Ilya Spivak,  On Friday 25 November 2011, 10:33 
 The Australian, Canadian and New Zealand Dollars – the so-called “commodity  bloc” – have been the worst performers against their US namesake among the  majors so far this year.
The Australian, Canadian and New Zealand  Dollars – the so-called “commodity bloc” – have been the worst performers  against their US namesake among the majors so far this year. The outcome  reflects the group’s sensitivity to global economic growth expectations and  investors’ risk appetite at a time when the post-2008 crisis faces its most  considerable headwinds yet, with output expansion increasingly expected to slow  worldwide while the Euro Zone sovereign debt crisis threatens to unleash another  credit disaster onto financial markets. 
   
  Source: Bloomberg 
   Drivers of the  Commodity Currencies 
  The fundamental forces behind the Australian,  Canadian and New Zealand Dollars are clearly revealed in the currencies’  intimate correlation with the S&P 500 benchmark stock index over recent  years. An understanding this relationship illustrates precisely why the  commodity currencies were so strong on the way out of the Great Recession  previously and whey they’ve lost their appeal so dramatically this year.  
  What does the S&P 500 represent? 
  Put simply, it is a reflection of the markets’  collective expectations of future earnings for the world’s largest companies.  Looking past the minutiae of individual firms and evaluating the aggregate,  those expectations are naturally a function of what investors believe about the  pace of global economic growth. Naturally enough, if growth is expected to be  robust, earnings are likely to rise as companies find more opportunities to do  business as well as greater demand for their goods and services. Needless to  say, the reverse is likewise the case. 
  Taking this logic one step further, it seems  reasonable enough to say that growth expectations will probably be quite telling  of the markets’ general appetite for risk. If aggregate earnings are expected to  rise overall, investors will be comparatively more sanguine about taking  additional risks for a chance at greater returns than they would if the global  economy was in dire straits and uncertainties loomed large. Once again, the same  logic applies in the opposite scenario as well. To this end, the S&P 500 is  both a real-time proxy for the financial markets’ collective economic growth  outlook as well as a barometer for their risk tolerance. 
   
  Source: Bloomberg 
   Why are commodity currencies aligned with the S&P 500? 
  All three economies look to exports of raw  materials to the world’s top-two economic engines as their core source of  expansion. In the case of Australia and New Zealand, that is China. The East  Asian giant has a healthy appetite for Australian mining goods, most notably  coal and iron ore, as well as New Zealand foodstuffs like meat and dairy.  Meanwhile, Canada has a similar relationship with the United States. Indeed,  close to 80 percent of Canadian exports are headed for US markets. Crude oil is  an oft-cited focal point in this relationship, but other goods such as lumber  are also important. 
  Needless to say, any given country’s economic  growth outlook is an important determinant of its currency’s exchange rate. In  the simplest of terms, strong performance puts upward pressure on the price of  goods across the spectrum as growing demand chases after finite supply, driving  inflation. Central banks seeking to cap price growth raise interest rates to  encourage saving and discourage consumption in a bid to cool growth. Rising  interest rates represent an increase in the return to be had for holding  deposits in a given currency, driving investment demand and leading to  appreciation. 
  If economic performance in Australia, Canada  and New Zealand is determined by demand from the US and China, the long-term  trajectory of their currencies are a function of that very same thing. Because  the US and China happen to be the world’s first- and second-largest economies,  the same can be said of the world as a whole, bringing us back to the S&P  500. All told, we can see that at their core, the Aussie, Kiwi and Canadian  Dollars are no less a function of the very same global growth expectations and  related risk appetite trends that drive the benchmark stock index. 
  Headwinds Facing  Global Economic Growth, Risk  Appetite 
  Having established what drives the commodity  currencies, we turn to what undermined them as well as risk appetite at large in  2011. Broadly speaking, this brings us to two discrete themes: the slowdown in  global economic growth and the lingering Euro Zone sovereign debt crisis.  
  The Global Recovery  is Faltering 
  Turning first to global economic growth, it is  clear that the markets have been faced with a deteriorating outlook for  worldwide performance as all three of the world’s leading growth engines – the  US, China and the Euro Zone – turn increasingly sluggish. The downturn in China  is self-induced, while those in the West reflect the fading effects of  aggressive fiscal and monetary stimulus efforts. 
   
