China/US Trade – Finding a Signal Amidst the Noise
The celebration of the Trump/Xi dinner in Buenos Aries lasted about three hours. What went wrong? This reaction was not a complete surprise, but the size and rapidity were attention-grabbing.
The market reaction fits the description I suggested in May: Trading, Fast and Slow. A small piece of news leads to a cascade of trading – algorithms trained to watch for key words, humans making a short-term directional play, technicians noting the “violation of key support or resistance,” and the subsequent media explanations. This confers an undue legitimacy on noise – tidbits of news without any context.
Here is how it plays out on the China/US trade story. In each case let’s try to separate trading “fast” reactions from trading “slow.”
|
Issue |
Fast – Traders |
Slow – Investors |
|
G20 Meeting |
Not specific enough. |
Reasonable outline with some initial agreement. |
|
90-Day Deadline |
Too many issues to resolve in 90 days. No firm schedule. |
A deadline is needed to prod negotiators. Extensions are possible, even likely, and that is fine. |
|
Posturing, tweets and comments |
Demonstrates lack of trust and commitment. |
Business as usual – will continue for 90 days. |
|
Arrest of Wanzhou |
Tactical effort by U.S. to gain leverage. Timing (same day as the dinner) undermines confidence. |
A separate policy path related to Iran. Preceded dinner plans, so trade impact might not have been considered. Timing was a coincidence of travel schedules. |
|
Differing communications from US and China |
Shows lack of real agreement and the poor prospects for an eventual deal. |
Shows why a dinner meeting is not a way to draft policy. A joint communique requires advance work by staff. |
|
Prospects for avoiding an all-out trade war. |
Slim. |
An encouraging first step. |
Conclusion
This is a typical example of the trading community’s failure to understand politics, negotiation, and compromise. I have highlighted this before on issues like Greece and the asserted collapse of Europe and concerning various US policy debates.
Here is what we should expect:
- Decades of history will not be reversed in a few months. Be happy for some progress.
- The outcome will be a compromise. It will not be a complete success for either side, but each will trumpet what they have accomplished.
- Nothing big will happen until the last minute. This is the way that partisans demonstrate they have accomplished as much as possible.
- Eventual relief on the most important reciprocal tariffs.
- Some progress on the intellectual property issues.
- Some immediate relief on existing boycotts, e.g. soybeans.
I expect significant improvement from current expectations for two reasons:
- It is in the interest of all. Political processes gravitate toward these outcomes.
- Trump supporters are feeling pain and will exert increasing pressure for a deal.
Long-term investors should emphasize legitimate signs of progress or failure, avoiding the false drama of the daily “explanations.”
One comment