and EU economies, Trump has a self-admitted weakness for recession-inducing tariffs and there are a range of other geopolitical issues that have destabilised markets. And yet, the many causes for concern notwithstanding, we expect the world economy to end 2019 with growth; what is more, we believe EM equities will presents investors with copious ‘diamonds in the rough’ opportunities which will be there for those willing and capable of unearthing them.

Disclosures

This material is prepared by Henry James International Management and is not intended to be relied upon as a forecast, research or investment advice, and is not a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy. The information and opinions contained in this material are obtained from proprietary and nonproprietary sources believed by Henry James International Management, to be reliable, are not necessarily comprehensive and are not guaranteed as to accuracy. No warranty of accuracy or reliability is given and no responsibility arising in any other way for errors and omissions is accepted by Henry James International Management, its officers, employees or agents. This material is based on information as of the specified date and may be stale thereafter. We have no obligation to tell you when information herein may change. Reliance upon information in this material is at the sole discretion of the reader. Certain information contained herein may constitute forward-looking statements. Estimates of future performance are based on assumptions that may not be realized.

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of current or future results and should not be the sole factor of consideration when selecting a product or strategy.

Any indices chosen by Henry James International Management to measure performance are representative of broad asset classes. Henry James International Management retains the right to change representative indices at any time.

Henry James International Management and its’ representatives do not provide legal or tax advice. Each client should always consult his/her personal tax and/or legal advisor for information concerning his/her individual situation.

April Market Commentary

Market Overview

The first quarter of 2019 finished with largely impressive numbers: the S&P 500 boasted its best quarter in ten years, up by 13.1% almost erasing the disastrous losses of the last quarter of 2018.  Globally,stocks generally posted solid returns for the quarter as the MSCI EAFE Index produced a return of 9.04%. International stocks were led by the BRIC countries which generated a 13.01% return. Even lackluster regions like Africa posted a positive return of 3.98%.  Indeed, when considering the full range of threats the global economy faced at the beginning of the year, investors should be happy that markets were able to shrug off those concerns and generate solid returns for the first quarter.

While we are delighted by 2019’s market performance thus far, we sense the palpable risk that the markets’ positive form is on borrowed time and that the 2019 of muted growth that we envisaged at the end of 2018 may return. We still feel very far away from the market friendly Brexit and United States (US)-China trade deal we were anticipating only a month ago. Both items continue to cause a considerable lack of clarity, which will likely perpetuate market instability. This, and other factors, remain problematic even in the face of last month’s optimism and have compelled us to face the reality that 2019 may yet become an uphill battle for international equities.

Henry James International Management April Market Commentary
Prime Minister Theresa May once said that ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’; alas, she ate her words and extended Britain’s withdrawal and in the process risked Brexit never happening at all, a reality that markets may find rather appealing.

It was largely a foregone conclusion that Britain would leave the European Union (EU) on March 29, 2019 ever since Primer Minister Theresa May and Parliament invoked Article 50 to begin the count down two years ago. Indeed, this was due to happen either with a mutually beneficial deal or an acrimonious divorce; i.e. a ‘no deal’ Brexit. And yet, to the joy of some and ire of others, the supposedly immoveable Brexit deadline was pushed back, first to May 22nd – were May able to get Parliament to pass her deeply unpopular Brexit deal – and most recently to October 31st due to Parliament rejecting her deal three decisive times and failing to agree on any viable alternative arrangement. May once said that ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’, which suggested that she would have been prepared to see Britain ‘crash’ out of the EU on April 12th, were the new six month Brexit extension not granted. Alas, she ate her words and extended Britain’s withdrawal and in the process risked Brexit never happening at all, a reality that markets may find rather appealing. Part of the latest Brexit extension is that, were Britain able to agree on a Brexit deal by May 22nd, it would be able to formally Brexit on June 1st. Of course, the UK Parliament’s failure to do so, would mean that Britain would have to participate in the European Parliamentary elections, something that May has always been reluctant to do as it would be – in her view – an abrogation of democracy and send the wrong signal about having respected the result of the 2016 Brexit referendum. In terms of next steps, it is genuine guesswork, yet plausible items on the horizon include a battle within the Conservative Party, with May defending herself from being ousted as Prime Minister from her own Members of Parliament, as well as a so-called People’s Vote referendum that would give final say to British voters about how it will want to proceed on Brexit, or if it even still does want to Brexit at all.