  Source: Bloomberg 
   The administration in Beijing has struggled to  contain inflation, with the annual growth rate of the Consumer Price Index  hitting a three-year high by mid-year and hovering uncomfortably above the 6  percent threshold throughout the third quarter. Inflation poses a major problem for China’s rulers, who know all too  well that the price of failing to secure affordable access to basic necessities  for the country’s enormous population is often mass upheaval and regime change.  As such, authorities moved to slow the economy and curb price growth with a  total of 11 interest rate hikes so far this year, at times acting on the 1-year  lending and/or deposit rates as well as banks’ reserve requirements. The results  have been dramatic: the annual GDP growth rate slowed to the weakest in two  years by the third quarter while the Manufacturing PMI gauge of factory-sector  growth that approximates trends in the overall economy dropped to the weakest  since February 2009 in October. 
  In the US, much of the damage occurred in the  first half of the year, with GDP adding a paltry 0.4 percent in the first  quarter followed by a still sub-par 1.3 percent in the three months through  June. Meanwhile, a Citigroup metric tracking US economic data surprises sank to  the lowest since late 2008 by mid-June. Much of this weakness can be traced to  the disappearance of the boost from the government’s aggressive stimulus  spending, but ripple effects from such events as the Tohoku earthquake in Japan  that – for example – disrupted parts shipments to US auto manufacturers are  likewise to blame. Performance seems to be improving in the second half of the  year, but consensus annual GDP growth expectations compounded in a survey from  Bloomberg suggest the economy will add 1.8 percent from the previous year in  2011, a marked slowdown from the 3 percent recorded in 2010. 
  Finally turning to Europe, the fading impact of  stimulus measures and a lurch toward austerity on the fiscal side of the  equation were compounded by added pressure from the European Central Bank in the  monetary policy space. Mirroring its often-criticized decision to raise interest  rates in the middle of 2008 as the global credit crunch was on the cusp of being  unleashed onto financial markets, the ECB opted to react to rising headline with  a cumulative 50bps in tightening between April and July. The results have been  dramatic: economists’ 2011 economic growth expectations (as tracked by  Bloomberg) topped out in June and began to trend firmly lower in August, now  calling for the currency bloc’s GDP to add just 1.6 percent this year. The  outlook for 2012 is even more ominous, with a paltry 0.7 percent increase set to  underperform the rest of the G10 by a wide margin. 
  Euro Zone Debt Crisis  Rekindles Meltdown Fears 
  Amplifying already substantial headwinds facing  risk appetite is the return to the spotlight of Euro Zone sovereign debt crisis.  The inability of some countries in the currency bloc to keep up with their debt  obligations seemingly vanished from the foreground in 2010 after Greece and  Ireland received €110 billion  and €85 billion bailouts in  May and November, respectively. This year seemed to start on a positive note  when Eurozone finance ministers set up a permanent €500  billion bailout facility called the European Stability  Mechanism (ESM), but stress returned as Portugal admitted it was underwater and  asked for a rescue in April. It received a €78 billion  lifeline in May, but another lull in market jitters was not to be. 
  In June, Eurozone finance threatened to  withhold an aid payment to Greece unless the country agrees to commit to harsher  austerity measures, sparking fears that a default within the currency bloc was  imminent. Though the Greek Parliament approved further budget cuts and received  the aid while Eurozone officials cobbled together a second €109 billion aid package by July aimed to  fund Athens as well as prevent contagion elsewhere in the region, the situation  began to spiral out of control. By August, yields on Spanish and Italian bonds  began to soar as investors demanded a hefty premium to lend to the next set of  Euro member states thought to come under sovereign pressure. The ECB reluctantly  agreed to begin buying the two countries’ bonds in a bid to cap borrowing costs,  but the effort proved too anemic to have a game-changing impact. A so-called  “comprehensive” solution hashed out at a summit in October – proposing to write  down 50 percent of privately-held Greek debt, lever up the existing €440 billion bailout fund (the European  Financial Stability Facility, or EFSF) to €1 trillion,  and require Eurozone banks to adhere to a 9 percent reserve requirement – failed  to reassure investors. Likewise in November, short-lived sigh of relief  following a change of governments in Greece and Italy is already running out of  stream. 
  The debt crisis presents a two-pronged problem.  On one hand, it amplifies already considerable headwinds facing Euro Zone  economic growth. Soaring borrowing costs amid fears of a default within the  currency bloc stymie growth as individuals and businesses find it more expensive  to spend and invest. In turn, slower growth reduces regional governments’ tax  intake, making it that much harder to reduce deficits, stoking already  considerable sovereign solvency fears and producing a vicious cycle. On the  other, it threatens to unleash another market-wide selloff and global credit  crunch, plunging worldwide finance at large into another existential crisis just  three years after the 2008 debacle. 
  
  Source: Bloomberg 
   Needless to say, the key threat is that of a  default in a large country like Italy or Spain – the third- and fourth-largest  economies in the Eurozone, respectively – where the problem is simply too big to  be addressed with a Greece-style bailout. Indeed, Italy is the world’s  third-largest bond market, meaning the impact of its default would prove far  more detrimental than the now infamous collapse of US investment bank Lehman  Brothers that triggered what would become the Great Recession. Countless banks,  funds and other institutions would suddenly find their holdings of Italian bonds  to be absolutely worthless and be forced to book sharp losses.--- Written by  Ilya Spivak, Currency Strategist for Dailyfx.com