馒头卡喉咙啦 personal page - To The Moon

馒头卡喉咙啦

馒头卡喉咙啦

No personal profile

192Follow

4Followers

0Topic

0Badge

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-04-08

go

Sorry, the original content has been removed

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-03-28

Hi

How long will the value style of US stocks last?

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-05-15

O

Sorry, the original content has been removed

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-03-18

2233

Bilibili's Hong Kong IPO begins today, with an entry fee of approximately HK$19,959 per lot.

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-06-07

Hao

Sorry, the original content has been removed

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-04-08

？

Sorry, the original content has been removed

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-03-23

Good

Tencent Music's Q4 and full-year financial reports were strong, and its stock price once hit a new high in after-hours trading.

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-03-22

Hao

Bilibili's margin trading subscriptions reached HK$35.55 billion, an excess of 52.3 times.

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-03-17

Down

馒头卡喉咙啦

2021-03-17

Expect to fall

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3576125208282503","uuid":"3576125208282503","gmtCreate":1613115836844,"gmtModify":1615975327856,"name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","pinyin":"mtkhllmantoukahoulongla","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":4,"headSize":192,"tweetSize":95,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":2,"name":"无畏虎","nameTw":"無畏虎","represent":"初生牛犊","factor":"发布3条非转发主帖,1条获得他人回复或点赞","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-4","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Tiger Star","description":"Join the tiger community for 2000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dddf24b906c7011de2617d4fb3f76987","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/53d58ad32c97254c6f74db8b97e6ec49","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6304700d92ad91c7a33e2e92ec32ecc1","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2026.08.06","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001,"isScarce":0,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-2","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"Executive Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $300,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d20b23f1b6335407f882bc5c2ad12c0","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ada3b4533518ace8404a3f6dd192bd29","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/177f283ba21d1c077054dac07f88f3bd","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2026.01.09","exceedPercentage":"80.46%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101,"isScarce":0,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-2","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Master Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 100","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ad22cfbe2d05aa393b18e9226e4b0307","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36702e6ff3ffe46acafee66cc85273ca","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d52eb88fa385cf5abe2616ed63781765","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.10.22","exceedPercentage":"80.34%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102,"isScarce":0,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":115403717,"gmtCreate":1623025463439,"gmtModify":1704194427157,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hao","listText":"Hao","text":"Hao","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/115403717","repostId":"1151287045","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5078,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":196856248,"gmtCreate":1621044005684,"gmtModify":1704352343716,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"O","listText":"O","text":"O","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/196856248","repostId":"2135983330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5564,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":341531767,"gmtCreate":1617839269459,"gmtModify":1704703710096,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"？","listText":"？","text":"？","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/341531767","repostId":"2125072521","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4786,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":341533622,"gmtCreate":1617839211766,"gmtModify":1704703708281,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"go","listText":"go","text":"go","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/341533622","repostId":"2125186725","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2125186725","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1617816543,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2125186725?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-08 01:29","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Xiaomi's car manufacturing enthusiasm remains strong, while Didi is gearing up to enter the market.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2125186725","media":"中国证券报-中证网","summary":"截至发稿，滴滴方面对此事未予置评。小米全力以赴造车除了滴滴以外，关于小米造车的热度依然不减。4月6日晚，小米集团董事长兼CEO雷军在粉“OpenDay”上再次回应了小米造车计划，称将“全力以赴为‘米粉’造好车”。3月30日，小米集团在港交所发布公告，董事会正式批准智能电动汽车业务立项，拟成立一家全资子公司，负责智能电动汽车业务。科技公司入局智能汽车“新战场”，新一轮“智能汽车大战”或将拉开帷幕。","content":"<p><div>Xiaomi's car manufacturing enthusiasm remains undiminished, while Didi is also rumored to be manufacturing cars. Entering 2021, with Baidu and Xiaomi officially announcing their car manufacturing efforts, technology companies gradually moved from behind the scenes to the forefront, making increasingly frequent statements in the automotive field. Industry insiders point out that the automotive electronics industry will become another major development opportunity across the entire industry chain, following home appliances, PCs, and mobile phones. The automotive electronics industry has entered a new round of technological innovation, and its penetration rate and value will be greatly increased, with a market potential exceeding one trillion yuan. Didi is manufacturing cars? On the evening of April 6th, news broke that Didi had launched a car manufacturing project, led by Yang Jun, Vice President of Didi and General Manager of Xiaoju Car Service.</p><p><a href=\"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/tech/2021-04-08/doc-ikmxzfmk5553014.shtml\">Web page link</a></div></p>","source":"sina_symbol","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Xiaomi's car manufacturing enthusiasm remains strong, while Didi is gearing up to enter the market.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nXiaomi's car manufacturing enthusiasm remains strong, while Didi is gearing up to enter the market.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">中国证券报-中证网</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-04-08 01:29</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><div>Xiaomi's car manufacturing enthusiasm remains undiminished, while Didi is also rumored to be manufacturing cars. Entering 2021, with Baidu and Xiaomi officially announcing their car manufacturing efforts, technology companies gradually moved from behind the scenes to the forefront, making increasingly frequent statements in the automotive field. Industry insiders point out that the automotive electronics industry will become another major development opportunity across the entire industry chain, following home appliances, PCs, and mobile phones. The automotive electronics industry has entered a new round of technological innovation, and its penetration rate and value will be greatly increased, with a market potential exceeding one trillion yuan. Didi is manufacturing cars? On the evening of April 6th, news broke that Didi had launched a car manufacturing project, led by Yang Jun, Vice President of Didi and General Manager of Xiaoju Car Service.</p><p><a href=\"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/tech/2021-04-08/doc-ikmxzfmk5553014.shtml\">Web page link</a></div></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/tech/2021-04-08/doc-ikmxzfmk5553014.shtml\">中国证券报-中证网</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4879226cba5adf8ff2086dab0c52ccbb","relate_stocks":{"01810":"小米集团-W"},"source_url":"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/tech/2021-04-08/doc-ikmxzfmk5553014.shtml","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2125186725","content_text":"小米造车热度未减，滴滴又传出造车消息。进入2021年，随着百度、小米官宣造车，科技公司逐渐从幕后走向台前，在汽车领域的发声愈发密集。业内人士指出，汽车电子产业将成为继家电、PC和手机之后又一次全产业链级别的大发展机遇。汽车电子产业进入新一轮技术革新周期，其渗透率及价值都将得到大幅提升，市场空间超万亿元。滴滴造车？4月6日晚，有消息称，滴滴开始启动造车项目，负责人是滴滴副总裁、小橘车服总经理杨峻。截至发稿，滴滴方面对此事未予置评。报道称，滴滴造车团队目前已经从车厂挖人，其中包括曾担任蔚来汽车用户发展副总裁的朱江。对此，朱江本人辟谣称消息并不属实。一名长安汽车相关人士向中国证券报记者透露称，“我有一个同事已经过去了。目前，滴滴还是采用和比亚迪合作的模式。”2019年11月，滴滴发布了全球首款定制网约车D1。这款车由滴滴联合比亚迪共同设计开发，基于滴滴平台上5.5亿位乘客、上千万名司机需求、百亿次出行数据，针对网约车出行场景，在车内人机交互、司乘体验、车联网等多方面进行定制化设计。据了解，D1在2021年首季度销量为5000台。目前，滴滴D1已经在长沙、宁波、厦门开始运营，招募D1专属司机。其中，长沙正在运营车辆已超过500台，下一步滴滴定制车D1还将登陆广州、深圳等一线城市。汽车行业资深分析师钟师向中国证券报记者表示，“滴滴此前的目的是做自动驾驶车队，提升智能化程度升级成L3自动驾驶的车队，更多控制出行市场。滴滴现在基本上已经把控了出行市场的各个端口，造车是在已有的用户数据库上做叠加”。威马汽车战略运营副总裁梅松林对中国证券报记者表示，滴滴如果造车，就会进入到“重资产”的经营模式。此前的科技巨头跨界造车，都是在某一个领域已经占据领头羊的地位，盈利模式也非常成熟。但造车是一项非常烧钱的项目，对滴滴而言，作为一家服务型公司，目前商业模式还没有完全成熟，此前在造车领域并无根基，造车的钱从哪里来？小米全力以赴造车除了滴滴以外，关于小米造车的热度依然不减。4月6日晚，小米集团董事长兼CEO雷军在粉“Open Day”上再次回应了小米造车计划，称将“全力以赴为‘米粉’造好车”。“手机和汽车有很多相似的地方，小米首款车一定会给大家带来惊喜。”雷军指出，小米发布的第一款车一定会是那个时间里最尖端的产品，预计会在3年后推出。在直播前，雷军在微博上向米粉“连发三问”，投票问题分别是“你希望小米汽车第一辆车是什么车”“你希望小米汽车第一辆车大约是什么价钱”“关于小米汽车的品牌”。投票结果大致勾勒出小米粉丝对小米汽车的构想与期待：关于小米汽车的品牌，超过63%的人认为小米应该坚持使用“小米”品牌。关于首款车的车型，小米调查显示，有45%用户希望小米首款车是轿车，40%用户希望是SUV，7%-8%用户则希望是跑车，5%-6%用户希望是房车。在价位上，虽然单项选择10万元以下的人最多，不过还是有2/3的人选择了10万元以上。3月30日，小米集团在港交所发布公告，董事会正式批准智能电动汽车业务立项，拟成立一家全资子公司，负责智能电动汽车业务。首期投资为100亿元人民币，预计未来10年投资额100亿美元（超650亿元人民币）。小米集团创始人雷军将兼任智能电动汽车业务的首席执行官。据雷军透露，在过去75天，小米进行了85场业内拜访沟通，与200多位汽车行业资深人士进行了深度交流，进行了4次管理层内部讨论会和两次正式董事会。雷军强调，小米造车是小米全资投入，小米经过反复考虑，决定只有和小米的手机、生态链等产品全部打通，才能提供无所不在的智能汽车体验。钟师认为，与其他造车新势力从零开始不同的是，小米造车已经自带品牌，作为一家电子消费品巨头和具有成熟商业生态的品牌，小米具有先天优势。梅松林指出，小米此前在智能手机和智能家居方面发展得十分成功，下一步最大的智能产品就是智能汽车。但汽车与智能家居产品在生命周期和安全可靠性等方面明显不同，需要格外留意。对中国汽车产业而言，目前还没有出现国际汽车品牌。小米智能手机已经是国际品牌，下一步小米或将承担全球智能汽车布道者的角色。智能汽车大战拉开帷幕随着滴滴和小米等科技公司相继加入智能电动车的赛道，也使得该领域的热度越来越高。对此，小鹏汽车董事长兼CEO何小鹏曾在社交媒体上表示，“据我了解，今年大概有数家科技企业可能会成为不同模式的造车新势力，这对智能汽车市场和新的移动生态的真正到来，会产生非常正面的影响。”进入2021年，随着百度、小米官宣造车，科技公司逐渐从幕后走向台前，在汽车领域的发声愈发密集。之前的“汽车+互联网”已经有向“互联网+汽车”转变的趋势。科技公司入局智能汽车“新战场”，新一轮“智能汽车大战”或将拉开帷幕。同时，智能汽车的发展趋势也逐渐明朗。IHSMarkit的报告预测，到2025年，全球汽车市场智能汽车的渗透率将提升到60%。届时，中国市场的智能汽车渗透率将达到75%，高出前者15个百分点。“早在2016年，国内就掀起了互联网巨头试水汽车产业的浪潮，但更多扮演的是通过AI、大数据、云计算技术为汽车产业赋能。而这一轮有所不同。很多科技巨头不再甘心充当配角，而是亲自下场造车，这对汽车产业的格局将产生重要影响。”业内人士对中国证券报记者表示。钟师表示，在汽车行业发展的“新四化”（智能化、网联化、电动化、共享化）趋势中，智能化和网联化都与科技公司有着千丝万缕的关系。科技公司进入汽车业，主要在于分享产业价值链中占比重越来越大的软件部分。目前，智能手机市场逐渐饱和，智能汽车被认为是下一个最具前景的智能终端。IDC预测，全球智能手机市场出货金额从2020年至2023年年均复合增长率仅为4.31%。安信证券认为，汽车电子产业将成为继家电、PC和手机之后又一次全产业链级别的大发展机遇。汽车电子产业进入新一轮技术革新周期，其渗透率及价值都将得到大幅提升，市场空间超万亿元。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"01810":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":6663,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":352333124,"gmtCreate":1616891366268,"gmtModify":1704799733385,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/352333124","repostId":"1192792909","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1192792909","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1617030576,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1192792909?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-29 23:09","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"How long will the value style of US stocks last?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1192792909","media":"雪涛宏观笔记","summary":"美股价值股与成长股长期相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值。与科网泡沫时期显著不同的是当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵）。短期来看，本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，可能处于风格优势期的","content":"<p>The core source of long-term relative returns between value and growth stocks in the US stock market is earnings, not valuation. Unlike the dot-com bubble era, value stocks do not currently have a significant valuation bubble compared to growth stocks (which may all be expensive). In the short term, this round of value stocks has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stages of the style advantage period (comparable to an average of 10 months). Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower the expectation of absolute returns for value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for a style reversal.<b>Introduction:</b></p><p>In August of last year, US value stocks underperformed growth stocks by more than the level during the dot-com bubble for the first time. At that time, the market began to see a shift towards cyclical value stocks, and at the same time, long-term US Treasury yields began to rebound sharply, driving the value/growth ratio back up from historical lows. Since February of this year, the Nasdaq index, which represents the growth style, has been on a pullback/retracement for several consecutive years, while the Dow Jones index, which represents the value style, has repeatedly hit new highs. Now that the style shift has become a reality, discussions about whether the value style of US stocks has reached a long-term inflection point have intensified.</p><p><b>Is the style shift a long-term reversal or a short-term convergence? How much room is left for interpretation?</b>—Let's explore the answer to this question using the Russel 1000 Value and Growth Index as an example.</p><p><b>Key conclusions:</b></p><p><b>First, the core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p><b>Second, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields after 1981 was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth. Currently, the technical and institutional factors that have led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth and a long-term deflationary environment have not been improved.</b></p><p><b>Third, if the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles. Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points, and the market's style inflection point also precedes the relative earnings inflection point.</b></p><p><b>Fourth, in the short term, this round of value style has lasted for 6 months and is in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average. The phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end this May. Therefore, value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks.</b></p><p><b>Fifth, once the US government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, conditions may arise for long-term interest rates to turn upward. The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades, and drive the central trend of long-term interest rates to rise.</b></p><p><b>Sixth, it remains to be seen whether the style divergence between long-term value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 1: Relative returns of the 10-year Treasury Bond yield versus the Russel 1000 Value and Style Index</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/600e3efd47bf1b5bf01a8081ca124909\" tg-width=\"910\" tg-height=\"594\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>I. What determines the relative return of a value/growth style?</b></p><p>The core argument supporting a long-term style reversal is the reversal of the downward trend in long-term US Treasury yields. We analyze the impact of long-term yields on earnings per share and valuations of value and growth stocks.</p><p><b>(1) The direction of long-term US Treasury yields and the difference between value growth EPS are in the same direction.</b></p><p>For value companies and growth companies, financial statement metrics related to operating leverage, such as asset, plant, and equipment turnover and net debt, differ significantly. In a broadly inflationary environment, value companies with relatively high levels of fixed assets will see a more significant improvement in turnover than growth companies. Value companies also have higher net debt levels than growth companies. With inflation resuming, value-based companies will have a relatively smaller burden of repaying principal and interest compared to growth companies. Therefore,<b>The decline in interest rates may indicate a decline in the relative EPS returns of value companies.</b></p><p>Looking at nearly 30 years of history,<b>The difference in EPS between value stocks and growth stocks is relatively consistent with short-term fluctuations in interest rates.</b>。 However, the highs of each cycle have shifted downwards in succession, which is in line with the long-term downward trend of interest rates. Before 2008, short-term monetary policy rates were consistent with the fluctuation pattern of profit spreads, but they gradually diverged after the financial crisis, reflecting a slower response of monetary policy rates to the economic profit cycle. The yield and earnings spread of long-term 10-year US Treasury bonds diverged significantly between 2003 and 2006. The difference between the EPS of value stocks and growth stocks reached a new high in 2007, but the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds was lower than the peak of the previous cycle.</p><p><b>The core of the divergence is also the mystery of Greenspan's long-term interest rate.</b>Short-term interest rates rose, while long-term risk-free interest rates fell. Greenspan's explanation of this includes:</p><p>1. The US economic recovery, coupled with deepening globalization, has led to trading partners accumulating increasingly large dollar surpluses. Globally, the only place capable of absorbing this portion of foreign exchange reserves accumulated from surpluses is the Treasury Bond market in the United States.</p><p>2. With the inevitable increase in the retirement population (especially in developed countries), the underfunding of retirement plans is a growing concern. Both pension funds and insurance companies have had to increase their share of long-term bonds in their portfolios.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 2: Before 2008, the monetary policy cycle and the value-to-growth profit spread were close to each other.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61937bebe0692c423e53ccc1341518ff\" tg-width=\"568\" tg-height=\"296\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 3: The fluctuations in the 10-year US Treasury yields and the profit spread of value growth are relatively consistent.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0213083f3bfc77aed3440308bd2fe7d3\" tg-width=\"824\" tg-height=\"431\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>(2) Declining long-term yields will not make growth stocks more expensive than value stocks.</b></p><p><b>There is a widespread view that a decline in risk-free interest rates will bring more valuation premiums to growth stocks, but this perception is wrong!</b>Although the volatility of Treasury Bond yields does indeed outperform the risk premium difference between value stocks and growth stocks from a short-term perspective, in the longer term, the risk premium of value stocks compared to growth stocks has not widened due to the decline in risk-free interest rates.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 4: Risk premium difference between 10-year Treasury Bond interest rate and value and growth stocks</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31507616ec0aec31a906ffcb6a74a3a9\" tg-width=\"478\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Therefore, we conclude<b>The core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p>The decline in risk-free interest rates and the decline in relative earnings (value stocks - growth stocks) both reflect changes in the industrial structure of the US economy. The use of capital and technology reduces labor costs and improves corporate efficiency and profitability. Therefore, the weight of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment (see Figure 6).<b>The key question of whether a style reversal will occur in the future is whether the US industrial structure will change, leading to a continued rise in value stock earnings, inflation, and interest rates.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 5: Apart from the divergence during the Internet era (2000), the earnings differential between value and growth dominates the relative returns of the value and growth indices.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b50730f74cd9d5269e52a4816dbcc27a\" tg-width=\"532\" tg-height=\"366\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 6: The weighting of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8b2645041d5028dd3dc4a6684ec26ed\" tg-width=\"480\" tg-height=\"291\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: BEA, BLS, Standard & Poor's, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>Second, if tax increases (and a series of institutional reforms representing a leftward shift in American society) occur, the 40-year downward trend in interest rates may end, and there is a possibility of a trend reversal in the style.</b></p><p>Looking back at the history of interest rates after World War II, the factors that led to the 40-year decline in interest rates remained unchanged.<b>The trend of nominal interest rates mainly depends on real economic growth and inflation.</b>After World War II, the 10-year US Treasury yield was highly consistent with the trends of US GDP growth and core CPI, with its peak occurring in the 1970s.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 7: 10-year Treasury Bond yield vs. US real GDP growth vs. core CPI</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/51766a075b0ad18b0da629cc8019a2c4\" tg-width=\"475\" tg-height=\"326\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>The first phase of the interest rate rise cycle (1946-1970)</b>It is based on genuine prosperity generated by positive feedback from both the supply and demand sides. During World War II, the U.S. government adapted to the times and promoted supply-side reforms, upgraded the supply level of American manufacturing and related industries, accelerated the training of a large number of technical personnel at the rate of a wartime economy, and recreated the barbaric advance of the late 19th century in the application of new technologies. Roosevelt's New Deal pushed for labor relations legislation, narrowed the gap between rich and poor, and allowed American workers to obtain an 8-hour workday and other benefits. However, the increase in relative labor costs, the increase in residents' education level, and the increase in women's labor participation rate pushed labor productivity to a new level. On the demand side, war has severely damaged global industries, leaving everything in ruins in need of reconstruction, and the industrial base urgently needs to be rebuilt. During this period, the economy grew rapidly, inflation was low, the unemployment rate continued to decline, and the gap between the rich and the poor narrowed.<b>Rising interest rates correspond to an acceleration in real economic growth.</b></p><p><b>The second phase of rising interest rates (1970-1981)</b>It is based on the supply shocks brought about by the oil crisis. During the two oil crises, crude oil prices rose from less than $3 a barrel in 1973 to $45 a barrel in 1980. Post-war economic recovery relied heavily on energy support from the petrochemical industry. As crude oil prices rose, the dollar depreciated after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, leading to imported inflation. The 10-year Treasury Bond yield rose to its highest level since the founding of the United States. During this period, the economy experienced frequent recessions, price levels remained high, and unemployment rose.<b>The rise in interest rates mainly corresponds to high inflation caused by supply contraction.</b></p><p><b>After 1981, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth.</b></p><p>On the supply side, global innovation and economic progress since the 1970s have been focused on a narrow area of human activity, primarily related to entertainment, communication, and information collection and processing. This improvement in social well-being has not been included in GDP. \"For other matters of concern to humanity, including food, clothing, housing, transportation, health, and the work environment inside and outside the home, the pace of progress has slowed down after 1970, both quantitatively and qualitatively.