China Archives - Sida 3 av 22

China A-shares, Short term headwinds, but positives in the medium term

ETF Securities Equity Research: China A-shares, Short term headwinds, but positives in the medium term.

Highlights

Financial conditions in China are tightening as policy makers are attempting to reverse some of the stimulus from last summer.
The ongoing deleveraging process is a headwind for A-share equity performance in the short-term which has a tight correlation to domestic liquidity conditions.
However we see state-owned enterprise reforms and the inclusion of A-shares in global equity indices as two drivers of a potential re-rating of the market in the medium term.

Policy is tightening in China

China has been taking pre-emptive steps since the start of the year to tighten financial conditions. The improvement in both the domestic and external outlook since last year has emboldened policy makers to tackle some of the excesses in the build-up in leverage. Since 2008 China has had the biggest increase in its ratio of debt to gross domestic product of any country. The BIS estimates that ratio jumped from 141 per cent at the start of 2009 to 260 per cent by the end of 2016. As the central bank (PBoC) outlined in its monetary report last December, it is increasingly worried about financial sector stability and unintended asset bubbles.

(click to enlarge)

The tightening steps since the start of the year include both quantitative as well as qualitative elements: a) hiking short-term interest rates across the interest rate corridor b) slowing the growth of total social finance and c) tightening bank regulations to reign in off-balance sheet lending and especially the shadow banking sector.

The net impact of these actions has been to tighten domestic liquidity. Both money market rates and bond yields have risen sharply since January to multi-year highs. The move up in rates so far has been orderly, with the PBoC limiting dislocations by injecting liquidity when needed, but it is now 20% more costly for companies and households to borrow than at the start of the year.

(click to enlarge)

The tighter funding conditions have so far had a mixed impact on economic growth. Some indicators such as falling industrial metal prices and an inverted yield curve send a negative signal for future growth prospects. Other indicators such as the latest PMI and retail sales point to a more robust domestic demand picture. Excess capacity in both the industrial and property sectors look less worrying than a few years ago, and external demand still looks strong. As a result, the downside risks to growth are more limited than in the 2015 growth scare. Our own leading indicator signals a moderation in activity but not a sharp slowdown.

Tighter liquidity a negative for short-term equity performance

(click to enlarge)

Although we do not expect a sharp downturn in growth, tighter financial conditions have never been a good backdrop for on-shore domestic equities. A-shares are tightly correlated to domestic liquidity as up to 80% of turnover is generated by retail investors. In previous episodes of liquidity tightening A-shares have underperformed both H-shares and other emerging markets, and so far it has not been different this time. A-Shares have been among the worst performing emerging market year-t0-date, down –1% in local currency versus up +11% for H-shares and +12% for the MSCI EM.

(click to enlarge)

Since mid-March the onshore equity market has seen reduced account openings, lower trading volumes and a reduction in leveraged margin trading. Without a looser policy stance, there are few triggers for A-shares to outperform in the short-term. Valuations are not particularly cheap at 14x forward P/E versus a 5yr average of 13x. Neither are relative valuations to H-shares particularly compelling at the moment trading roughly in-line with the 5-year average.

SOEs reforms and index inclusion are medium-term positives

Despite the short-term headwinds, we think A-share multiples could re-rate to a higher sustained P/E in the medium term for two reasons.

First, we are starting to see signs that state-owned enterprises are becoming more share-holder friendly. The state agency tasked with regulating SOEs (SASAC) issued guidelines last year for SOEs to increase transparency and improve corporate governance. One of the largest state-owned coal companies came out with an unexpected special dividend shortly after the announcement and the expectation is that we could see more SOEs follow suit. We have also seen recent reforms to rationalise capacity in SOE dominated sectors, particularly commodities, where there have been significant plant closures in steel, coal and cement since 2015.

Second, we think the potential inclusion of A-shares in global equity benchmarks is another medium-term driver. There has been ongoing discussions to include on-shore companies in benchmarks available to foreign investors over the years. These discussions have accelerated recently as Chinese authorities have improved foreign access to capital markets over the last two years. We could get a decision by MSCI in mid-June and the resulting inclusion (if any) could begin in June 2018.

Conclusion

The PBoC is taking welcome steps to reign in some of the excessive credit growth since the great financial crisis. Although these steps are a short-term headwind for A-share performance, they should help financial stability in the medium-term. We continue to think that with further capital account liberalisation and SOE reforms, A-shares represent an interesting opportunity over the medium-term.

