Commodities

David Fickling is a Bloomberg Gadfly columnist covering commodities, as well as industrial and consumer companies. He has been a reporter for Bloomberg News, Dow Jones, the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times and the Guardian.

Metals markets have performed a dramatic reversal as 2016 nears its close.

Copper, having struggled to post gains all year amid healthy supplies and underwhelming demand, put in its strongest monthly performance since 2006 in November, with three-month LME futures climbing 20 percent. Gold, which was up as much as 30 percent in July and heading for its biggest annual increase since 2010, has crashed to a point where it's likely to end the year just $50 or so above where it started.

Winners and Losers
Copper has surged and gold has slumped in the last two months of the year
Source: Bloomberg
Note: Rebased. Oct. 31, 2016 = 100

A simple story has been told to explain this reaction: After the election of Donald Trump, the U.S. Congress is going to take the country off its eight-year fiscal crash diet, push through a $1 trillion infrastructure program and $9.5 trillion of tax cuts, and send economic growth and demand for industrial raw materials such as copper soaring.

Meanwhile, Janet Yellen will respond to the healthier environment by raising interest rates. That ought to increase the attraction of 10-year Treasuries, which should be yielding about 2.8 percent a year from now, and reduce the appeal of commodities such as gold that pay no interest.

The problem with this theory is that monetary and fiscal policy don't happen in isolation from each other. Put the two stories together, and the narrative starts to look incoherent. Guys, it's time for some game theory:

Here's a way to summarize the four situations shown on the Gadfly decision-matrix napkin:

  • Scenario A is basically what the copper market is predicting. Congress pushes through fiscal stimulus but the U.S. Federal Reserve chooses to hold fire on interest rates. That's consistent with Yellen's long-standing reputation as a dove and her view expressed this month that monetary policy "remains accommodative."
  • The problem with that forecast is that the U.S. represents a rather small share of global copper consumption, as Gadfly's Liam Denning has pointed out. A shift in U.S. demand dramatic enough to shake metals markets would stand a good chance of closing the country's lingering output gap and kicking interest rates into a higher gear. In Scenario B, this tighter policy would slow the economy and reduce materials demand. This is more or less what the gold market is predicting.
  • In theory, it's possible that we get something like Scenario C. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell last week poured cold water on the idea of a large infrastructure package, and Trump's "Penny Plan" to cut federal spending will reduce outlays by about $740 billion, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan think tank. If fiscal policy wasn't stimulating the economy as much, monetary policy would probably remain loose to compensate.
  • Scenario D is closer to the situation that's prevailed under most of Barack Obama's administration. While Congress passed a major stimulus program in February 2009, nominal government spending has grown at the slowest rate since the Second World War. Meanwhile, interest rates, constrained by the zero lower bound, have spent most of the past eight years tighter than they should be, with inflation as measured by the Personal Consumption Expenditure Index falling below the Fed's 2 percent target in 91 of the 95 months since Obama's inauguration.

Of those four scenarios, A would match the bullishness in the copper market, but might imply that the current bout of bearishness around gold is overdone. Should scenarios B or D come about, growth is going to be slower than expected and interest rates higher, which would be bearish for both copper and gold. In the unlikely event of scenario C, copper could fall while gold rises.

There may be edge cases which could explain the recent price action, but in general there are no obvious circumstances in which copper would put in sustainable gains while gold registers ongoing losses, which is what we've been seeing of late.

Belt Tightening
U.S. government spending under the Obama administration has risen at the slowest rate in decades
Source: White House, Gadfly calculations
Note: Election-year spending = 100. Shows total nominal federal, state and local expenditures as percentage of election-year spending. Kennedy-Johnson and Nixon-Ford administrations have been treated as single eras; Reagan-Bush have been treated separately.

Anyone making a momentum-type bet on the direction that base and precious metal prices have moved over the past few months should bear in mind quite how unusual their recent behavior has been. Negative correlations between copper and gold -- where one rises, while the other falls -- generally hold for only rare, brief periods.

Same Same
120-day correlations between spot gold and three-month LME copper forwards are almost always positive
Source: Bloomberg

We're in one of those periods at the moment, but wise traders with an eye on history shouldn't count on it lasting. If you're betting on a bullish outlook for copper you'd do well to make the same wager on gold -- or vice versa.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
David Fickling in Sydney at dfickling@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Matthew Brooker at mbrooker1@bloomberg.net