At February’s close we had good cause to believe that the incipient blaze of a possible US-China trade war was about to be extinguished. Just as the March 2, 2019 deadline that was to see the tariff on over $200bn of Chinese goods more than double from 10% to 25%, President Donald Trump confidently proclaimed that all planned increases would be indefinitely suspended as a result of a new bilateral trade deal nearing completion. Yet more than a month later not only has a deal not been confirmed, the US and China appear to be much further apart than what Trump’s bluster and the general bonhomie between the superpowers would have suggested. While it must be said that it appears that an all-out trade war between the world’s two largest economies has been averted for now – a reality that investors would have been all too eager to embrace only a matter of months ago – it seems that it was premature to have expected a mutually beneficial trade deal that would abolish all tariffs and give international equities the boost they have craved.

China is reported to be pushing back against US trade demands that it perceives as one-sided; moreover, they want all tariffs lifted immediately, which the US is reluctant to do. Consequently, Chinese negotiators are evidently less gung-ho about fulfilling their key promises on intellectual property rights, which for Trump and both sides of Congress is the foundation to any meaningful trade deal. The superpowers are caught in a tedious Catch-22: the US will not roll back tariffs until China fulfills its key commitments, but China refuses to honor its side without movement on tariffs. Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s chief negotiator, deflated expectations by saying, ‘If there’s a great deal to be gotten, we’ll get it. If not, we’ll find another plan.’ Furthermore, news that Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s meeting has been postponed by at least a month until the end of April also suggests that a quick, easy and market friendly solution is not at all imminent.  According to reports, it is unlikely that any future trade deal will begin by repealing all existing tariffs and will instead be more like a trade cease-fire that will see no new tariffs introduced. Of course, it is plausible that the deal may set stages at which tariffs are lifted when particular targets or agreements are met, but one has to wonder if there ever will be a medium term scenario of free, frictionless trade between these two super powers given that they are, and will remain, commercial, economic and military rivals? Yet, Trump continues to hype up his delivery of a positive trade deal with China, which, if he were able to achieve, would give him at least one foot into a second term at the White House and offer markets a positive jolt. This should give him plenty of incentive and what is more Democrats may even cheer him on (privately, of course). However, politicians, markets and investors will likely have to face the facts that the road to economic peace with China will be long, harrowing and may even be impossible in the short to medium term.

In Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro’s honeymoon period is over. The Brazilian market hit its all time high in mid-March but dismal reports over Bolsonaro’s questionable economic ideas and concerns over rapidly increasing inflation cost the market almost 6% in the final 2 weeks of March. The sweeping market optimism that his corruption fighting, business-liberalizing premiership was thought might bring has turned sour as Bolsonaro is under widespread criticism from across the Brazilian political spectrum. What is more, his apparent inexperience and desire to get into Twitter battles has not only mitigated his ability to navigate himself out of his current political quandary, it has also distracted him from selling his ambitious and necessary plans to lawmakers. Bolsonaro aims to make wide-ranging changes to Brazil, yet none is more important than his proposed reform of the state pension system, which is crippling the state’s coffers. Pushing his reform through would cut 1TR Reals from the fiscal deficit in the next decade and would shore up Brazil’s public finances. Of greater importance to investors, it is believed that it would also spark the economy into high gear. Yet, the so called ‘apprentice President’ is facing an arduous battle as opposition parties either oppose the reforms in their entirety or want to chop and change them until they are so watered down they lose their fiscal and economic potency. Bolsonaro has so far failed to engage with the opposition political parties whose support he requires to make meaningful change to Brazil’s state pension; what is more, instead of courting the support of Brazil’s most powerful lawmaker House Speaker Rodrigo Maia, for whom pension reform is also very important, Bolsonaro has chosen to trade petty insults with him. As things currently stand, Bolsonaro has scant support in Congress for pension reform and if he fails to build bridges through the so-called ‘pork barrel politics’ of which he has been so critical, he will fail and South America’s largest economy will likely remain in the catastrophic political and economic situation in which it has found itself for the past few years.