For more information contact:

ETF Securities Research team
ETF Securities (UK) Limited
T +44 (0) 207 448 4336
E info@etfsecurities.com

Important Information

This communication has been issued and approved for the purpose of section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 by ETF Securities (UK) Limited (“ETFS UK”) which is authorised and regulated by the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”).

The information contained in this communication is for your general information only and is neither an offer for sale nor a solicitation of an offer to buy securities. This communication should not be used as the basis for any investment decision. Historical performance is not an indication of future performance and any investments may go down in value.

This document is not, and under no circumstances is to be construed as, an advertisement or any other step in furtherance of a public offering of shares or securities in the United States or any province or territory thereof. Neither this document nor any copy hereof should be taken, transmitted or distributed (directly or indirectly) into the United States.

This communication may contain independent market commentary prepared by ETFS UK based on publicly available information. Although ETFS UK endeavours to ensure the accuracy of the content in this communication, ETFS UK does not warrant or guarantee its accuracy or correctness. Any third party data providers used to source the information in this communication make no warranties or representation of any kind relating to such data. Where ETFS UK has expressed its own opinions related to product or market activity, these views may change. Neither ETFS UK, nor any affiliate, nor any of their respective officers, directors, partners, or employees accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from any use of this publication or its contents.

ETFS UK is required by the FCA to clarify that it is not acting for you in any way in relation to the investment or investment activity to which this communication relates. In particular, ETFS UK will not provide any investment services to you and or advise you on the merits of, or make any recommendation to you in relation to, the terms of any transaction. No representative of ETFS UK is authorised to behave in any way which would lead you to believe otherwise. ETFS UK is not, therefore, responsible for providing you with the protections afforded to its clients and you should seek your own independent legal, investment and tax or other advice as you see fit.

What the Chinese authorities can do next?

The wording changes in the Chinese National People’s Congress annual keynote speech suggest more currency liberalisation, thus increasing currency volatility. We expect more risk aversion towards Chinese assets in the short run. What the Chinese authorities can do next?

The Chinese National People’s Congress dropped the pledge to ensure that the Renminbi “remains generally stable at an appropriate and balanced level”. Chinese officials also said “the Renminbi exchange rate will be further liberalised, and the currency’s stable position in the global monetary system will be maintained”. In our opinion, these changes in the statement increase the risk of higher currency volatility while a one-off devaluation seems less likely at this stage. We also believe the currency liberalisation is more likely than another devaluation of the Yuan as the latter would complicate further the Chinese relationship with the US who relentlessly accused China of currency manipulation.

The Yuan fell 7% against the US dollar last year as the Chinese economic growth slowed and capital outflows rose. In an attempt to slow down the drop of the yuan, the PBOC sold its FX reserves (almost US$3bn in 2016) and implemented stricter capital controls (capital account fell to -US$200mn at the end of last year).

(Click to enlarge)

The latest hawkish comments from FOMC’s member suggest higher US rates sooner rather than later. These comments might have had an impact on Premier Lu Keqiang’s decision to change the statement, giving more flexibility to the Chinese authorities in conducting economic policy. The latest keynote speech also signals that Chinese authorities would be unlikely to divest their FX reserves at the current pace for long if the dollar appreciates further.

Overall, we believe the Chinese authorities could move toward more currency liberalisation, meaning more currency risk for investors. They could also implement stricter capital controls to reduce capital outflows, which would likely increase risk aversion from foreign investors. Finally, the PBOC could decide to tighten its monetary policy, which is potentially too accommodative now taking into account the explosive trend on the Chinese credit market (China’s total debt reached 250% of GDP in late 2016 from 160% before the financial crisis). However, the PBOC would face a great challenge in tightening monetary policy to reduce capital outflows, slow down credit growth and limit the depreciation of the Yuan without triggering a credit and banking crisis and ultimately a recession.

We expect more risk aversion towards Chinese assets in the short run alongside increased currency volatility and bond risk contingent on the next PBOC’s policy move. Over the longer term, China’s economic growth will slow down gradually as the country continues its convergence toward more developed economies, which favours Chinese bonds over equities.