\" (Robert Gordon, *The Rise and Fall of American Economic Growth*)</p><p>On the demand side, the deterioration of the income distribution mechanism has led to a long-term shortage of effective demand. The wage control policy, which was relaxed in 1973, was a major reason for the widening wealth gap that followed. Population aging generally occurred in Western countries in the early 1980s. Combined with their high welfare systems, both labor supply and savings declined, and capital investment was insufficient. In addition, in response to global competition, companies in developed countries are relocating their industries to emerging markets to reduce costs, residents' wage growth has stagnated.</p><p><b>Currently, the factors that led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth have not been improved.</b>Population aging and declining fertility rates continue to intensify in developed countries; Global innovation mainly focuses on business models, and hardware investment has not yet led to a qualitative change in improving social production efficiency. Technological advances and globalization have improved efficiency, but they have undermined equity, and governments must make greater efforts to pay attention to vulnerable groups.</p><p>Human society does not evolve linearly, but rather develops in leaps and bounds like a quantum leap. It has been in a level of slow and stable development for a long time, and then suddenly encounters some major changes. Order, systems, and technology begin to undergo profound changes, and the process of history begins to accelerate until it enters the next new level of long-term slow and stable development. The COVID-19 pandemic may be such a major change. When humanity encounters difficulties, cooperation and reform are more likely to emerge, leading to the leapfrog development mentioned above.</p><p><b>Following the COVID-19 pandemic, some factors that could alter the insufficient endogenous driving force for long-term economic growth have begun to emerge.</b>The Democratic Party is willing to reform the wealth distribution system, including raising income tax rates for the wealthy and large corporations, increasing the minimum wage, boosting employment through traditional infrastructure, and increasing transfer payments to low- and middle-income earners. However, the polarization of political opinions between the two parties and society in the United States has made this reform extremely difficult (the Republican Party's opposition to raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour is a microcosm of political polarization). The bipartisan consensus could be antitrust enforcement against large tech companies. Congress is considering forcing tech giants to separate their dominant online platforms from other business units, and the House Judiciary Committee's antitrust subcommittee, led by Democrats, is preparing to propose comprehensive reforms that could, in the long run, encourage innovation (as IBM was spun off in the 1970s), increase social labor productivity, and improve wealth distribution mechanisms.</p><p><b>Once the U.S. government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, the conditions for long-term interest rates to turn upward may arise.</b>The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades.<b>This will also drive a trend upward in the central level of long-term interest rates.</b></p><p><b>In addition, there are potential factors on the supply side that could drive a long-term rebound in interest rates.</b>Under the global trend of \"carbon neutrality,\" the capital market is also driving the \"greening\" of the energy industry, which may lead to insufficient investment in traditional energy. For example, Shell, which is undergoing a more aggressive transformation, plans to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. As a result, its capital expenditure ratio in the upstream sector has been reduced from around 35% to 25-30% after 2025, while its capital expenditure ratio in renewable energy has increased. Correspondingly, the IRR of new capital expenditures also treats the return requirements for upstream sectors and renewable energy differently. The return on capital expenditures in the upstream sector should reach 20-25%, while the return on investment in renewable energy is only required to be no less than 10%. It's not just energy; commodity prices have been low over the past decade, raw material producers have cut capital expenditures to varying degrees, and the COVID-19 pandemic has also accelerated some capacity shedding.</p><p><b>Third, without considering the trend reversal of interest rates, how long can this round of style shift in growth value last?</b></p><p><b>If the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles.</b></p><p>We selected five indicators to examine how value stocks have outperformed growth stocks since 2000: inflation expectations, real interest rates, PMI, CPI, and year-on-year inventory growth. 2000.7-2001.3 and 2008.6-2008.12 were both periods of economic downturn, with PMI, inventory year-on-year, and CPI all declining. Value stocks reaped excess returns under defensive strategies. The remaining four stages all showed economic recovery, with most economic indicators rebounding. Inflation expectations and the CPI rebound are fluctuating at high levels; Except for November 2001 and July 2002, real interest rates began to rise from their bottom, and the PMI fluctuated upwards; Except for 2012.5-2013.7, the inventory cycle is in the restocking phase. Excluding this bull market (September 2020-February 2021) and the long bull period for value stocks (December 2003-June 2006), the average excess return of value stocks was 15.54%.<b>Average duration: 10 months</b>。 The most similar period to this is from March to December 2016. This period was the previous short-cycle recovery period, and the excess return of value stocks was 8.22%, which lasted for 10 months.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 1: Periods of excess returns of value stocks relative to growth stocks over the years</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c79f98fa6d41cc0bb8b40968953959c8\" tg-width=\"492\" tg-height=\"179\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 8: Inflation expectations (%), CPI year-on-year growth (%), and inventory year-on-year growth (%) from 1990 to present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9497187cf6a6026f1ba5e5df2d759692\" tg-width=\"494\" tg-height=\"345\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 9: Real interest rates and PMI 1990-present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b903d79a6e050f784a34a9525ddba907\" tg-width=\"485\" tg-height=\"315\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Looking at the timing of the previous four style reversals (i.e., the RUSSEL 1000 value/growth Index turned from a downward trend to an upward trend),<b>Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points.</b>。 However, after 2008, value stocks could only reap the benefits of rising interest rates or inflation, that is, the early stages when interest rates or inflation rose from the bottom, and could not reap the benefits of peaking. This may be because the market believes that the excess profits of value stocks will not last as long as they did from 2003 to 2006.<b>The market's style inflection point also precedes the relative profitability inflection point.</b></p><p>According to FactSet data, profits in the industrial, materials, and financial sectors are expected to grow by 89%, 40%, and 23% year-on-year in 2021, respectively, while profits in the technology sector are expected to grow by only 18%, indicating that the current value style is dominant.<b>This round of value style has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average.</b></p><p>From a macroeconomic perspective,<b>The CPI may fall after peaking in May, and inflation expectations are already at a historical high (99.5% percentile).</b>。 The slower-than-expected recovery of U.S. shale oil production capacity has given OPEC room to continue cutting production and maintaining high oil prices. Oil prices may fluctuate wildly at high levels in the first half of the year, but inflation expectations may fall along with oil prices in the second half of the year. Based on previous historical experience, inflation expectations are about six months ahead of real interest rates. Therefore, even after inflation expectations decline in the second half of the year, real interest rates still have room to rise. After stripping away the long-term trend, the current real interest rate (around -0.66%) is still at a historically low level (17.4th percentile). The rebound in real interest rates is expected to peak at around 0.2%-0.3%, corresponding to the 70%-80% historical percentile, which is roughly equivalent to the average level in 2019.</p><p><b>Based on our assessment of inflation and real interest rates, the phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end in May of this year. Therefore, the short-term style advantage of value stocks may continue for another quarter, and whether the trend can be reversed in the long run will be determined by a series of institutional reforms that reverse income distribution and the wealth gap.</b></p><p>Looking at specific industries, rising commodity prices, manufacturing inventory replenishment, and rising interest rates were driven by...<b>Finance, energy, industry, and raw materials sectors led the gains during the recovery period.</b>Healthcare, information technology, public utilities, and telecommunications services do not have obvious inventory cycles, while the performance of core consumer goods is relatively stable and relatively less elastic. Non-core consumer goods are overly influenced by amazon.<b>Currently, energy stocks have risen above the historical average, and the gains in financial stocks have also been fully realized.</b>。</p><p>In the short term, we believe<b>Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 2: Performance of various industries during the recovery phase</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6228f37247756967ffbc3aa57083aa9d\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"249\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table></p>","source":"xthgbj","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>How long will the value style of US stocks last?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHow long will the value style of US stocks last?\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">雪涛宏观笔记</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-29 23:09</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The core source of long-term relative returns between value and growth stocks in the US stock market is earnings, not valuation. Unlike the dot-com bubble era, value stocks do not currently have a significant valuation bubble compared to growth stocks (which may all be expensive). In the short term, this round of value stocks has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stages of the style advantage period (comparable to an average of 10 months). Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower the expectation of absolute returns for value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for a style reversal.<b>Introduction:</b></p><p>In August of last year, US value stocks underperformed growth stocks by more than the level during the dot-com bubble for the first time. At that time, the market began to see a shift towards cyclical value stocks, and at the same time, long-term US Treasury yields began to rebound sharply, driving the value/growth ratio back up from historical lows. Since February of this year, the Nasdaq index, which represents the growth style, has been on a pullback/retracement for several consecutive years, while the Dow Jones index, which represents the value style, has repeatedly hit new highs. Now that the style shift has become a reality, discussions about whether the value style of US stocks has reached a long-term inflection point have intensified.</p><p><b>Is the style shift a long-term reversal or a short-term convergence? How much room is left for interpretation?</b>—Let's explore the answer to this question using the Russel 1000 Value and Growth Index as an example.</p><p><b>Key conclusions:</b></p><p><b>First, the core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p><b>Second, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields after 1981 was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth. Currently, the technical and institutional factors that have led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth and a long-term deflationary environment have not been improved.