logo
Commodities tend to outperform when equities go down

Commodities tend to outperform when equities go down

Bloomberg06-03-2025

In our blog from a year ago, we highlighted how commodities tend to outperform in late cycle economic environments while other asset classes underperform. When other asset classes get pulled out with the tide, commodities can be an anchor in a portfolio by moving against in a risk-off scenario. Looking at the past six decades, exhibit 1 demonstrates the historical uncorrelated nature of commodities prices to other major asset classes found in typical portfolios. There were only a few instances since 1960 when commodities tended to have a higher than 0.4 correlation to equities (highlighted in light blue) – these episodes have occurred after big global shock events such as GFC and the Covid crisis. Most recently correlations have been moving toward zero across the major asset classes.
Looking through a historical macro lens, there have been examples when the unique performance attributes of commodities really shine when equity markets fall or even move sideways. In 2025, there are plenty of reasons why a market participant may want to reduce an allocation to equities and diversify by adding or increasing an allocation to commodities, such as elevated stock valuations, impact from tariffs imposed by the US administration or sinking market sentiment.
Commodities do not have the same drivers of performance as equities. Commodities do not have earnings estimates to beat or rely on what analysts think a stock price will do over the next 12 months. Commodities prices fluctuate based on the current point in time situation, already this year there are several themes – Tariff Effects and Peak Supply – playing out as was highlighted in our 2025 Outlook.
A broad commodities benchmark like BCOMTR has had a strong start to the year verifying its role as a diversifier in a portfolio. If equities lose momentum this year, commodities could take the charge forward as deflationary momentum has stalled and could potentially reverse. Exhibit 2 shows how commodities and equities performed during the quarters when inflation rose the most over the past four decades. Only one quarter showed commodities had a negative performance, but this was in 2022 after commodities rose 25% the prior quarter. Looking back to the start of BCOM history in the 1960s, equities fell in 16 years and had an average drawdown of 14% while commodities averaged a positive 6% return over these same equity down years.
Traditional diversifiers like fixed income have not behaved as expected since 2021 with correlations to equities over the last four years in positive territory for much of the time. This is a change from the typical negative correlations seen over the past century. Other diversifiers like private equity have gained in popularity and performed well but do not have the liquidity of commodities markets. Broadly, market participants are still under allocated to commodities, even though participation has been picking up.
Simply going long commodities or tactically going long individual or sector commodity exposures has worked well recently, particularly for softs, precious metals, and livestock. Sophisticated market participants sometimes gain exposure through a long/short expression to take advantage of carry dynamics between different commodities. Shorting a commodity in steep contango like wheat or a precious metal could provide a pickup of at least 5% a year based on the current futures curves in Exhibit 3.
The rise in gold prices challenges the traditional relationship between gold, USD and real rates. Strong central bank buying, futures positioning that has risen close to all-time highs, and big inflows of over $5 billion into physical backed gold ETFs over February 2024 have all helped push the price of gold to all-time highs despite the traditional fundamentals. If gold breaches the $3000 mark, at least a pause in price action could be warranted.
Gold may continue its path higher if there is sustained safe-haven demand and cautious market sentiment. During uncertain times, diversification is a dear friend and uncorrelated assets such as commodities could be the diversifier market participants continue to consider when thinking about risks for 2025. The diverse nature of commodities sectors and individual commodities allows market participants to initiate long/short exposures based on specific drivers of performance differentiated within the broad commodities universe which provides opportunities for expression outside of a simple long-only exposure. If equities move into a bear market after recent multi-year outperformance, market participants could find opportunities with a diversifier in their portfolio like commodities.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ron Insana says Trump's spending bill unlikely to generate the economic boom he promised
Ron Insana says Trump's spending bill unlikely to generate the economic boom he promised

CNBC

time12 hours ago

  • CNBC

Ron Insana says Trump's spending bill unlikely to generate the economic boom he promised