Morgane Delledonne, Fixed Income Strategist at ETF Securities

Morgane Delledonne joined ETF Securities as Fixed Income Strategist in 2016. Morgane has an extensive experience in Monetary policy, Fixed Income Markets and Macroeconomics gained at the French Treasury’s Office in Washington DC and most recently in her role as Macroeconomist and Strategist at Pictet&Cie in Geneva. Morgane holds a Bachelor of Applied Mathematics from the University of Nice Sophia Antipolis (France), a Master of Economics and Finance Engineering and a Master of Economic Diagnosis from the University of Paris Dauphine (France).

Gold’s Long-Term Appeal Remains Intact

Market Review – Gold’s Long-Term Appeal Remains Intact Gold Market Commentary December 2016

Consolidation in Gold Market on U.S. Dollar Strength

It looks as if gold is now consolidating the losses experienced since the November U.S. presidential election. Gold reached its lows for the month of December at $1,137 per ounce following the Federal Reserve’s (the “Fed”) December 14 announcement to increase the targeted federal funds rate1 by 25 basis points. The Fed’s decision also caused the U.S. Dollar Index (DXY)2 to jump to new highs. Gold finished the month at $1,152.27 per ounce, down $20.98 (1.8%). Net redemptions in the gold bullion exchange traded products (ETPs) continued their post-presidential election slide, although the pace tapered at yearend. Since the Trump victory, there have been net outflows of 7.2 million ounces in global bullion ETPs, bringing net inflows for the year to a still impressive 11.8 million ounces. Gold stocks were also in consolidation mode, as the NYSE Arca Gold Miners Index (GDMNTR)3 gained 1.1% and the MVIS Junior Gold Miners Index (MVGDXJTR)4 fell 2.0%.

Although Ignored, Markets Events Could Add Long-Term Support

There were two unrelated developments in December that the markets largely ignored which we believe could have positive implications for gold in the longer term. On December 4, Italian voters rejected a constitutional referendum that effectively became a vote of no-confidence for Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, who promptly resigned. This is the latest in a string of populist victories around the globe driven by voters frustrated with established political parties that have been unable to bring policies that generate needed jobs. Instead, post-crisis policies have brought an unprecedented coordination of regulations, monetary experiments, austerity, and debt expansion. The outcome of the referendum has empowered opposition parties in Italy who question whether the country should remain in the European Union (EU). The implementation of Brexit in 2017 poses significant risks to the European economy and the Italian referendum is further evidence of a broader movement that undermines the EU. Important elections will be held in the Netherlands (March 2017), France (April 2017), and Germany (August – October 2017). Gold could benefit if risks of an EU breakup increase. On December 5, a second potentially favorable development for gold occurred when the Shari’ah Standard on Gold (the “Standard”) was released by the Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI).5 The Standard, for the first time, sets out specific rules for the use of gold as an investment in the Islamic finance industry. Until now, there have been no such rules which has led to confusion over whether or not Islamic households are permitted to invest in gold. Those who wanted to own gold were compelled to invest only in jewelry. The Standard also rules that it is permissible to invest in gold mining stocks. This opens a significant segment of the global population that already has an affinity for gold to initiate potential investments in gold bars, coins, ETPs, and stocks.

2016 Should Be Remembered as Strong Year and Turning Point for Gold

While the post-election performance of gold and gold stocks has been disappointing, 2016 overall remained a strong year and a major turning point for gold investments. Gold gained $91 per ounce or 8.6% in 2016 for its first annual gain in four years. But gold stocks stole the show, with gains of 54.4% for GDMNTR and 75.1% for MVGDXJTR. There are several reasons for the spectacular performance of gold stocks including:

A rebound from 2015 bear market levels that were very oversold as the industry fell out of favor with investors who had been avoiding the sector, driving valuations to record lows
Gold companies impressed investors with their cost controls, operating results, and overall financial discipline
Earnings leverage to the gold price

Strong performance like what was experienced in 2016 is common at major turning points in the gold market. For example, the GDMNTR gained 80% in 2002 and in 2009 the Index rose 37%.

