Authors: Alex Wolf, Yuxuan Tang, Kendrick Cheung and Donna Tang
Cross Asset Strategy
U.S. equities rallied on the week to a one-month high on the back of solid earnings. Both the real and digital economy saw bright spots from the earnings reports released so far, which stood in contrast to the dim expectations of the market. The tech-heavy NASDAQ outperformed the broad market. Bonds and commodities were relatively muted, with the 10-year Treasury yield stabilizing at around the 3% level. We think volatility may stay elevated as recession concerns linger, and see 3,500 – 3,600 as a more reasonable entry level for the S&P 500 (see detailed analysis in the previous Asia Strategy Weekly).
Nonetheless, Europe seems to be the focus of the week. The ECB held its policy meeting on Thursday, hiking the interest rate by 50 bps. It was the first hike delivered by the central bank since 2011 – in the midst of the European sovereign debt crisis. Since then, the ECB cut its policy rate all the way to zero, subsequently bringing the region into an era of negative interest rates in 2014. The ECB was increasingly an island before this meeting, being one of the only central banks that had put monetary policy on hold. Because of widening interest rate differentials and the precarious growth outlook due to the war in Ukraine, the Euro had briefly touched parity with the dollar before rebounding to 1.02 on Thursday. Energy shortages and fragmentation risk remain major challenges. That said, we see EURUSD at 1.05 by year-end as the movement of EUR rates back into positive territory may encourage flows.
Strategy question: Is mortgage non-payment China’s Lehman Moment?
It’s déjà vu all over again in China’s property sector. If last summer was marked by the (yet unresolved) Evergrande saga, this summer mortgage non-repayments are sparking a new source of unease. Over the past two weeks, homebuyers of unfinished residential properties indicated their intention to boycott their mortgage payments. The number of projects involved has since been rising every day, reaching 300 across 50 cities at the time of writing.
Reminiscent of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis that originated from a wave of mortgage defaults, many are asking whether this is China’s Lehman moment? First, it’s important to note there are a number structural differences between the two. The most important being the level of household leverage. The U.S. subprime crisis was built up on highly leveraged buyers paying very low down-payments (low single digit or even zero). In China, however, effective loan-to-value ratio is much lower at around 40% (see chart) meaning down payments and other sources of financing make up a much larger portion of the purchase. Banks also benefit from a larger buffer against potential credit losses.
Additionally, financial derivatives in the mortgage space is not as advanced, thus contagion risks due to mortgage defaults could be relatively limited. Though a key difference lies in the structure of balance sheets – when a homebuyer in the US defaulted there was at least an asset (the home) for banks to seize and auction; whereas in China if homebuyers default on an unfinished property the banks don’t have an asset to seize in many cases other than a barely finished property, making the risks slightly skewed to the banks.
At this moment, the direct impact from the mortgage non-payment saga still looks manageable. We do not see systemic risks as an imminent concern just yet. So far, 17 major banks have responded with statements that their exposure to the affected mortgages remain minimal on their balance sheets. According to estimates by J.P. Morgan Investment Bank, about 20% of mortgage loans are collateralized by work-in-progress projects; assuming 20% of pre-sold projects see delayed delivery and 50% of affected homebuyers suspend their mortgage payments, the mortgage non-performing loan (NPL) ratio could rise by around 200 bps on average, leading to a material, but manageable drag on the banking system.
That said, the potential risks could go beyond the missing mortgage payments. While it is still too early to call, some worry that it could be just the tip of the iceberg. We will likely see stricter control on access to funds in the escrow accounts, which could further deteriorate the liquidity of the developers, among which many are already in distress. More importantly, if mismanaged, the wave of boycotts may further dampen homebuyer confidence, leading to further downside in housing sales and investment, and potentially a negative feedback loop affecting even healthier property developers. As shown in the below chart, key housing market indicators have been in a 40-50% decline year-on-year during Q2, and a further collapse could increasingly threaten the overall property-related asset quality on banks’ balance sheets (i.e. loans to developers and their suppliers). Furthermore, if concerns reach beyond construction suspension and more people join the boycott on various grounds (i.e. we’ve seen some suppliers/contractors halt debt payments due to payment delays by developers), the situation could get worse.
The impact of further contagion on the macro environment could be material, as property-related industries account for roughly 30% of the country’s GDP. China’s Q2 GDP slowed to 0.4% year-on-year from 4.8% in Q1, largely due to the severe disruptions from the Omicron-induced lockdowns in April and May. As we wrote in a previous note, while the worst of the lockdown impact is behind us, recovery in 2H may not be easy. Constraints on policy easing and lingering Covid impact would weigh on growth, and weakness in the property sector seems to be a persistent drag on the recovery. Furthermore, if land sales further collapse due to property weakness, cash flows to local governments and their financing vehicles could suffer. This could disrupt Beijing’s stimulus plans, which rely on local governments to deliver infrastructure investment.