As he did in his first term as president, President Donald Trump is once again predicting an economic boom the likes of which the U.S. has never before seen. In reviewing the publicly available economic data since Ronald Reagan, the period in which the U.S. grew the fastest with the most job creation did not occur in Trump's first term and is unlikely to do so in this term, the reasons why to be explained shortly. First, a brief review of recent economic history where the biggest economic boom actually took place. Former President Bill Clinton's eight years in office produced nearly 4% annual growth, over 240,000 jobs added per month and an inflation rate that averaged less than 3%, considered very low for that time. The unemployment rate when Clinton first took office was 7.3% and bottomed at 3.8% by April 2000. By contrast, in Trump's first term, the economy added under 200,000 jobs per month, roughly equal to that of former President Barack Obama, while GDP growth averaged 2.3%, again, roughly equal to Obama's last three years in office, while inflation was less than a quarter percentage point lower than in Obama's second term. (Trump's numbers, of course, were skewed by the Covid crisis, which featured the steepest and shortest recession in U.S. history.) All that leads me to the notion that a boom, the likes of which we have not seen, is unlikely even if the "Big Beautiful Bill" passes through Congress and lands on Trump's desk. And here's why. Nothing new to help growth First, the bill largely extends existing tax rates that were put in place in 2017, without further lowering corporate taxes, as once promised, from 21% to 15%. There are no major additional tax cuts included in the bill. The bill simply makes much of the existing code permanent. No change, no gain. It's true that taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security payments may be eliminated, but that could also lead to employers seeking out ways, in the first two cases anyway, to pay lower wages if tips and overtime go untaxed. Beyond that, there's not much new in the bill that would accelerate economic growth, nor would a failure of the bill's passage lead to a 68% tax increase for everyone in America, as the president has warned . Published analyses have suggested that 68% of Americans could see a 7% increase in their taxes, but not a 68% increase in what they pay. Given the prospects for rising inflation amid recently imposed tariffs, and a subsequent slowing in consumer spending, some of which is already taking place, the economy appears to be downshifting rather than speeding up. Job growth , as we saw on Friday, has moderated for several months in a row and while not reflective of a recession, we're also witnessing a jump in jobless claims, announced layoffs and, according to some published reports, consumers maxing out credit cards to buy the basics. Add to that the reductions in support for the poorest Americans, whether its access to Medicaid or food stamps, and the ingredients for a further slowdown are embedded in the bill, especially for those who can least afford to have government assistance reduced in a meaningful way. Big changes needed The Department of Government Efficiency spending cuts are also affecting government stimulus in so far as key funding in technology, medicine and education are being slashed, threatening the very areas that make the U.S. economy competitive and very much growth-oriented. The bill, by most accounts, also adds from $2.4 trillion to $3.3 trillion to the budget deficit over the next decade. With the current national debt standing at a record $36.2 trillion, higher federal borrowing needs could further push up borrowing costs as investors, especially international ones, now nervous about America's fiscal position could demand higher yields to compensate them for the risk, however unlikely, that the U.S. runs into trouble in paying its bills. During the Clinton administration, tax rates were higher, and yet growth was stronger, 22.7 million jobs were added and the budget deficit turned to surplus by the end of his term. None of those metrics are supported by existing or proposed policy initiatives today. The Clinton boom was second only to that of FDR, whose economy grew strongly as Roosevelt took over, quite literally, at the very bottom of the Great Depression. In modern times, Clinton's economy was stronger than that of any president who came before or after him. None of the policies currently being pursued by this administration offer the same prospects for growth though, even like Clinton, this president has a major technological revolution underway. That big, beautiful bill would require some big, bountiful changes if it hopes to stimulate growth in a way in which all Americans, rather than perhaps a handful of billionaires, will share meaningfully in any future prosperity.

What are the three big things in markets now? RBC weighs in
What are the three big things in markets now? RBC weighs in

Yahoo

time16 hours ago

  • Yahoo

What are the three big things in markets now? RBC weighs in

-- RBC Capital analysts highlighted three significant trends currently shaping markets in a note to clients on Monday. The firm noted that the trends include an improving 2026 EPS outlook, a sharp increase in net bulls on the AAII survey, and emerging seasonal patterns. First, "consensus expectations for 2026 are inching up for S&P 500 EPS in a broad-based way," said the bank. This is seen as a "positive data point for the stock market but a slight one." RBC explains that the embedded growth rate for the S&P 500 in 2026 consensus estimates has risen modestly, and this improvement has been "fairly broad-based," impacting both the "Mag 7 as well as the index ex the Mag 7." RBC Capital views this as a "positive data point for the broader U.S. equity market." Second, investor sentiment, as measured by the AAII survey, has shifted. "Net bulls on the AAII survey have moved up sharply, and formally entered a less robust forward return environment." While not yet negative, "the sentiment set up for the stock market is far less favorable than just a few weeks ago." Other sentiment indicators also show "some signs of a stall," including correlations within the S&P 500 inching up again and U.S. equity funds experiencing "very modest outflows." Third, seasonal trends suggest a tricky period ahead. RBC Capital says that "in recent years June and July have tended to be strong for the S&P 500 but that the transition into fall has been tricky with declines often seen in the August – October time frame." This keeps them "mindful that even if stocks continue to climb in the near-term, the transition into the latter part of the year is often tricky." They also note that the rebound off the April 8 low in the S&P 500 "continues to track the path of the rebounds off the major post GFC non-recession drawdowns," suggesting more room for recovery through year-end, albeit with potential choppiness. Related articles What are the three big things in markets now? RBC weighs in Chewy set-up into and post Q1 results is 'increasingly less attractive' Interactive Brokers hit by Citi downgrade as valuation climbs but Redburn ups PT Sign in to access your portfolio