Be Wary of Consensus Opinion and Short-Term Overreaction

If 2016 taught us anything, it is that whatever the consensus says is going to happen in economics, investments, or politics in the coming year will probably be wrong. This year the Fed is again showing optimism towards the U.S. economy, guiding for three rate increases in 2017. The market responded in December by selling gold and driving the U.S. dollar higher. The Fed, however, has had a dismal forecasting record and we see no reason to believe that 2017 will be any different. At this time last year the Fed was guiding for four rate increases in 2016, yet there was only one. The Trump honeymoon with the stock market is in full bloom, as the financial media prepares to celebrate should the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA)6 cross 20,000 points. The stock market is reflecting a consensus for robust economic growth, and the Trump administration certainly has the potential to implement policies that promote growth. However, it seems the market is ignoring many potential risks the new administration may face. These include attempting to change trade treaties, immigration policies, Democrats and deficit hawks in Congress, the national debt, and Fed tightening. Potential moves by China or Russia, disarray in the EU, and strife the Middle East could also impact the administration’s efforts. We believe many of these risks will surface in 2017, reversing the positive sentiment in the stock market and U.S. dollar to gold’s benefit.

Forming the Base of a Long-Term Bull Market

Through most of 2016 we had been very bullish on gold, believing it had embarked on a new bull market. This belief was based on fundamentals, which included unprecedented levels of peacetime sovereign debt and monetary policies, such as quantitative easing7 and negative rates, which distort markets and pose systemic risks. While we were premature in forecasting a new gold bull market, we continue to believe these risks will ultimately drive gold to new highs. However, the turn the markets took following the U.S. presidential election took us entirely by surprise. The positive sentiment towards gold proved to be fickle and it appears the market will need more substantial evidence that the risks we see coming are in fact imminent. We now characterize 2016 and 2017 as a base-forming phase for gold, probably a precursor to a bull market. The bear market trend from 2011 to 2015 has clearly been broken and 2016 showed us that investors are becoming quite skittish of systemic financial risks. The following chart shows where gold might be in the context of similar markets of the past. Gold has a strong negative correlation8 with the dollar. This is shown by the peaks and troughs on the gold chart roughly correlating with the troughs and peaks respectively on the U.S. dollar chart. The U.S. dollar has been in a bull market since 2011 that is now similar in magnitude to bull markets of the early eighties and late nineties. These all correspond to bear markets for gold. As the dollar approached its peaks in 1985 and 2001, gold formed a double-bottom before embarking on new bull markets. In 1985, gold began a cyclical bull phase within a longer-term secular bear market. In 2001, gold began a historic secular bull market. It now looks like December 2015 was the first low for gold in this cycle. What remains unclear is whether the second low in a double-bottom was set in December 2016 or whether there is further weakness to come. In any case, it looks like gold is forming a base and historical analysis suggests that downside is limited.

(click to enlarge) 1In the U.S., the federal funds rate is “the interest rate” at which depository institutions actively trade balances held at the Federal Reserve, called federal funds, with each other, usually overnight, on an uncollateralized basis. Institutions with surplus balances in their accounts lend those balances to institutions in need of larger balances. 2U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) indicates the general international value of the U.S. dollar. The DXY does this by averaging the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and six major world currencies: Euro, Japanese yen, Pound sterling, Canadian dollar, Swedish kroner, and Swiss franc. 3NYSE Arca Gold Miners Index (GDMNTR) is a modified market capitalization-weighted index comprised of publicly traded companies involved primarily in the mining for gold. 4MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index (MVGDXJTR) is a rules-based, modified market capitalization-weighted, float-adjusted index comprised of a global universe of publicly traded small- and medium-capitalization companies that generate at least 50% of their revenues from gold and/or silver mining, hold real property that has the potential to produce at least 50% of the company’s revenue from gold or silver mining when developed, or primarily invest in gold or silver. 5The Accounting and Auditing Organisation for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) is the recognized world leader in Islamic finance standards, and its rulings are widely accepted across the majority of Islamic markets. 6The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) is a price-weighted average of 30 significant stocks traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and the NASDAQ. 7Quantitative easing (QE) is an unconventional monetary policy used by a central bank to stimulate an economy when standard monetary policy has become ineffective. 8The correlation coefficient is a measure that determines the degree to which two variables’ movements are associated and will vary from -1.0 to 1.0. -1.0 indicates perfect negative correlation, and 1.0 indicates perfect positive correlation.