</b></p><p><b>Third, if the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles. Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points, and the market's style inflection point also precedes the relative earnings inflection point.</b></p><p><b>Fourth, in the short term, this round of value style has lasted for 6 months and is in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average. The phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end this May. Therefore, value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks.</b></p><p><b>Fifth, once the US government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, conditions may arise for long-term interest rates to turn upward. The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades, and drive the central trend of long-term interest rates to rise.</b></p><p><b>Sixth, it remains to be seen whether the style divergence between long-term value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 1: Relative returns of the 10-year Treasury Bond yield versus the Russel 1000 Value and Style Index</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/600e3efd47bf1b5bf01a8081ca124909\" tg-width=\"910\" tg-height=\"594\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>I. What determines the relative return of a value/growth style?</b></p><p>The core argument supporting a long-term style reversal is the reversal of the downward trend in long-term US Treasury yields. We analyze the impact of long-term yields on earnings per share and valuations of value and growth stocks.</p><p><b>(1) The direction of long-term US Treasury yields and the difference between value growth EPS are in the same direction.</b></p><p>For value companies and growth companies, financial statement metrics related to operating leverage, such as asset, plant, and equipment turnover and net debt, differ significantly. In a broadly inflationary environment, value companies with relatively high levels of fixed assets will see a more significant improvement in turnover than growth companies. Value companies also have higher net debt levels than growth companies. With inflation resuming, value-based companies will have a relatively smaller burden of repaying principal and interest compared to growth companies. Therefore,<b>The decline in interest rates may indicate a decline in the relative EPS returns of value companies.</b></p><p>Looking at nearly 30 years of history,<b>The difference in EPS between value stocks and growth stocks is relatively consistent with short-term fluctuations in interest rates.</b>。 However, the highs of each cycle have shifted downwards in succession, which is in line with the long-term downward trend of interest rates. Before 2008, short-term monetary policy rates were consistent with the fluctuation pattern of profit spreads, but they gradually diverged after the financial crisis, reflecting a slower response of monetary policy rates to the economic profit cycle. The yield and earnings spread of long-term 10-year US Treasury bonds diverged significantly between 2003 and 2006. The difference between the EPS of value stocks and growth stocks reached a new high in 2007, but the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds was lower than the peak of the previous cycle.</p><p><b>The core of the divergence is also the mystery of Greenspan's long-term interest rate.</b>Short-term interest rates rose, while long-term risk-free interest rates fell. Greenspan's explanation of this includes:</p><p>1. The US economic recovery, coupled with deepening globalization, has led to trading partners accumulating increasingly large dollar surpluses. Globally, the only place capable of absorbing this portion of foreign exchange reserves accumulated from surpluses is the Treasury Bond market in the United States.</p><p>2. With the inevitable increase in the retirement population (especially in developed countries), the underfunding of retirement plans is a growing concern. Both pension funds and insurance companies have had to increase their share of long-term bonds in their portfolios.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 2: Before 2008, the monetary policy cycle and the value-to-growth profit spread were close to each other.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61937bebe0692c423e53ccc1341518ff\" tg-width=\"568\" tg-height=\"296\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 3: The fluctuations in the 10-year US Treasury yields and the profit spread of value growth are relatively consistent.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0213083f3bfc77aed3440308bd2fe7d3\" tg-width=\"824\" tg-height=\"431\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>(2) Declining long-term yields will not make growth stocks more expensive than value stocks.</b></p><p><b>There is a widespread view that a decline in risk-free interest rates will bring more valuation premiums to growth stocks, but this perception is wrong!</b>Although the volatility of Treasury Bond yields does indeed outperform the risk premium difference between value stocks and growth stocks from a short-term perspective, in the longer term, the risk premium of value stocks compared to growth stocks has not widened due to the decline in risk-free interest rates.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 4: Risk premium difference between 10-year Treasury Bond interest rate and value and growth stocks</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31507616ec0aec31a906ffcb6a74a3a9\" tg-width=\"478\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Therefore, we conclude<b>The core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p>The decline in risk-free interest rates and the decline in relative earnings (value stocks - growth stocks) both reflect changes in the industrial structure of the US economy. The use of capital and technology reduces labor costs and improves corporate efficiency and profitability. Therefore, the weight of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment (see Figure 6).<b>The key question of whether a style reversal will occur in the future is whether the US industrial structure will change, leading to a continued rise in value stock earnings, inflation, and interest rates.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 5: Apart from the divergence during the Internet era (2000), the earnings differential between value and growth dominates the relative returns of the value and growth indices.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b50730f74cd9d5269e52a4816dbcc27a\" tg-width=\"532\" tg-height=\"366\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 6: The weighting of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8b2645041d5028dd3dc4a6684ec26ed\" tg-width=\"480\" tg-height=\"291\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: BEA, BLS, Standard & Poor's, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>Second, if tax increases (and a series of institutional reforms representing a leftward shift in American society) occur, the 40-year downward trend in interest rates may end, and there is a possibility of a trend reversal in the style.</b></p><p>Looking back at the history of interest rates after World War II, the factors that led to the 40-year decline in interest rates remained unchanged.<b>The trend of nominal interest rates mainly depends on real economic growth and inflation.</b>After World War II, the 10-year US Treasury yield was highly consistent with the trends of US GDP growth and core CPI, with its peak occurring in the 1970s.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 7: 10-year Treasury Bond yield vs. US real GDP growth vs. core CPI</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/51766a075b0ad18b0da629cc8019a2c4\" tg-width=\"475\" tg-height=\"326\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>The first phase of the interest rate rise cycle (1946-1970)</b>It is based on genuine prosperity generated by positive feedback from both the supply and demand sides. During World War II, the U.S. government adapted to the times and promoted supply-side reforms, upgraded the supply level of American manufacturing and related industries, accelerated the training of a large number of technical personnel at the rate of a wartime economy, and recreated the barbaric advance of the late 19th century in the application of new technologies. Roosevelt's New Deal pushed for labor relations legislation, narrowed the gap between rich and poor, and allowed American workers to obtain an 8-hour workday and other benefits. However, the increase in relative labor costs, the increase in residents' education level, and the increase in women's labor participation rate pushed labor productivity to a new level. On the demand side, war has severely damaged global industries, leaving everything in ruins in need of reconstruction, and the industrial base urgently needs to be rebuilt. During this period, the economy grew rapidly, inflation was low, the unemployment rate continued to decline, and the gap between the rich and the poor narrowed.<b>Rising interest rates correspond to an acceleration in real economic growth.</b></p><p><b>The second phase of rising interest rates (1970-1981)</b>It is based on the supply shocks brought about by the oil crisis. During the two oil crises, crude oil prices rose from less than $3 a barrel in 1973 to $45 a barrel in 1980. Post-war economic recovery relied heavily on energy support from the petrochemical industry. As crude oil prices rose, the dollar depreciated after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, leading to imported inflation. The 10-year Treasury Bond yield rose to its highest level since the founding of the United States. During this period, the economy experienced frequent recessions, price levels remained high, and unemployment rose.<b>The rise in interest rates mainly corresponds to high inflation caused by supply contraction.</b></p><p><b>After 1981, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth.</b></p><p>On the supply side, global innovation and economic progress since the 1970s have been focused on a narrow area of human activity, primarily related to entertainment, communication, and information collection and processing. This improvement in social well-being has not been included in GDP. \"For other matters of concern to humanity, including food, clothing, housing, transportation, health, and the work environment inside and outside the home, the pace of progress has slowed down after 1970, both quantitatively and qualitatively.\" (Robert Gordon, *The Rise and Fall of American Economic Growth*)</p><p>On the demand side, the deterioration of the income distribution mechanism has led to a long-term shortage of effective demand. The wage control policy, which was relaxed in 1973, was a major reason for the widening wealth gap that followed. Population aging generally occurred in Western countries in the early 1980s. Combined with their high welfare systems, both labor supply and savings declined, and capital investment was insufficient. In addition, in response to global competition, companies in developed countries are relocating their industries to emerging markets to reduce costs, residents' wage growth has stagnated.</p><p><b>Currently, the factors that led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth have not been improved.</b>Population aging and declining fertility rates continue to intensify in developed countries; Global innovation mainly focuses on business models, and hardware investment has not yet led to a qualitative change in improving social production efficiency. Technological advances and globalization have improved efficiency, but they have undermined equity, and governments must make greater efforts to pay attention to vulnerable groups.</p><p>Human society does not evolve linearly, but rather develops in leaps and bounds like a quantum leap. It has been in a level of slow and stable development for a long time, and then suddenly encounters some major changes. Order, systems, and technology begin to undergo profound changes, and the process of history begins to accelerate until it enters the next new level of long-term slow and stable development. The COVID-19 pandemic may be such a major change. When humanity encounters difficulties, cooperation and reform are more likely to emerge, leading to the leapfrog development mentioned above.