In more positive news, the US Federal Reserve confirmed what was widely speculated: there are no plans to raise interest rates in 2019 due to slower than anticipated economic growth. Chairman Jerome Powell indicated that the current rate of 2.5% is rate neutral and that it would take some time before the employment and inflation outlook called for a change in fiscal policy. The Fed did indicate, however, that regardless of its recent announcement its policy remained nimble and was subject to change depending on future economic indicators.

Henry James International Management April Market Commentary
Will it even be possible in the medium term to envisage free, frictionless trade between the US and China given that they are, and will remain, commercial, economic and military rivals?

Investment Outlook

Despite 2019’s first quarter having outperformed expectations, we fear we are creeping back to the muted optimism and incipient pessimism with which we began the year. It seems highly unlikely that the US and China will agree the mutually beneficial trade deal markets have expected for more than 8 months. Moreover, a decisive and market friendly Brexit is at least 6 month’s away and it is widely believed that further ‘kicking the can down the road’ delays are extremely possible.  As a result, we are left with a petering-out US economy, China in the midst of an economic slowdown, a Britain frozen by Brexit uncertainty and an EU economy that is flat-lining. Adding to the negativity are first quarter corporate earnings that are anticipated to be lackluster. And yet, investors will be thankful that we have at least avoided an all-out trade war between the US and China and a devastating ‘no-deal’ Brexit, which could have made matters much worse than what they may be poised to become.

A spot for genuine, unmitigated optimism may be EM equities, which have rallied in 2019 and may outperform for the next 6 to 12 months. Moreover, we believe it is reasonable to expect EM equities to claw back their 2018 losses. We have already seen the MSCI EM Index up 9.56% in the first quarter of the year. China will help Asia lead the way for EM equities through their own policy of monetary and fiscal easing.  Other countries like Mexico and Brazil may not be so lucky as the former may see capital outflow as a result of domestic political uncertainty as well as trade tension north of the border and the latter will be stuck in a well without a ladder unless Bolsonaro can abandon his idiosyncratic style and effectively push his state pension reform through the Brazilian Congress.

In conclusion, it seems unlikely that markets will benefit from the much-desired steroid injection of a US-China trade deal in the short term. President Trump is still talking up the possibility of a mutually beneficial, market catalyzing solution, but taking him at his word might be unwise. A more likely victory for markets may be Britain leaving the EU through a ‘soft Brexit’ – or even doing an about-face and persisting as an EU member. However, any market-friendly resolution is not only difficult to imagine in the short term, there also remains the perpetuated uncertainty fostered by the October 31st extension as well as the risk of Brexit culminating into something pernicious for investors. For 2019 we believe that US equities will continue in positive territory despite a likely earnings recession, that Europe will be mired in uncertainty until Brexit is resolved and that EM equities may offer investors excellent opportunity, particularly in Asia where share prices are comparatively cheap.

Disclosures

This material is prepared by Henry James International Management and is not intended to be relied upon as a forecast, research or investment advice, and is not a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy. The information and opinions contained in this material are obtained from proprietary and nonproprietary sources believed by Henry James International Management, to be reliable, are not necessarily comprehensive and are not guaranteed as to accuracy. No warranty of accuracy or reliability is given and no responsibility arising in any other way for errors and omissions is accepted by Henry James International Management, its officers, employees or agents. This material is based on information as of the specified date and may be stale thereafter. We have no obligation to tell you when information herein may change. Reliance upon information in this material is at the sole discretion of the reader. Certain information contained herein may constitute forward-looking statements. Estimates of future performance are based on assumptions that may not be realized.

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of current or future results and should not be the sole factor of consideration when selecting a product or strategy.

Any indices chosen by Henry James International Management to measure performance are representative of broad asset classes. Henry James International Management retains the right to change representative indices at any time.

Henry James International Management and its’ representatives do not provide legal or tax advice. Each client should always consult his/her personal tax and/or legal advisor for information concerning his/her individual situation.