by Joe Foster, Portfolio Manager and Strategist With more than 30 years of gold industry experience, Foster began his gold career as a boots on the ground geologist, evaluating mining exploration and development projects. Foster is Portfolio Manager and Strategist for the Gold and Precious Metals strategy. 1In the U.S., the federal funds rate is “the interest rate” at which depository institutions actively trade balances held at the Federal Reserve, called federal funds, with each other, usually overnight, on an uncollateralized basis. Institutions with surplus balances in their accounts lend those balances to institutions in need of larger balances. 2The correlation coefficient is a measure that determines the degree to which two variables’ movements are associated and will vary from -1.0 to 1.0. -1.0 indicates perfect negative correlation, and 1.0 indicates perfect positive correlation. 3U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) indicates the general international value of the U.S. dollar. The DXY does this by averaging the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and six major world currencies: Euro, Japanese yen, Pound sterling, Canadian dollar, Swedish kroner, and Swiss franc. 4The ISM Manufacturing Index is an index based on surveys of more than 300 manufacturing firms by the Institute of Supply Management. The ISM Manufacturing Index monitors employment, production inventories, new orders and supplier deliveries. 5A survey of consumer confidence conducted by the University of Michigan. The Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index (MCSI) uses telephone surveys to gather information on consumer expectations regarding the overall economy. 6The U.S. consumer confidence index (CCI) is an indicator designed to measure consumer confidence, which is defined as the degree of optimism on the state of the economy that consumers are expressing through their activities of savings and spending. 7NYSE Arca Gold Miners Index (GDMNTR) is a modified market capitalization-weighted index comprised of publicly traded companies involved primarily in the mining for gold. 8MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index (MVGDXJTR) is a rules-based, modified market capitalization-weighted, float-adjusted index comprised of a global universe of publicly traded small-and medium-capitalization companies that generate at least 50% of their revenues from gold and/or silver mining, hold real property that has the potential to produce at least 50% of the company’s revenue from gold or silver mining when developed, or primarily invest in gold or silver. Please note that the information herein represents the opinion of the author and these opinions may change at any time and from time to time.

Important Information For Foreign Investors

This document does not constitute an offering or invitation to invest or acquire financial instruments. The use of this material is for general information purposes. Please note that Van Eck Securities Corporation offers actively managed and passively managed investment products that invest in the asset class(es) included in this material. Gold investments can be significantly affected by international economic, monetary and political developments. Gold equities may decline in value due to developments specific to the gold industry, and are subject to interest rate risk and market risk. Investments in foreign securities involve risks related to adverse political and economic developments unique to a country or a region, currency fluctuations or controls, and the possibility of arbitrary action by foreign governments, including the takeover of property without adequate compensation or imposition of prohibitive taxation. Please note that Joe Foster is the Portfolio Manager of an actively managed gold strategy. Any indices listed are unmanaged indices and include the reinvestment of all dividends, but do not reflect the payment of transaction costs, advisory fees or expenses that are associated with an investment in the Fund. An index’s performance is not illustrative of the Fund’s performance. Indices are not securities in which investments can be made. 1U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) indicates the general international value of the U.S. dollar. The DXY does this by averaging the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and six major world currencies: Euro, Japanese yen, Pound sterling, Canadian dollar, Swedish kroner, and Swiss franc. 2NYSE Arca Gold Miners Index (GDMNTR) is a modified market capitalization-weighted index comprised of publicly traded companies involved primarily in the mining for gold. 3MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index (MVGDXJTR) is a rules-based, modified market capitalization-weighted, float-adjusted index comprised of a global universe of publicly traded small- and medium-capitalization companies that generate at least 50% of their revenues from gold and/or silver mining, hold real property that has the potential to produce at least 50% of the company’s revenue from gold or silver mining when developed, or primarily invest in gold or silver. 4Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association); Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) Please note that the information herein represents the opinion of the author and these opinions may change at any time and from time to time. Not intended to be a forecast of future events, a guarantee of future results or investment advice. Historical performance is not indicative of future results; current data may differ from data quoted. Current market conditions may not continue. Non-VanEck proprietary information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission of VanEck. ©2016 VanEck.

Sharia Gold Standard to boost investment, but expect little impact on price

A common interpretation of Sharia Law could help boost gold investing in the Islamic community. However, in the absence of changes in monetary fundamentals, the price of gold is unlikely to change as a result.

Although it is commonly acceptable for Muslims to own physical gold, for example as jewellery, there is currently ambiguity about gold as an investment. Gold is considered a “Ribawi” item which means it must be traded by weight and measure and cannot be traded for its future value or speculation. The Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI), working with the World Gold Council has developed the “Sharia Standard on Gold”. The AAOIFI Board adopted the new standards today.

Many commentators have noted that there is more than US$2trn invested in Islamic Finance assets and a small allocation of that could be a significant boost to gold investing. A common example offered is that a 2% allocation of existing assets into gold could rival total 2015 consumer demand from China. However, we believe the price impact will be limited. Gold trades more like a currency and its price is driven more by monetary considerations such as inflation, interest rates and exchanges rates.