</p><p><b>Following the COVID-19 pandemic, some factors that could alter the insufficient endogenous driving force for long-term economic growth have begun to emerge.</b>The Democratic Party is willing to reform the wealth distribution system, including raising income tax rates for the wealthy and large corporations, increasing the minimum wage, boosting employment through traditional infrastructure, and increasing transfer payments to low- and middle-income earners. However, the polarization of political opinions between the two parties and society in the United States has made this reform extremely difficult (the Republican Party's opposition to raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour is a microcosm of political polarization). The bipartisan consensus could be antitrust enforcement against large tech companies. Congress is considering forcing tech giants to separate their dominant online platforms from other business units, and the House Judiciary Committee's antitrust subcommittee, led by Democrats, is preparing to propose comprehensive reforms that could, in the long run, encourage innovation (as IBM was spun off in the 1970s), increase social labor productivity, and improve wealth distribution mechanisms.</p><p><b>Once the U.S. government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, the conditions for long-term interest rates to turn upward may arise.</b>The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades.<b>This will also drive a trend upward in the central level of long-term interest rates.</b></p><p><b>In addition, there are potential factors on the supply side that could drive a long-term rebound in interest rates.</b>Under the global trend of \"carbon neutrality,\" the capital market is also driving the \"greening\" of the energy industry, which may lead to insufficient investment in traditional energy. For example, Shell, which is undergoing a more aggressive transformation, plans to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. As a result, its capital expenditure ratio in the upstream sector has been reduced from around 35% to 25-30% after 2025, while its capital expenditure ratio in renewable energy has increased. Correspondingly, the IRR of new capital expenditures also treats the return requirements for upstream sectors and renewable energy differently. The return on capital expenditures in the upstream sector should reach 20-25%, while the return on investment in renewable energy is only required to be no less than 10%. It's not just energy; commodity prices have been low over the past decade, raw material producers have cut capital expenditures to varying degrees, and the COVID-19 pandemic has also accelerated some capacity shedding.</p><p><b>Third, without considering the trend reversal of interest rates, how long can this round of style shift in growth value last?</b></p><p><b>If the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles.</b></p><p>We selected five indicators to examine how value stocks have outperformed growth stocks since 2000: inflation expectations, real interest rates, PMI, CPI, and year-on-year inventory growth. 2000.7-2001.3 and 2008.6-2008.12 were both periods of economic downturn, with PMI, inventory year-on-year, and CPI all declining. Value stocks reaped excess returns under defensive strategies. The remaining four stages all showed economic recovery, with most economic indicators rebounding. Inflation expectations and the CPI rebound are fluctuating at high levels; Except for November 2001 and July 2002, real interest rates began to rise from their bottom, and the PMI fluctuated upwards; Except for 2012.5-2013.7, the inventory cycle is in the restocking phase. Excluding this bull market (September 2020-February 2021) and the long bull period for value stocks (December 2003-June 2006), the average excess return of value stocks was 15.54%.<b>Average duration: 10 months</b>。 The most similar period to this is from March to December 2016. This period was the previous short-cycle recovery period, and the excess return of value stocks was 8.22%, which lasted for 10 months.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 1: Periods of excess returns of value stocks relative to growth stocks over the years</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c79f98fa6d41cc0bb8b40968953959c8\" tg-width=\"492\" tg-height=\"179\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 8: Inflation expectations (%), CPI year-on-year growth (%), and inventory year-on-year growth (%) from 1990 to present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9497187cf6a6026f1ba5e5df2d759692\" tg-width=\"494\" tg-height=\"345\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 9: Real interest rates and PMI 1990-present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b903d79a6e050f784a34a9525ddba907\" tg-width=\"485\" tg-height=\"315\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Looking at the timing of the previous four style reversals (i.e., the RUSSEL 1000 value/growth Index turned from a downward trend to an upward trend),<b>Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points.</b>。 However, after 2008, value stocks could only reap the benefits of rising interest rates or inflation, that is, the early stages when interest rates or inflation rose from the bottom, and could not reap the benefits of peaking. This may be because the market believes that the excess profits of value stocks will not last as long as they did from 2003 to 2006.<b>The market's style inflection point also precedes the relative profitability inflection point.</b></p><p>According to FactSet data, profits in the industrial, materials, and financial sectors are expected to grow by 89%, 40%, and 23% year-on-year in 2021, respectively, while profits in the technology sector are expected to grow by only 18%, indicating that the current value style is dominant.<b>This round of value style has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average.</b></p><p>From a macroeconomic perspective,<b>The CPI may fall after peaking in May, and inflation expectations are already at a historical high (99.5% percentile).</b>。 The slower-than-expected recovery of U.S. shale oil production capacity has given OPEC room to continue cutting production and maintaining high oil prices. Oil prices may fluctuate wildly at high levels in the first half of the year, but inflation expectations may fall along with oil prices in the second half of the year. Based on previous historical experience, inflation expectations are about six months ahead of real interest rates. Therefore, even after inflation expectations decline in the second half of the year, real interest rates still have room to rise. After stripping away the long-term trend, the current real interest rate (around -0.66%) is still at a historically low level (17.4th percentile). The rebound in real interest rates is expected to peak at around 0.2%-0.3%, corresponding to the 70%-80% historical percentile, which is roughly equivalent to the average level in 2019.</p><p><b>Based on our assessment of inflation and real interest rates, the phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end in May of this year. Therefore, the short-term style advantage of value stocks may continue for another quarter, and whether the trend can be reversed in the long run will be determined by a series of institutional reforms that reverse income distribution and the wealth gap.</b></p><p>Looking at specific industries, rising commodity prices, manufacturing inventory replenishment, and rising interest rates were driven by...<b>Finance, energy, industry, and raw materials sectors led the gains during the recovery period.</b>Healthcare, information technology, public utilities, and telecommunications services do not have obvious inventory cycles, while the performance of core consumer goods is relatively stable and relatively less elastic. Non-core consumer goods are overly influenced by amazon.<b>Currently, energy stocks have risen above the historical average, and the gains in financial stocks have also been fully realized.</b>。</p><p>In the short term, we believe<b>Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 2: Performance of various industries during the recovery phase</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6228f37247756967ffbc3aa57083aa9d\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"249\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzI0MzMzNzczNQ==&mid=2247495039&idx=1&sn=c64cff2fab379436f872324dadae5a4b&chksm=e96c3217de1bbb01c4cdf1ef8dcdeda0fd65adfedf8aff752e2d35d9bb926099814cf31cf9bb&mpshare=1&scene=23&srcid=03271858VKgyWAwMRniMvBl0&sharer_sharetime=1616837119379&sharer_shareid=fbf3e6a28882bb91c07a361d6d431142#rd\">雪涛宏观笔记</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1fc1f5e2fa377c378fa230c10e0849a2","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzI0MzMzNzczNQ==&mid=2247495039&idx=1&sn=c64cff2fab379436f872324dadae5a4b&chksm=e96c3217de1bbb01c4cdf1ef8dcdeda0fd65adfedf8aff752e2d35d9bb926099814cf31cf9bb&mpshare=1&scene=23&srcid=03271858VKgyWAwMRniMvBl0&sharer_sharetime=1616837119379&sharer_shareid=fbf3e6a28882bb91c07a361d6d431142#rd","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1192792909","content_text":"美股价值股与成长股长期相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值。与科网泡沫时期显著不同的是当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵）。短期来看，本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，可能处于风格优势期的中后期（可比平均10个月），价值股作为复苏交易在未来一个季度仍有望跑赢成长股，但建议放低对价值股绝对收益的预期。长期来看，价值/成长的风格分化能否趋势性逆转仍然未知，如果美国政府通过加税推动一系列缩小贫富差距的制度改革，要做好风格趋势性逆转的心理准备。引言：去年8月，美股价值股跑输成长股的幅度首次超过科网泡沫时期水平，当时市场开始出现转向周期价值股的观点，同一时间长端美债利率开始剧烈反弹，带动价值/成长比值从历史低位回升。今年2月以来，代表成长风格的纳斯达克指数连续回撤，代表价值风格的道琼斯指数屡创新高。当风格切换已成为事实后，关于美股价值风格是否迎来长期拐点的讨论愈演愈烈。风格切换是长期反转还是短期收敛，还有多少演绎空间？——我们以Russel 1000的价值和成长指数为例，探讨该问题的答案。核心结论：第一、价值股与成长股相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值！当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵！），这与科网泡沫时期是显著不同的。第二、1981年后，长期债券利率下行的内核是经济增长内生动能不足带来的低经济增速、低通胀现象。目前来看，导致经济增长内生动能不足、长期通缩环境的技术因素和制度因素仍未得到改善。第三、如果美国国债市场无法形成长期熊市，价值优于成长风格的讨论可能仅仅局限于短周期。名义利率、实际利率、CPI、通胀预期触顶回落大致是拐点同步或领先指标，市场的风格拐点也早于相对盈利拐点。第四、短周期看，本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，处于风格优势期的中后期（可比平均10个月），超额收益也完成了历史均值的一大半。利率和通胀快速上行的阶段可能在今年5月结束。因此价值股作为复苏交易在未来一个季度仍有望跑赢成长股，但建议放低对价值股绝对收益的预期。第五、一旦美国政府开始左转，改革里根政府以来以自由资本主义为基础的分配制度，长期利率转为趋势上行的条件可能出现。收入分配的均衡化可能扭转过去四十年贫富差距拉大带来的长期通缩局面，并推动长期利率中枢趋势性回升。第六、长期价值/成长的风格分化能否趋势性逆转仍然未知，如果美国政府通过加税推动一系列缩小贫富差距的制度改革，要做好可能发生风格趋势性逆转的心理准备。图1：10年期国债收益率与Russel 1000 价值与风格指数相对收益资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所一、价值/成长风格的相对收益由什么决定？支持风格长期反转的核心观点是美债长端收益率下行趋势的扭转。我们从长端收益率对价值股和成长股每股盈利和估值影响的角度予以分析。（1）长端美债收益率方向与价值成长EPS之差同向对于价值型公司和成长型公司来说，与经营杠杆相关的财务报表指标，如资产、工厂和设备的周转率和净债务，有显著的不同。在一个广泛的通货再膨胀环境中，拥有相对较高固定资产水平的价值型公司将比成长型公司在周转率方面有更明显的改善。价值型公司的净债务水平也高于成长型公司。在通货再膨胀的情况下，相对成长型企业，价值型企业还本付息的负担会相对较小。因此，利率的下行可能暗示了价值型公司EPS相对收益的下滑。从近30年的历史来看，价值股与成长股EPS之差与利率短周期波动较为吻合。但每轮周期的高点依次下移，符合利率长期下行的方向。其中短端货币政策利率在2008年前与盈利差波动规律一致，但在金融危机后逐渐背离，反映货币政策利率对经济盈利周期响应变慢。长端十年期美债利率与盈利差在2003-2006年有显著背离，价值股与成长股EPS之差在07年创下新高，但十年期美债利率却比上一轮周期高点更低。背离的核心也是格林斯潘长期利率之谜，短期利率上升，长期无风险利率却下降。格林斯潘对此的解释包括：1. 美国经济复苏叠加全球化程度加深，导致贸易伙伴累积了越来越庞大的美元顺差。而在全球范围内，唯一有能力承接这部分由顺差累积而来的外汇储备的地方，就是美国国债市场。2. 随着退休人口不可避免的增加（尤其是在发达国家），退休计划的资金供给不足日益引起关注。养老基金和保险公司都不得不在自己的投资组合中加大对长期债券的份额。图2：2008年之前，货币政策周期与价值与成长盈利差走势接近资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图3：10Y美债利率与价值成长盈利差的波动较为吻合资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所（2）长端收益率下行并不会导致成长股比价值股更贵一种广泛的观点认为无风险利率的下行会给成长股带来更多的估值溢价，但这个认知是错误的！尽管从短周期的角度看国债收益率的波动的确领先价值股与成长股的风险溢价差，但拉长周期看，价值股相比成长股的风险溢价并没有因为无风险利率的下行而扩大。图4：10年期国债利率与价值同成长股风险溢价差资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所因此，我们总结，价值股与成长股相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值！当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵！），这与科网泡沫时期是显著不同的。无风险利率下行与风格相对盈利（价值股-成长股）的下行均反映了美国经济产业结构的变化。资本和技术的运用减少了人力成本，提高了企业效率和盈利，因此以科技为代表的成长股在股市中的权重与对经济和就业的贡献并不匹配（见图6）。未来是否出现风格逆转的关键问题是美国产业结构是否会发生变化，导致价值股盈利、通胀和利率持续上行。图5：除了科网时期（2000）的背离，价值与成长的盈利差主导了价值与成长指数的相对收益资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图6：以科技为代表的成长股在股市中的权重与对经济和就业的贡献并不匹配资料来源：BEA, BLS, Standard & Poor's，天风证券研究所二、如果出现加税（以及一系列代表美国社会左转的制度改革），四十年利率下行的趋势可能终结，风格有趋势性逆转的可能回顾二战后的利率史，导致利率长达40年下行的因素并未改变。名义利率的走势主要取决于实际经济增长和通胀。二战后，10年期美债收益率与美国GDP增速和核心CPI的走势有较高的一致性，峰值出现在1970年代。