The key to watch from here is whether we see effective government interventions. Over the weekend, China’s banking regulator came out to reassure the market and encourage banks to provide credit to eligible developers to help them deliver the homes. In addition, the authorities are reportedly considering payment holiday for mortgages of delayed projects. A comprehensive plan to help resolve suspended constructions and deliver the pre-sale properties would be needed to restore confidence. There are recent reports that Henan province is considering a bailout fund and gathering SOE developers to help complete unfinished projects. In the longer term, a thorough review of pre-sale property regulations might be needed to mitigate systemic risks.
What does it mean for investors?
With the fluid situation on the ground, volatility in the property and banking sectors will likely remain elevated. For equities, negative earnings impact and media coverage will likely continue to drag on trading sentiment for both sectors in the near term. For the property sector, with contract sales underperforming and the overall slow progress of asset disposals, the number of unfinished projects are expected to go up. Homebuyers will likely be more cautious about buying unfinished projects from financially fragile and non-SOE developers. SOEs and private developers with solid credit metrics will likely enjoy market share gains, although this has largely been priced in given the resilience in their share prices. Before more effective government interventions kick in, we believe it is still too early to ‘bottom fish’ China property stocks. For the banking sector, a rise in project suspensions would lead to higher NPL formation in developer loans, thus dragging banks’ earnings, especially those with fast mortgage loan growth and large mortgage loan sizes. Investors could also become more cautious on SOE banks that may need to provide uneconomic assistance to developers for the “greater good”.
All market and economic data as of July 21, 2022 and sourced from Bloomberg Finance L.P. and FactSet unless otherwise stated.
For illustrative purposes only. Estimates, forecasts and comparisons are as of the dates stated in the material.
There can be no assurance that any or all of these professionals will remain with the firm or that past performance or success of any such professional serves as an indicator of the portfolio’s success.
We believe the information contained in this material to be reliable but do not warrant its accuracy or completeness. Opinions, estimates, and investment strategies and views expressed in this document constitute our judgment based on current market conditions and are subject to change without notice.
This document may also have been made available in a different language, at the recipient’s request, and for convenience only. Notwithstanding the provision of a convenience copy, the recipient re-confirms that he/she/they are fully conversant and has full comprehension of the English language. In the event of any inconsistency between such English language original and the translation, including without limitation in relation to the construction, meaning or interpretation thereof, the English language original shall prevail.
This information is provided for informational purposes only. We believe the information contained in this video to be reliable; however we do not represent or warrant its accuracy, reliability or completeness, or accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of the use of any information in this video. The views expressed herein are those of the speakers and may differ from those of other J.P. Morgan employees, and are subject to change without notice. Nothing in this video is intended to constitute a representation that any product or strategy is suitable for you. Nothing in this document shall be regarded as an offer, solicitation, recommendation or advice (whether financial, accounting, legal, tax or other) given by J.P. Morgan and/or its officers or employees to you. You should consult your independent professional advisors concerning accounting, legal or tax matters. Contact your J.P. Morgan team for additional information and guidance concerning your personal investment goals.
Indices are not investment products and may not be considered for investment.
- Past performance is not indicative of future results. You may not invest directly in an index.
- The prices and rates of return are indicative as they may vary over time based on market conditions.
- Additional risk considerations exist for all strategies.
- The information provided herein is not intended as a recommendation of or an offer or solicitation to purchase or sell any investment product or service.
- Opinions expressed herein may differ from the opinions expressed by other areas of J.P. Morgan. This material should not be regarded as investment research or a J.P. Morgan investment research report.
Standard and Poor’s 500 Index is a capitalization-weighted index of 500 stocks. The index is designed to measure performance of the broad domestic economy through changes in the aggregate market value of 500 stocks representing all major industries. The index was developed with a base level of 10 for the 1941–43 base period.
The Nasdaq 100 Index is a basket of the 100 largest, most actively traded U.S companies listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange. The index includes companies from various industries except for the financial industry, like commercial and investment banks. These non-financial sectors include retail, biotechnology, industrial, technology, health care, and others.
The J.P. Morgan Asia Credit Index (JACI) consists of liquid US-dollar denominated debt instruments issued out of Asia ex-Japan. The JACIFIBS is a sub-index of JACI.
The JPMorgan US Liquid Index (JULI) provides performance comparisons and valuation metrics across a carefully defined universe of investment grade corporate bonds, tracking individual issuers, sectors and sub-sectors by their various ratings and maturities. The JULIFINS Index is a sub-index of JULI.
Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns and investors may get back less than the amount invested. It is not possible to invest directly in an index.