Western Asset: The health of the US economy will be front-and-center for markets, but five key issues in focus may also impact investors ahead of the November vote.
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated economic fallout have already added significant uncertainty to the outcome of the US presidential election this November. After a heart-rending plunge in March and April, economic activity has bounced back over the past few months. However, even the sectors that have bounced most strongly have not yet fully recovered, and other sectors have only begun their recoveries. Furthermore, the recent passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the process of confirming her replacement now adds a new dimension to the political landscape and could re-shape stakes in a number of key Senate races.
At the time of writing, former Vice President Joe Biden leads President Donald Trump in polling. However, Trump’s potential pick for a replacement for Justice Ginsburg could meaningfully shift the tone of his campaign over the next few weeks; historically, Trump’s court policies have been generally popular among Republican voters.
As we saw during the 2016 election, the impact of several key swing states could easily shift the overall presidential election outcome. Beyond the office of president, other elections in this cycle will result in either a further divided or a more unified government. The wider results will likely have an even greater impact on future policy, and in turn, on markets, than the outcome of any one race. Presently, Republicans hold a majority of the Senate seats up for re-election, giving Democrats several opportunities to break up the Republicans’ current 53-seat majority.
While the overall health of the US economy will be front-and-center for markets that remain sensitive to headline risk, there are also several other key issues in focus that may impact global fixed-income investors ahead of the November vote.
Source: CEIC, Wind, STR, CPCA, Company Data, TravelSky, Morgan Stanley Research. As of 13 Aug 2020.
Given the track record of bipartisan Congressional support for recent anti-China legislations, we are not hopeful that either election outcome will produce a material improvement in the US-China relationship. Currently, the dynamics of the relationship are driven by the hawks in both nations, and China appears unlikely to back down on its strategic positions (e.g., related to its policies regarding Hong Kong and Taiwan). The Chinese government has a long-term perspective and will likely be positioned for a worst-case scenario of heightened US-China strategic rivalry, regardless of which camp wins in November.
That said, it is possible that a Biden-Harris administration may improve the form (not necessarily substance) of the US-China relationship. There could be some room to “agree to disagree” and for a peaceful co-existence if tensions are not amplified by hawks on both sides of the US-China relationship.
Market Implications: Markets have already been pricing in a partial and gradual disentanglement of global supply chains dependent on China. An escalation in tensions would accelerate that trend with certain industries negatively affected (e.g., retail and manufacturing industries scrambling to adjust) while others may see a positive boost (e.g., telecom and technology).
Much of our future outlook on US-Europe relations will also hinge upon which party controls the chambers of Congress come November, in particular, the Senate. Though understandably, the outcome of the presidential election will be instrumental in setting the tone of future policy decisions.
During a second Trump term, we would expect to see US trade policy focus increasingly on the US trade balance deficit with the eurozone (Exhibit 2). In many ways, the US-China relationship could serve as a blueprint of what is in store for Europe. We also see a chance that divergent monetary policy—in case the Fed were to remove accommodation significantly earlier than central banks in Europe, resulting in a stronger US dollar—could bring us back to a discussion about currency wars.
Source: Haver Analytics. As of June 2020.
Under a Biden-Harris administration, we would expect a return to more global cooperation, though not to the level of the early Obama years. We foresee a stronger international engagement than currently exists and we think some of the decisions made under Trump could be rolled back, in particular with respect to the withdrawal of the US from the Paris Climate Accord and the World Health Organization. We also believe that a Biden presidency would imply more support for functional international organizations, especially the World Trade Organization. However, we note that the Biden platform is viewed as “moderate” within the Democratic Party and such an administration will be required to balance catering to the left wing of the party. Without full control of Congress, a Biden-Harris presidency may be limited in its ability to effect a continuity of sorts with the policies promoted by the Obama administration.
Regarding US-UK relations, we believe that a mutually beneficial trade arrangement might be somewhat harder to reach under a Democratic president given the potential for conflict with the left wing of the party. That said, we don’t foresee such an agreement as a policy priority under either administration.
Market Implications: While unlikely, we believe any meaningful changes to trade policy with the UK or EU would introduce massive uncertainty with regard to global trade. Moreover, we believe that it’s possible a Biden administration would be much more willing to engage, like a replay of 2008-2009, in a constructive discussion around a one-off increase of country financing quotas at the International Monetary Fund. Such an increase could somewhat alleviate the enormous financing needs of emerging and developing countries in the face of COVID-19, and be viewed as positive for global markets.
As witnessed during the 2016 election, the ability of polls to predict election outcomes is limited. With several weeks to go before November, outcome uncertainty is high. The current political landscape was already exacerbated by the economic and healthcare climate as well as renewed calls for racial justice. The latest focus on a Supreme Court replacement adds additional uncertainty to election outcomes and could reduce the chances of the White House and Senate splitting along party lines. It is important to note that with respect to this election cycle, more than just the presidency is at stake; there are a number of highly contested Senate races, the outcome of which could lead to Democrats gaining full control over Congress.
Given that markets will likely remain sensitive to headline risk, particularly those that could come in the form of an “October surprise,” we remain focused on positioning our portfolios to withstand further market volatility. As always, we are also focused on remaining flexible enough to capture value opportunities as they appear, particularly in those sectors most likely to be influenced by election outcomes.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please note that an investor cannot invest directly in an index. Unmanaged index returns do not reflect any fees, expenses or sales charges.
Equity securities are subject to price fluctuation and possible loss of principal. Fixed-income securities involve interest rate, credit, inflation and reinvestment risks; and possible loss of principal. As interest rates rise, the value of fixed income securities falls. International investments are subject to special risks including currency fluctuations, social, economic and political uncertainties, which could increase volatility. These risks are magnified in emerging markets. Commodities and currencies contain heightened risk that include market, political, regulatory, and natural conditions and may not be suitable for all investors.
U.S. Treasuries are direct debt obligations issued and backed by the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. government. The U.S. government guarantees the principal and interest payments on U.S. Treasuries when the securities are held to maturity. Unlike U.S. Treasuries, debt securities issued by the federal agencies and instrumentalities and related investments may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. Even when the U.S. government guarantees principal and interest payments on securities, this guarantee does not apply to losses resulting from declines in the market value of these securities.