图7：10年期国债收益率与美国实际GDP增速与核心CPI资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所利率上升周期的第一阶段（1946年-1970年）建立在供给侧与需求侧正反馈产生的真实繁荣基础上。二战期间，美国政府顺应时势推动了供给侧改革，升级了美国制造业及配套产业的供给水平，以战时经济的速率加速培养了大批量的技术人才，在新技术的应用方面再现了19世纪后期的野蛮式突进。罗斯福新政力推劳资关系立法，贫富分化收窄，让美国工人获得了8小时工作制及其他福利，但相对劳动成本的提升，居民受教育程度、女性劳动参与率的提高将劳动生产率推升至新的高度。需求端，战争重创全球产业，百废待兴，工业基础亟待重建。本阶段经济高速增长，通胀较低，失业率持续下降，贫富分化收窄。利率上升对应的是实际经济增长的加速。利率上升的第二阶段（1970年-1981年）建立在石油危机带来的供给冲击上。两次石油危机期间，原油价格从1973年的每桶不到3美元涨到了1980年的45美元，战后经济复苏高度依赖石油化工产业提供的能源支持，原油价格上涨，布雷顿森林体系破裂后美元贬值，带来输入性通胀，十年期国债收益率升至美国建国以来的最高水平。本阶段，经济频繁衰退，物价水平持续位于高位，失业率上升，利率上升主要对应的是供给收缩带来的高通货膨胀。1981年后，长期债券利率下行的内核是经济增长内生动能不足带来的低经济增速、低通胀现象。供给端，70年代以来的全球创新和经济进步聚焦在人类活动的一个狭窄领域，更多是同娱乐、通信、信息收集和处理有关，而这部分social well-being的提高并没有计入GDP，“对于人类所关心的其他事务，包括食品、服装、住房、交通、健康、家庭内外的工作环境等，无论是从定量还是定性的角度看，在1970年之后进步速度都已经放缓。”（《美国经济增长的起落》罗伯特戈登）需求端，收入分配机制恶化导致了长期的有效需求不足。1973年松绑的工资控制政策是此后贫富分化加剧的一个重要原因。西方国家人口老龄化普遍出现在1980年初期，结合其高福利制度，劳动力供给和储蓄双双下降，资本投资不足；此外，为应对全球竞争发达国家企业将产业迁往新兴市场以降低成本，居民工资增长停滞。目前来看，以上导致经济增长内生动能不足的因素仍未得到改善。发达国家人口老龄化、生育率下降仍在加剧；全球创新主要聚焦于商业模式，硬件投入尚未形成提高社会生产效率的质变；技术进步和全球化提高了效率，但有损公平，政府必须要付出更多努力关注弱势群体。人类社会并不是线性演进的，而是像量子跃迁一样跳跃式发展，长期处在一个缓慢稳定发展的能级，突然遇到一些重大变化，秩序、制度、技术开始发生深刻变化，历史的进程开始加速，直到进入下一个长期缓慢稳定发展的新能级。新冠疫情可能就是这样一个重大变化，当人类遇到困境时，合作和改革才更有可能出现，进入到上面所说的跃迁式发展。新冠疫情之后，一些改变长期经济增长内生动力不足的因素开始若隐若现。民主党有意愿改革财富分配制度，包括提高富人和大企业的所得税率，提高最低工资，传统基建拉动就业，增加对中低收入者的转移支付等。但美国两党、社会的政治观点极化让这项改革变得困难重重（共和党反对将最低工资提升至每小时15美元，即是政治极化的一个缩影）。两党的共识可能是对大型科技企业的反垄断执法，国会考虑迫使科技巨头将它们占据主导地位的在线平台与其他业务部门分开，由民主党人领导的众议院司法委员会反垄断小组委员会准备提出全面改革，这可能在长期会鼓励创新（如同1970年代IBM被分拆），提高社会劳动生产率，改善财富分配机制。一旦美国政府开始左转，改革里根政府以来以自由资本主义为基础的分配制度，长期利率转为趋势上行的条件可能出现。收入分配的均衡化可能扭转过去四十年贫富差距拉大带来的长期通缩局面，并推动长期利率中枢趋势性回升。除此之外，供给侧也存在推动利率长期回升的潜在因素。全球“碳中和”趋势下，资本市场亦在驱动能源行业“绿色化”，这可能导致传统能源投资不足。例如转型比较激进的壳牌公司（Shell）计划到2050年达到碳中和目标。为此，其在上游板块的资本开支比例从35％左右缩减到2025年之后25-30％，而可再生能源资本开支比例提升。相应的，新增资本开支的IRR对上游板块和可再生能源的回报率要求也差别对待，上游板块的资本开支回报率要达到20-25％，而对可再生能源投资回报率要求仅不低于10％。不仅是能源，过去10年大宗商品价格低迷，原材料生产商不同程度地削减了资本开支，新冠疫情也加速了部分产能出清。三、如果不考虑利率的趋势性逆转，这一轮成长价值的风格切换能持续多久？如果美国国债市场无法形成长期熊市，价值优于成长风格的讨论可能仅仅局限于短周期。我们选取了通胀预期、实际利率、PMI、CPI、库存同比5个指标考察2000年以来价值股跑赢成长股的宏观状态。2000.7-2001.3和2008.6-2008.12均是经济下行阶段，PMI、库存同比、CPI均下行，防御策略下价值股收获超额收益。剩余4个阶段均表现为经济复苏，各项经济指标大多处于回升状态。通胀预期和CPI回升在高位震荡；除2001.11-2002.7外，实际利率底部开始攀升，PMI震荡上行；除2012.5-2013.7外，库存周期处于补库阶段。除去本次（2020.9-2021.2）和价值股长牛期（2003.12-2006.06），价值股的超额收益平均为15.54%，平均持续时长为10个月。与本次最为类似的是2016.3-2016.12，此阶段为上一轮小周期复苏期，价值股的超额收益为8.22%，持续了10个月。表1：历次价值股相对成长股超额收益时期资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图8：1990-至今通胀预期(%)、CPI同比增速(%)、库存同比增速(%)资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图9：1990-至今实际利率和PMI资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所从之前四次风格反转（即RUSSEL 1000 value/growth指数由下行转为上行）时点来看，名义利率、实际利率、CPI、通胀预期触顶回落大致是拐点同步或领先指标。但08年后，价值股只能吃到利率或通胀上行的“鱼身”，也即利率或通胀从底部上行的早期阶段，吃不到冲顶阶段的“鱼尾”，这可能是因为市场认为价值股超额盈利持续时间难以像2003-2006年那么长，市场的风格拐点也早于相对盈利拐点。FactSet的数据显示，预计2021年工业、材料和金融行业的利润将分别同比增长89％、40％和23％，而科技行业的利润仅增长18％，显示当前价值风格占优。本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，可能处于风格优势期的中后期（可比平均10个月），超额收益也完成了历史均值的一大半。宏观指标来看，CPI可能在5月冲顶后回落，通胀预期也已经处在历史高位（99.5%分位）。美国页岩油产能恢复不及预期给了OPEC继续减产维持高油价的空间，上半年油价可能在高位剧烈震荡，但下半年通胀预期可能随油价回落。从之前几轮历史经验来看，通胀预期领先实际利率半年左右，因此下半年通胀预期回落后，实际利率仍有上行空间。剥离长期趋势后，当前实际利率（-0.66%左右）仍然处在历史较低水平（17.4%分位）。预计实际利率的反弹高点大约在0.2%-0.3%左右，对应70%-80%历史分位，约等于2019年的平均水平。根据我们对通胀和实际利率的判断，利率和通胀快速上行的阶段可能在今年5月结束。因此，价值股的短期风格优势可能仍能持续一个季度，长期是否能趋势性逆转将由一系列逆转收入分配和贫富差距的制度改革所决定。具体行业来看，大宗商品涨价、制造业补库和利率上行推动金融、能源、工业和原材料等行业在复苏期涨幅领先。医疗保健，信息技术、公共事业、电信服务没有明显的库存周期，核心消费品业绩较为稳定，相对弹性较小。非核心消费品受amazon影响过大。目前能源股涨幅已超过历史均值水平，金融股的涨幅也已充分兑现。短期来看，我们认为价值股作为复苏交易在未来一个季度仍有望跑赢成长股，但建议放低对价值股绝对收益的预期；长期来看，价值/成长的风格分化能否趋势性逆转仍然未知，如果美国政府通过加税推动一系列缩小贫富差距的制度改革，要做好可能发生风格趋势性逆转的心理准备。表2：各行业在复苏阶段表现资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":6682,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353965204,"gmtCreate":1616456446908,"gmtModify":1704794250984,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/353965204","repostId":"2121510889","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2121510889","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616456389,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2121510889?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 07:39","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Tencent Music's Q4 and full-year financial reports were strong, and its stock price once hit a new high in after-hours trading.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2121510889","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"盘前，市场对腾讯音乐娱乐集团即将发布的财报普遍感到乐观，助推了腾讯音乐股价的强劲表现，其盘中股价一度上冲至31.12美元，创下上市以来的新高，并报收于30.89美元。在腾讯音乐公布财报后，其盘后股价一度涨超2.14%，并创下31.55美元的历史新高。其中环比净增长为430万，付费率达9%，高于第三季度的8%和2019年同期的6.2%。","content":"<p>March 23 - After the US stock market closed on Monday, March 22,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TME\">Tencent Music</a>(TME.US) released its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2020.</p><p>Following the release of its financial report, its stock price rose by more than 2.14% in after-hours trading, reaching a record high of $31.55.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/205ce59be0c5db585c7e736c69dd28fb\" tg-width=\"615\" tg-height=\"510\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The financial report shows that the company's revenue in the fourth quarter was RMB 8.34 billion (US$1.28 billion), a year-on-year increase of 14.3%, compared with market expectations of RMB 8.334 billion and RMB 7.293 billion in the same period last year. Among them, online music service revenue increased by 29.0% year-on-year, higher than the 25.9% in the third quarter of 2020. Revenue from music subscription services was RMB 1.58 billion (US$242 million), representing a year-on-year increase of 41.9%. Advertising services recorded a year-on-year growth of over 100% in the fourth quarter of 2020.</p><p>Net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the fourth quarter was RMB 1.2 billion (US$183 million), with earnings per ADS of RMB 0.71, compared to market expectations of RMB 0.68 and RMB 0.62 in the same period last year.</p><p>In the fourth quarter, the number of paying online music users reached 56 million, a year-on-year increase of 40.4%, and a net quarter-on-quarter increase of 4.3 million. The payment rate broke a historic 9%, higher than 8% in the third quarter and 6.2% in the same period of 2019.</p><p>It is worth noting that in the fourth quarter of 2020, the number of the company's long audio albums increased by 370% year-on-year, greatly enriching the long audio content pool; The penetration rate of long-form audio MAUs increased from 5.5% in the same period last year to 14.8%, and the average daily usage time of long-form audio users continued to grow.</p><p>Revenue for the full year of 2020 increased by 14.6% year-on-year to RMB 29.15 billion (US$4.47 billion), and net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the full year of 2020 increased by 4.3% year-on-year to RMB 4.16 billion (US$637 million).</p><p>Mr. Peng Jiaxin, CEO of Tencent Music, said: “By investing in multiple music formats, we have further strengthened our content leadership and increased user engagement, which is reflected in the continuous growth of total user time on our platform. Our initial investment in long audio has begun to pay off, and in the fourth quarter of 2020, the penetration rate of long audio in our user base reached 15%, up from 6% in the same period last year.”</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Tencent Music's Q4 and full-year financial reports were strong, and its stock price once hit a new high in after-hours trading.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTencent Music's Q4 and full-year financial reports were strong, and its stock price once hit a new high in after-hours trading.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-23 07:39</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>March 23 - After the US stock market closed on Monday, March 22,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TME\">Tencent Music</a>(TME.US) released its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2020.</p><p>Following the release of its financial report, its stock price rose by more than 2.14% in after-hours trading, reaching a record high of $31.55.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/205ce59be0c5db585c7e736c69dd28fb\" tg-width=\"615\" tg-height=\"510\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The financial report shows that the company's revenue in the fourth quarter was RMB 8.34 billion (US$1.28 billion), a year-on-year increase of 14.3%, compared with market expectations of RMB 8.334 billion and RMB 7.293 billion in the same period last year. Among them, online music service revenue increased by 29.0% year-on-year, higher than the 25.9% in the third quarter of 2020. Revenue from music subscription services was RMB 1.58 billion (US$242 million), representing a year-on-year increase of 41.9%. Advertising services recorded a year-on-year growth of over 100% in the fourth quarter of 2020.</p><p>Net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the fourth quarter was RMB 1.2 billion (US$183 million), with earnings per ADS of RMB 0.71, compared to market expectations of RMB 0.68 and RMB 0.62 in the same period last year.</p><p>In the fourth quarter, the number of paying online music users reached 56 million, a year-on-year increase of 40.4%, and a net quarter-on-quarter increase of 4.3 million. The payment rate broke a historic 9%, higher than 8% in the third quarter and 6.2% in the same period of 2019.</p><p>It is worth noting that in the fourth quarter of 2020, the number of the company's long audio albums increased by 370% year-on-year, greatly enriching the long audio content pool; The penetration rate of long-form audio MAUs increased from 5.5% in the same period last year to 14.8%, and the average daily usage time of long-form audio users continued to grow.</p><p>Revenue for the full year of 2020 increased by 14.6% year-on-year to RMB 29.15 billion (US$4.47 billion), and net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the full year of 2020 increased by 4.3% year-on-year to RMB 4.16 billion (US$637 million).</p><p>Mr. Peng Jiaxin, CEO of Tencent Music, said: “By investing in multiple music formats, we have further strengthened our content leadership and increased user engagement, which is reflected in the continuous growth of total user time on our platform. Our initial investment in long audio has begun to pay off, and in the fourth quarter of 2020, the penetration rate of long audio in our user base reached 15%, up from 6% in the same period last year.”</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/06c120bbb961941a6910f63352c38f2b","relate_stocks":{"TME":"腾讯音乐"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2121510889","content_text":"3月23日讯，3月22日(周一)美股收盘后，腾讯音乐(TME.US)公布了2020年四季度及全年财报。公布财报后，其盘后股价一度涨超2.14%，并创下31.55美元的历史新高。财报显示，公司四季度营收为人民币83.4亿元(12.8亿美元)，同比增长14.3%，市场预期83.34亿元，去年同期72.93亿元。其中，在线音乐服务收入同比增长29.0%，高于2020年第三季度的25.9%。音乐订阅服务收入为人民币15.8亿元(2.42亿美元)，同比增长41.9%。广告服务在2020年第四季度录得超过100%的同比增长。四季度归属于公司股东的净利润为人民币12亿元(1.83亿美元)，每ADS盈利0.71元，市场预期0.68元，去年同期0.62元。四季度在线音乐付费用户达到5600万，同比增长40.4%，环比净增长为430万，付费率历史性破9%，高于第三季度的8%和2019年同期的6.2%。值得注意的是，2020年第四季度，公司长音频专辑数量同比增长370%，极大丰富了长音频内容池；长音频MAU渗透率从去年同期的5.5%增长至14.8%，长音频用户日均使用时长持续增长。2020年全年收入同比增长14.6%至人民币291.5亿元(44.7亿美元)，2020年全年归属于公司股东的净利润同比增长4.3%至人民币41.6亿元(6.37亿美元)。腾讯音乐首席执行官彭迦信先生表示：“通过投资多种格式的音乐类型，我们进一步加强了内容的领先性，提高了用户的参与度，这体现在用户在我们平台上的总使用时间的连续增长。我们最初在长音频方面的投资开始得到回报，2020年第四季度长音频在我们用户群中的渗透率达到15%，高于去年同期的6%。”","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TME":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4353,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":359514553,"gmtCreate":1616412647872,"gmtModify":1704793691276,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hao","listText":"Hao","text":"Hao","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/359514553","repostId":"1159315281","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1159315281","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616406415,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1159315281?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-22 17:46","market":"hk","language":"zh","title":"Bilibili's margin trading subscriptions reached HK$35.55 billion, an excess of 52.3 times.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1159315281","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"综合券商数据显示，哔哩哔哩的孖展认购金额达355.5亿港元，相当于公开招股部分超额认购52.3倍。","content":"<p>According to data from securities firms,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">Bilibili</a>The margin subscription amount reached HK$35.55 billion, equivalent to a 52.3 times oversubscription in the public offering.