Points of Return
To get John Authers’ newsletter delivered directly to your inbox, sign up here. Great news — US inflation AND unemployment are rising, which
View in browser
Bloomberg

To get John Authers’ newsletter delivered directly to your inbox, sign up here.

Today’s Points:

Rate-Cut Week Is Here

The Federal Reserve is going to cut rates this week for the first time in 12 months. It will probably reduce the overnight fed funds rate by 0.25 percentage points, but there’s a chance it might still opt for a so-called “jumbo” cut of 0.5 percentage points. The increasingly ugly legal battle over whether Fed governor Lisa Cook should be allowed to vote in Wednesday’s meeting doesn’t affect this in the slightest, for all the potential long-term ramifications of replacing her. 

That much is clear from last week’s US unemployment and inflation data. However, the risks that the Fed won’t cut much more, or might even have to reverse course, remain. Unemployment is rising, while inflation remains relatively controlled, and it behooves the Fed to cut for now. But much else is still murky.

A nasty surprise from the jobless claims data, revised weekly and the closest approach to a real-time measure of the labor market, seals the case for an easing with the highest number since late in 2021. This is a noisy series, and claims over the last four weeks remain a bit lower than their recent peak, but a chart like this will plainly move a central bank that has already said it was more worried by employment than inflation:

Inflation remains complex, but doesn’t give enough reason for the Fed to stay their hand. It continues to be dominated by services, as this breakdown into its four main components shows. The fall in overall price rises is over:

The technical statistical measures beloved by the Fed showed no great worsening, and certainly no great impact of tariffs on the overall numbers. The trimmed mean ticked up very slightly, as did the measure dubbed Supercore by the central bank (services excluding housing), while the median and the Atlanta Fed’s index of sticky prices both ticked down very slightly. All have stalled above 3%, the upper range of the Fed’s target:

Reason for concern about tariffs comes from core goods and food, areas most directly affected by the trade levies. Neither makes much of an impact on the overall index, but the contribution of core goods is now positive and rising fast, while food prices are also adding more to the index. These are the trends to check whether the tariffs do indeed have a serious negative impact on the cost of living:

The lower paid are of particular worry, as they are crucial to President Donald Trump’s political base. The Atlanta Fed’s wage tracker, based on census data, slices and dices pay rises several ways. Wage increases for the first quartile, the 25% of the population who are paid the least, have pegged back sharply and are now only just above the headline rate of inflation. This is in line with the theory that companies are hoarding labor and reluctant to make layoffs, but have very little interest in bidding up for lower-skilled workers.

It’s not a coincidence that the two times real pay rises for the lowest paid went negative in recent history came during the administrations of Barack Obama and Joe Biden — and both times they were followed by a Trump election victory:

Another worrying sign for the administration lies in inequality. Usually, the lowest paid get higher percentage rises; they’re cheaper for employers. Their wages are now suddenly lagging the best remunerated to a startling extent, previously only briefly seen for a few months under Obama:

Lower rates help out indebted consumers, but tend to stoke inequality by juicing up the price of assets, generally only held by those who have money in the first place. So while the drop in wage rises for the low paid adds to the case to cut rates, it also suggests possible problems down the road. 

One more reason why the Fed might not want to cut rates too aggressively — inflation expectations still look unmoored. The University of Michigan’s regular consumer survey shows them moving back up last month. Particularly for the longer term, they are riding significantly higher than at any time since 2000:

Consumer surveys are increasingly contaminated by political polarization, as people answer questions through a partisan lens; with Trump in power, Republicans think things are great and Democrats think they’re terrible. Self-identified independents offer a good way to control for this — and it’s noticeable that both in current sentiment and their expectations they are more negative than at any time during the pandemic. They remain above the post-“Liberation Day” nadir, but not by much:

This tends to reinforce the case for a rate cut, but also suggests that conditions are too bad for equities and other risk assets to flourish. Why are investors so much more confident than consumers? The expectation of lower rates instantaneously eases conditions. Longer-dated bond yields have been rising ominously, fueled by fears that governments on both sides of the Atlantic don’t have their deficits under control. The fresh certainty that the Fed will ease has brought down real yields nicely, and that boosts risky assets:

The Fed is going to cut, and there is a strong case for it to do so. With inflation not tamed and tariffs still to filter through into employment and production decisions, the risk ahead is stagflation.

Smart Beta Fights Back

Times aren’t great for people who dislike market cap-weighted indexes. All the problems have been well-aired over the last decade or so; they tend to enshrine and accelerate mispricings by accepting whatever valuation the market has put on a company. By emphasising larger stocks they miss out on the long-run tendency for smaller companies to do well. Whether they’re really Marxist, as once claimed, they don’t help markets find efficient outcomes. 