Not all gold products currently available are likely to be Sharia compliant. It will likely take time for sufficient market access to develop. The standard states that gold ETPs must be physically backed, with requirements of segregation and allocation. Many existing ETP structures would need to be amended to become Sharia compliant. Equally gold futures would need to be physically settled to be complaint.

Although we don’t expect Islamic investors to reallocate existing portfolios into gold in a rush, with Muslims representing 25% of the world’s population, there could be a larger investor base over time.

Nitesh Shah, Research Analyst at ETF Securities

Nitesh is a Commodities Strategist at ETF Securities. Nitesh has 13 years of experience as an economist and strategist, covering a wide range of markets and asset classes. Prior to joining ETF Securities, Nitesh was an economist covering the European structured finance markets at Moody’s Investors Service and was a member of Moody’s global macroeconomics team. Before that he was an economist at the Pension Protection Fund and an equity strategist at Decision Economics. He started his career at HSBC Investment Bank. Nitesh holds a Bachelor of Science in Economics from the London School of Economics and a Master of Arts in International Economics and Finance from Brandeis University (USA).

Falsely Trumpeting Chinese currency manipulation

It is highly unlikely that President Elect Trump will officially deem China a currency manipulator when he takes office in 2017. China is a currency manipulator, but not in the way that Donald Trump thinks. The more than 6% decline in foreign exchange reserves in 2016 highlights that the Peoples Bank of China is supporting the currency rather than exacerbating its weakness to the detriment of American businesses, as Trump asserts. Falsely Trumpeting Chinese currency manipulation. Chinese policymakers set a target rate for the Chinese Renminbi (CNY) each day, based on the prior day’s closing price, referencing a basket of currencies[1]. The currency is then able to trade within a +/-2% band on that day. China does intervene to manage the currency’s movements in order to ‘better maintain the overall stability of the RMB exchange rate’. Although the CNY has dropped nearly 3.4% against the US Dollar since end-Q2 2016, against its reference basket of currencies, it has fallen just 0.8%, broadly range-trading over the period.

(Click to enlarge) We expect that Trump will moderate the language he has used toward China and don’t expect him to label China a currency manipulator. The US Treasury have three criteria to determine whether a country is a manipulator. To be deemed a currency manipulator, a country must:

have a trade surplus of greater than US$20bn with the US (currently US$349bn[2]); and
have a current account surplus of greater than 3% of GDP (currently 2.4%[3]); and
be engaged in persistent one-sided intervention in the foreign exchange market by repeated net purchases of greater than 2% of GDP (China has net sales of 5% over past year[4]).

China currently only satisfies one of those criteria – that it has a trade surplus of over US$20bn with the US. President Elect Trump will have significant problems in changing the criteria or by naming China a manipulator if they do not satisfy all three. We expect the move toward greater currency liberalisation to continue as there is an onus on China (with the CNY a part of the IMF SDR valuation basket) to increasingly have its currency determined by market forces to spur trade and investment activities. Labelling China a currency manipulator and instigating proceedings to punish its largest trading partner, would seem to be counter to Trump’s objective to generate greater business activity for US companies. If China continues, as we expect, to progress with further financial market reforms, it would make sense for the US to enhance ties with China to achieve greater access to Chinese markets for US companies. [1] The CFETS RMB Index measures CNY against a basket of 13 currencies, based mainly on international trade. The largest weightings: USD 26.4%, EUR 21.4%, JPY 14.7%. [2] Source: US Census Bureau [3] Source: Bloomberg [4] Source: Bloomberg

Martin Arnold, Global FX & Commodity Strategist at ETF Securities

Martin Arnold joined ETF Securities as a research analyst in 2009 and was promoted to Global FX & Commodity Strategist in 2014. Martin has a wealth of experience in strategy and economics with his most recent role formulating an FX strategy at an independent research consultancy. Martin has a strong background in macroeconomics and financial analysis – gained both at the Reserve Bank of Australia and in the private commercial banking sector – and experience covering a range of asset classes including equities and bonds. Martin holds a Bachelor of Economics from the University of New South Wales (Australia), a Master of Commerce from the University of Wollongong (Australia) and attained a Graduate Diploma of Applied Finance and Investment from the Securities Institute of Australia.