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bilibili's margin trading subscriptions reached HK$35.55 billion, an excess of 52.3 times.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBilibili's margin trading subscriptions reached HK$35.55 billion, an excess of 52.3 times.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-22 17:46</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>According to data from securities firms,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">Bilibili</a>The margin subscription amount reached HK$35.55 billion, equivalent to a 52.3 times oversubscription in the public offering.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5864d278f2595d2e7918e2cb2d118419","relate_stocks":{"BILI":"哔哩哔哩","09626":"哔哩哔哩-W"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1159315281","content_text":"综合券商数据显示，哔哩哔哩的孖展认购金额达355.5亿港元，相当于公开招股部分超额认购52.3倍。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BILI":0.9,"09626":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4531,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":327904505,"gmtCreate":1616045509607,"gmtModify":1704790168379,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"2233","listText":"2233","text":"2233","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327904505","repostId":"1146319399","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1146319399","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616029606,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1146319399?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-18 09:06","market":"sh","language":"zh","title":"Bilibili's Hong Kong IPO begins today, with an entry fee of approximately HK$19,959 per lot.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1146319399","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"3月18日消息，$哔哩哔哩 $于2021年3月18日至3月23日招股，公开发售价将不超过每股香港发售股份988.00港元，每手20股，股票代码为“ 9626”。预计将在2021年3月29日（星期一）挂牌上市。每手20股，入场费19959.12港元。乙组门槛为6000股，申购所需资金约5987763.46港元。截至2021年3月17日美股收盘，哔哩哔哩的总市值已达到392亿美元。根据招股书，哔哩哔哩尚未实现盈利，2018年至2020年产生净亏损人民币5.65亿元、13.04亿元及30.54亿元。","content":"<p>March 18th news,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI\">Bilibili</a>（<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">$(09626)$</a>.HK) will conduct its IPO from March 18 to March 23, 2021. The public offering price will not exceed HK$988.00 per Hong Kong offer share, with 20 shares per lot, and the stock code \"9626\". It is expected to be listed on Monday, March 29, 2021.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da523cc810f669b6583bebf395b1d418\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"442\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><b>Subscription ladder:</b></p><p>Each lot contains 20 shares, with an entry fee of HK$19,959.12.</p><p>The threshold for Group B is 6,000 shares, and the funds required for subscription are approximately HK$5,987,763.46.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/244f0536c2e47327abe28219456ab2c7\" tg-width=\"653\" tg-height=\"372\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It is understood that Bilibili originated as an ACG content-based community website founded in 2009. It has now developed into an iconic brand for China's younger generation and a leading video community, providing a wealth of rich content to meet the diverse interests of young people. The platform centers on professional user-generated videos (PUGVs), supplemented by live streaming and professional organization-generated videos (OGVs), with content categories covering many fields such as lifestyle, games, entertainment, animation, technology and knowledge.</p><p>In March 2018, the company went public on NASDAQ in the United States under the ticker symbol \"BILI\". In the nearly three years since its listing,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI.US\">Bilibili</a>The stock price has risen by more than 800%. As of the US stock market close on March 17, 2021, Bilibili's total market capitalization had reached $39.2 billion.</p><p>Bilibili has a large and rapidly growing user base. In Q4 2020, the platform had 202 million monthly active users, a year-on-year increase of 55%. Meanwhile, Bilibili's mobile monthly active users grew by 49% between 2019 and 2020, ranking as the highest growth rate among China's top ten video mobile apps in 2020, higher than the average growth rate of the other nine video mobile apps during the same period (11.9%).</p><p>In terms of revenue structure, the company has achieved diversified monetization models, mainly generating revenue from mobile games, value-added services, advertising, e-commerce and other aspects. Benefiting from the rapid growth of its various business segments, Bilibili's revenue has grown rapidly in recent years. From 2018 to 2020, the company's net revenue was RMB 4.129 billion, RMB 6.778 billion and RMB 11.999 billion respectively, with a compound annual growth rate of 70.5%. The gross profit margin for the same periods was 20.7%, 17.6% and 23.7%, respectively.</p><p>According to its prospectus, Bilibili has not yet achieved profitability, incurring net losses of RMB 565 million, RMB 1.304 billion, and RMB 3.054 billion from 2018 to 2020, respectively.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8ffa01204ffbd3bc6a65cb3cca169162\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"646\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In terms of industry, China's pan-video platforms mainly commercialize through advertising, mobile games, live streaming, membership and paid content, and other channels. Since 2016, various commercialization channels in China's pan-video market have grown significantly and are expected to continue to expand at a relatively high rate in the future. Among them, Generation Z+, as the driving force and trend leader of various types of online consumption in China, is regarded as the golden group in the pan-video market.</p><p>Video content has become an important way for Generation Z+ to communicate and interact. In 2020, Generation Z+ reached 452 million people, 74.3% of whom watched various forms of video content, and this penetration rate is expected to further increase to 99.1% by 2025.</p><p>Generation Z+ has become the most important pillar of China's pan-video market, accounting for 64.8% of the market size in 2019. The per capita output value increased from RMB 516 in 2016 to RMB 1,280 in 2019, and then to RMB 3,042 in 2025.</p><p>It is worth noting that, according to the prospectus, Chairman and CEO Chen Rui holds 14.2% of the shares, making him the largest shareholder of the company;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent Holdings</a>Holding 12.4% of the shares, it is its second-largest shareholder; President Xu Yi holds 8% of the shares, making him the company's third-largest shareholder;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>Taobao China Holdings Limited is the fourth largest shareholder, holding 6.7% of the shares.</p><p>Regarding the use of funds, based on the upper limit of the offer price of HK$988, the IPO is expected to receive net proceeds of approximately HK$24.3 billion from the global offering (after deducting underwriting commissions and other estimated expenses related to the global offering). The company intends to use the net proceeds from the share offering for the following purposes: 50% for the company's content to support the company's healthy and high-quality user growth; 20% is used for research and development; 20% is used for sales and marketing; 10% for general corporate purposes and working capital needs.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bilibili's Hong Kong IPO begins today, with an entry fee of approximately HK$19,959 per lot.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBilibili's Hong Kong IPO begins today, with an entry fee of approximately HK$19,959 per lot.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-18 09:06</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>March 18th news,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI\">Bilibili</a>（<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">$(09626)$</a>.HK) will conduct its IPO from March 18 to March 23, 2021. The public offering price will not exceed HK$988.00 per Hong Kong offer share, with 20 shares per lot, and the stock code \"9626\". It is expected to be listed on Monday, March 29, 2021.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da523cc810f669b6583bebf395b1d418\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"442\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><b>Subscription ladder:</b></p><p>Each lot contains 20 shares, with an entry fee of HK$19,959.12.</p><p>The threshold for Group B is 6,000 shares, and the funds required for subscription are approximately HK$5,987,763.46.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/244f0536c2e47327abe28219456ab2c7\" tg-width=\"653\" tg-height=\"372\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It is understood that Bilibili originated as an ACG content-based community website founded in 2009. It has now developed into an iconic brand for China's younger generation and a leading video community, providing a wealth of rich content to meet the diverse interests of young people. The platform centers on professional user-generated videos (PUGVs), supplemented by live streaming and professional organization-generated videos (OGVs), with content categories covering many fields such as lifestyle, games, entertainment, animation, technology and knowledge.</p><p>In March 2018, the company went public on NASDAQ in the United States under the ticker symbol \"BILI\". In the nearly three years since its listing,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI.US\">Bilibili</a>The stock price has risen by more than 800%. As of the US stock market close on March 17, 2021, Bilibili's total market capitalization had reached $39.2 billion.</p><p>Bilibili has a large and rapidly growing user base. In Q4 2020, the platform had 202 million monthly active users, a year-on-year increase of 55%. Meanwhile, Bilibili's mobile monthly active users grew by 49% between 2019 and 2020, ranking as the highest growth rate among China's top ten video mobile apps in 2020, higher than the average growth rate of the other nine video mobile apps during the same period (11.9%).</p><p>In terms of revenue structure, the company has achieved diversified monetization models, mainly generating revenue from mobile games, value-added services, advertising, e-commerce and other aspects. Benefiting from the rapid growth of its various business segments, Bilibili's revenue has grown rapidly in recent years. From 2018 to 2020, the company's net revenue was RMB 4.129 billion, RMB 6.778 billion and RMB 11.999 billion respectively, with a compound annual growth rate of 70.5%. The gross profit margin for the same periods was 20.7%, 17.6% and 23.7%, respectively.</p><p>According to its prospectus, Bilibili has not yet achieved profitability, incurring net losses of RMB 565 million, RMB 1.304 billion, and RMB 3.054 billion from 2018 to 2020, respectively.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8ffa01204ffbd3bc6a65cb3cca169162\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"646\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In terms of industry, China's pan-video platforms mainly commercialize through advertising, mobile games, live streaming, membership and paid content, and other channels. Since 2016, various commercialization channels in China's pan-video market have grown significantly and are expected to continue to expand at a relatively high rate in the future. Among them, Generation Z+, as the driving force and trend leader of various types of online consumption in China, is regarded as the golden group in the pan-video market.</p><p>Video content has become an important way for Generation Z+ to communicate and interact. In 2020, Generation Z+ reached 452 million people, 74.3% of whom watched various forms of video content, and this penetration rate is expected to further increase to 99.1% by 2025.</p><p>Generation Z+ has become the most important pillar of China's pan-video market, accounting for 64.8% of the market size in 2019. The per capita output value increased from RMB 516 in 2016 to RMB 1,280 in 2019, and then to RMB 3,042 in 2025.