Thus it was that “smart beta” took hold. As laid out by Research Affiliates’ Rob Arnott and colleagues in 2008’s The Fundamental Index: A Better Way to Invest, the notion of the so-called RAFI (Research Affiliates Fundamental Index) was to weight stocks within an index according to fundamental measures such as dividends, cash flow, revenue or profits, rather than their share price. There are a myriad variants, the simplest being just to weight each stock equally. The idea is that in the long run you probably outperform the most famous benchmark, without having to incur any of the extra trading and research costs that active managers must pay.

The problem for approaches like this is that since the pandemic they haven’t worked. With US stocks ever more concentrated in a few huge names whose performance has been stellar, the smartest beta has been just to relax and buy the S&P 500. A simple illustration compares the conventional cap-weighted S&P 500 with its equal-weighted version, in which the likes of Nvidia Corp. and Microsoft Corp. only account for 0.2% each, like everyone else. The relative performance of the two strategies has tended to go in long cycles. Equal-weight has been ahead most of time since 1990, but not now: 
 

This won’t last. The extraordinary underperformance of the S&P 500 cap-weighted index after the internet bubble burst in 2000 is a warning of what could happen, and for anyone with some patience, the arguments for the existing smart-beta funds still make some sense. But many people can’t afford to wait, and it does ask a lot of investors to tell them they should miss out on the AI boom. 

For them, Arnott has now devised a new and even smarter beta, laid out in this paper. An exchange-traded fund linked to RACWI (Research Affiliates Capital Weight Index) launched on Friday, but the strategy has been running since 2020. The key intuition is to maintain the RAFI framework for deciding which stocks should be in the index, so only companies that are already making money and have real assets get in, but then to weight those components by their market cap — meaning this index’s biggest stock is Nvidia.

Why do it this way? Beyond the well-known tendency to buy high and sell low, which is unavoidable in a cap-weighted index, Arnott also found “an underrecognized propensity for flip-flops.” This refers to “stocks that are added at frothy multiples, fail to deliver on their lofty expectations, and are dropped at far lower prices in relatively short order.”

As the index effectively buys these stocks high and sells them low, they affect the return. So the solution is to use the RAFI criteria to decide the stocks that should be in the benchmark, and then let the market weight them. Since 2020, RACWI has managed a consistent small upgrade on the cap-weighted S&P, which compounds over time. RAFI and the equal-weight S&P have lagged since the AI boom got underway late in 2022:

Another factor helps you have your cake and eat it with this strategy. The stocks that RACWI inserts tend to be smaller than the S&P stocks they displace. That means that Nvidia and the other Magnificent Seven get a very slightly higher weighting in the RACWI than in the S&P. 

For a truly long-term investor, it still makes far more sense to eschew cap-weighting. But if you want to eke out every last point of advantage from following the market, while also reducing cap-weighted indexes’ tendency to introduce distortions, this idea makes a lot of sense. 

See You in Hong Kong

For the next week, Points of Return will be coming from Hong Kong, where I will be taking part in a special live edition of the China Show. Subscribers are invited to our Hong Kong bureau for a discussion of Trump, China and what investors can expect next. Is there more volatility ahead? Please join us if you’re in Hong Kong, and ask me and Bloomberg Opinion colleague Shuli Ren your questions. Register here.

Survival Tips

Maintaining the Hong Kong theme, this newsletter has been written across 12 time zones, on a plane that went without Wi-Fi throughout its time over the polar ice cap and in Russian airspace (which was most of the flight). I did watch Lost in Translation, which is surely the best movie about jet lag ever made. I recommend it. And if anyone out there has suggestions for music to listen to while lying wide awake in the middle of the night in a hotel room, do tell. Have a great week everyone. 

More From Bloomberg Opinion:

  • Andreas Kluth: America’s Friends Will Never Trust the US Again
  • Martin Ivens: Starmer Will Keep Flailing Until He Finds His Political Compass
  • Editorial Board: ICE Raids Will Shackle US Manufacturing Ambitions

Want more Bloomberg Opinion? OPIN. Or you can subscribe to our daily newsletter.

Like Bloomberg's Points of Return? Subscribe for unlimited access to trusted, data-based journalism in 120 countries around the world and gain expert analysis from exclusive daily newsletters like Markets Daily or Odd Lots.

Like getting this newsletter? Subscribe to Bloomberg.com for unlimited access to trusted, data-driven journalism and subscriber-only insights.

Want to sponsor this newsletter? Get in touch here.

You received this message because you are subscribed to Bloomberg's Points of Return newsletter. If a friend forwarded you this message, sign up here to get it in your inbox.
Unsubscribe
Bloomberg.com
Contact Us
Bloomberg L.P.
731 Lexington Avenue,
New York, NY 10022
Ads Powered By Liveintent Ad Choices