Lincoln entrepreneur running for open NU Board of Regents seat in 2026
Lincoln entrepreneur running for open NU Board of Regents seat in 2026

Yahoo

time6 days ago

  • Yahoo

Lincoln entrepreneur running for open NU Board of Regents seat in 2026

Brent Comstock of Lincoln is the first announced 2026 candidate for the District 1 seat on the University of Nebraska Board of Regents held by Regent Tim Clare of Lincoln, who says he will not seek a fourth term on the board. (Candidate photo courtesy of Comstock campaign | University of Nebraska-Lincoln campus photo by Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — A Lincoln entrepreneur born and raised in Auburn announced his 2026 candidacy Wednesday for an open seat on the University of Nebraska Board of Regents. Brent Comstock, 29, is the CEO of the Lincoln-based marketing firm BCom, which he started a decade ago, after having thought up the idea for the business while he was in school. The District 1 seat Comstock is running for is held by Regent Tim Clare of Lincoln, who told the Lincoln Journal Star in April that he would not seek a fourth six-year term next year. NU Board of Regents District 1 includes the northern half of Lincoln, as well as the surrounding communities of Emerald, Malcolm, Agnew, Raymond and Davey. Comstock said it's important to preserve Clare's legacy of being principled and that he hopes to continue Clare's ability to bring all Nebraskans to the table. 'With the current political climate and the current budget environment, I think the next decade is going to shape how future generations choose to work and live here in the state,' Comstock told the Nebraska Examiner. 'All of that future depends on a strong, forward-thinking university system that brings everyone to the table and recognizes that every Nebraskan is impacted by what happens through the university system.' Comstock said NU is the 'most important public institution in the state,' from Nebraska Extension and 4-H in rural communities to degree programs across NU campuses and world-class research at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. 'I think it touches every person in Nebraska,' Comstock said. Comstock, the son of a plumber and a former special education teacher, is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He said he made his own college decision similar to other small town Nebraska kids: on finances, dreams and aspirations. A scholarship made it more economically viable to go to school in North Carolina, Comstock said he returned home and invested in BCom, which partners with start-up companies, a bipartisan group of candidates and other causes or organizations. Comstock's campaign announcement included endorsements from Nebraskans, including Lincoln Mayor Leirion Gaylor Baird, community leader and philanthropist Connie Duncan, former State Sen. Matt Williams of Gothenburg (who ran for the regents in 2022) and former U.S. Sens. Bob Kerrey and Ben Nelson, who both also served Nebraska as governor. In a statement, Gaylor Baird said Comstock 'helped put Lincoln on the map' and has played a key role in shaping Lincoln's 'growing entrepreneurial ecosystem.' He lives and works in the downtown and Haymarket space in Lincoln. 'Brent understands that the success of the university and the success of Lincoln are deeply connected. He brings people together — across politics, industries and generations — to focus on what really matters: education, opportunity and progress,' Gaylor Baird said. 'He's exactly the kind of regent we need right now.' Jeff Raikes, the former Microsoft executive and Nebraska native who co-founded the Raikes Foundation, also endorsed Comstock. The Jeffrey S. Raikes School of Computer Science and Management at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln is named after Raikes, the former CEO of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Raikes said in a statement that Comstock understands that NU 'is not only a world-class institution, but also a vital economic engine for our state.' 'His ability to work across sectors and across the aisle makes him exactly the kind of regent we need to lead with vision, integrity and purpose,' Raikes said. Clare ran unopposed in 2014 and 2020 and won in 2008 with 58% of the vote. New district boundaries took effect in 2021 and match those of the State Board of Education District 1, which in November elected newcomer Kristin Christensen. Races for the education boards are officially nonpartisan, and Comstock is a registered nonpartisan, while Clare is a registered Republican and Christensen is a registered Democrat. Christensen won with 58% of the vote in a highly watched election in November, succeeding former State Board of Education member Patsy Koch Johns, a Democrat first elected in 2016. Comstock said that while he would bring a 'fresh perspective,' he also brings a decade of leadership in building a company in the Cornhusker State. 'I told people, if I were ever to seek elected office, I would want it to be in a place that we can make impact that touches as many people as possible,' Comstock said. 'I think that this is the moment to do that.' The top two vote-getters in May 2026 will advance to the November 2026 election. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store