</p><p>It is worth noting that, according to the prospectus, Chairman and CEO Chen Rui holds 14.2% of the shares, making him the largest shareholder of the company;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent Holdings</a>Holding 12.4% of the shares, it is its second-largest shareholder; President Xu Yi holds 8% of the shares, making him the company's third-largest shareholder;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>Taobao China Holdings Limited is the fourth largest shareholder, holding 6.7% of the shares.</p><p>Regarding the use of funds, based on the upper limit of the offer price of HK$988, the IPO is expected to receive net proceeds of approximately HK$24.3 billion from the global offering (after deducting underwriting commissions and other estimated expenses related to the global offering). The company intends to use the net proceeds from the share offering for the following purposes: 50% for the company's content to support the company's healthy and high-quality user growth; 20% is used for research and development; 20% is used for sales and marketing; 10% for general corporate purposes and working capital needs.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7c7f2e3ab9856d4cdcb423e2c4f7a729","relate_stocks":{"BILI":"哔哩哔哩","09626":"哔哩哔哩-W"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1146319399","content_text":"3月18日消息，哔哩哔哩（$(09626)$.HK）于2021年3月18日至3月23日招股，公开发售价将不超过每股香港发售股份988.00港元，每手20股，股票代码为“ 9626”。预计将在2021年3月29日（星期一）挂牌上市。申购阶梯：每手20股，入场费19959.12港元。乙组门槛为6000股，申购所需资金约5987763.46港元。据悉，哔哩哔哩起源于2009年创立的ACG内容型社区网站，目前已发展成为中国年轻一代的标志性品牌及领先的视频社区，提供大量丰富的内容以满足年轻人多元的兴趣。平台以专业用户生成视频（PUGV）为中心，辅以直播、专业机构生成视频（OGV）等，内容品类覆盖生活、游戏、娱乐、动漫、科技和知识等众多领域。2018年3月，公司在美国纳斯达克上市，代码“BILI”，上市近三年以来，哔哩哔哩的股价已经上涨超800%。截至2021年3月17日美股收盘，哔哩哔哩的总市值已达到392亿美元。哔哩哔哩拥有庞大且快速增长的用户基础。20Q4，平台月活用户达到2.02亿人，同比增长55%。同时，哔哩哔哩移动端月活用户于2019年至2020年间增长49%，为2020年中国前十大视频移动端应用中移动端月活用户增长幅度最高，高于其余九大视频移动端应用在同期的平均增长率(11.9%)。营收结构方面，公司实现了多元的变现模式，主要从移动游戏、增值服务、广告、电商及其他方面带来收入。受益于各业务板块高速增长，哔哩哔哩近年来营收增长迅猛，2018年至2020年，公司净营业额分别为人民币41.29亿元、67.78亿元及119.99亿元，复合年增长率为70.5%；同期毛利率分别为20.7%、17.6%及23.7%。根据招股书，哔哩哔哩尚未实现盈利，2018年至2020年产生净亏损人民币5.65亿元、13.04亿元及30.54亿元。行业方面，中国的泛视频平台主要通过广告、移动游戏、直播、会员和付费内容及其他渠道进行商业化。自2016年以来，中国泛视频市场的各种商业化渠道显著增长，预期未来将以相对较高的速度继续扩张。其中，Z+世代作为中国各类线上消费的驱动力和趋势引领者，被视为泛视频市场的黄金群体。视频内容已经成为Z+世代交流和互动的重要途径。2020年Z+世代达到4.52亿人，其中74.3%观看各种形式的视频内容，预期到2025年此渗透率将进一步提升到99.1%。Z+世代已成为中国泛视频市场最重要的支柱，2019年占泛视频市场市场规模的64.8%，人均产值从2016年的人民币516元增加至2019年的人民币1280元，再到2025年的人民币3042元。值得关注的是，根据招股书显示，董事会主席兼CEO陈睿持股14.2%，为公司最大股东；腾讯控股持股12.4%为其第二大股东；总裁徐逸持股8%，为公司第三大股东；阿里巴巴淘宝中国控股有限公司为第四大股东，持股6.7%。筹资用途方面，以发售价的上限988港元计算，此次IPO预计自全球发售收取所得款项净额约243亿港元（经扣除包销佣金及与全球发售有关的其他估计开支）。公司拟将股份发售所得款项净额用于以下用途：50%用于公司的内容以支持公司的健康和高质量的用户增长；20%用于研发；20%用于销售及营销；10%用于一般公司用途及运营资本需要。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"09626":0.9,"BILI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5109,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":324040427,"gmtCreate":1615946300669,"gmtModify":1704788775364,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Down&nbsp;","listText":"Down&nbsp;","text":"Down","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bf42df917a2bc4c06b34b1a97f97a44","width":"1440","height":"4156"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324040427","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4291,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":324057851,"gmtCreate":1615946219673,"gmtModify":1704788775906,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Expect to fall","listText":"Expect to fall","text":"Expect to fall","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bdeaaf7f546e9569ce127096cb7292b","width":"1440","height":"4156"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324057851","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4822,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":341533622,"gmtCreate":1617839211766,"gmtModify":1704703708281,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"go","listText":"go","text":"go","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/341533622","repostId":"2125186725","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":6663,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":352333124,"gmtCreate":1616891366268,"gmtModify":1704799733385,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/352333124","repostId":"1192792909","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1192792909","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1617030576,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1192792909?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-29 23:09","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"How long will the value style of US stocks last?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1192792909","media":"雪涛宏观笔记","summary":"美股价值股与成长股长期相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值。与科网泡沫时期显著不同的是当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵）。短期来看，本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，可能处于风格优势期的","content":"<p>The core source of long-term relative returns between value and growth stocks in the US stock market is earnings, not valuation. Unlike the dot-com bubble era, value stocks do not currently have a significant valuation bubble compared to growth stocks (which may all be expensive). In the short term, this round of value stocks has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stages of the style advantage period (comparable to an average of 10 months). Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower the expectation of absolute returns for value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for a style reversal.<b>Introduction:</b></p><p>In August of last year, US value stocks underperformed growth stocks by more than the level during the dot-com bubble for the first time. At that time, the market began to see a shift towards cyclical value stocks, and at the same time, long-term US Treasury yields began to rebound sharply, driving the value/growth ratio back up from historical lows. Since February of this year, the Nasdaq index, which represents the growth style, has been on a pullback/retracement for several consecutive years, while the Dow Jones index, which represents the value style, has repeatedly hit new highs. Now that the style shift has become a reality, discussions about whether the value style of US stocks has reached a long-term inflection point have intensified.</p><p><b>Is the style shift a long-term reversal or a short-term convergence? How much room is left for interpretation?</b>—Let's explore the answer to this question using the Russel 1000 Value and Growth Index as an example.</p><p><b>Key conclusions:</b></p><p><b>First, the core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p><b>Second, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields after 1981 was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth. Currently, the technical and institutional factors that have led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth and a long-term deflationary environment have not been improved.</b></p><p><b>Third, if the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles. Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points, and the market's style inflection point also precedes the relative earnings inflection point.</b></p><p><b>Fourth, in the short term, this round of value style has lasted for 6 months and is in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average. The phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end this May. Therefore, value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks.</b></p><p><b>Fifth, once the US government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, conditions may arise for long-term interest rates to turn upward. The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades, and drive the central trend of long-term interest rates to rise.</b></p><p><b>Sixth, it remains to be seen whether the style divergence between long-term value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 1: Relative returns of the 10-year Treasury Bond yield versus the Russel 1000 Value and Style Index</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/600e3efd47bf1b5bf01a8081ca124909\" tg-width=\"910\" tg-height=\"594\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>I. What determines the relative return of a value/growth style?</b></p><p>The core argument supporting a long-term style reversal is the reversal of the downward trend in long-term US Treasury yields. We analyze the impact of long-term yields on earnings per share and valuations of value and growth stocks.</p><p><b>(1) The direction of long-term US Treasury yields and the difference between value growth EPS are in the same direction.</b></p><p>For value companies and growth companies, financial statement metrics related to operating leverage, such as asset, plant, and equipment turnover and net debt, differ significantly. In a broadly inflationary environment, value companies with relatively high levels of fixed assets will see a more significant improvement in turnover than growth companies. Value companies also have higher net debt levels than growth companies. With inflation resuming, value-based companies will have a relatively smaller burden of repaying principal and interest compared to growth companies. Therefore,<b>The decline in interest rates may indicate a decline in the relative EPS returns of value companies.</b></p><p>Looking at nearly 30 years of history,<b>The difference in EPS between value stocks and growth stocks is relatively consistent with short-term fluctuations in interest rates.</b>。 However, the highs of each cycle have shifted downwards in succession, which is in line with the long-term downward trend of interest rates. Before 2008, short-term monetary policy rates were consistent with the fluctuation pattern of profit spreads, but they gradually diverged after the financial crisis, reflecting a slower response of monetary policy rates to the economic profit cycle. The yield and earnings spread of long-term 10-year US Treasury bonds diverged significantly between 2003 and 2006. The difference between the EPS of value stocks and growth stocks reached a new high in 2007, but the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds was lower than the peak of the previous cycle.</p><p><b>The core of the divergence is also the mystery of Greenspan's long-term interest rate.</b>Short-term interest rates rose, while long-term risk-free interest rates fell. Greenspan's explanation of this includes:</p><p>1. The US economic recovery, coupled with deepening globalization, has led to trading partners accumulating increasingly large dollar surpluses. Globally, the only place capable of absorbing this portion of foreign exchange reserves accumulated from surpluses is the Treasury Bond market in the United States.</p><p>2. With the inevitable increase in the retirement population (especially in developed countries), the underfunding of retirement plans is a growing concern. Both pension funds and insurance companies have had to increase their share of long-term bonds in their portfolios.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 2: Before 2008, the monetary policy cycle and the value-to-growth profit spread were close to each other.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61937bebe0692c423e53ccc1341518ff\" tg-width=\"568\" tg-height=\"296\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 3: The fluctuations in the 10-year US Treasury yields and the profit spread of value growth are relatively consistent.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0213083f3bfc77aed3440308bd2fe7d3\" tg-width=\"824\" tg-height=\"431\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>(2) Declining long-term yields will not make growth stocks more expensive than value stocks.</b></p><p><b>There is a widespread view that a decline in risk-free interest rates will bring more valuation premiums to growth stocks, but this perception is wrong!</b>Although the volatility of Treasury Bond yields does indeed outperform the risk premium difference between value stocks and growth stocks from a short-term perspective, in the longer term, the risk premium of value stocks compared to growth stocks has not widened due to the decline in risk-free interest rates.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 4: Risk premium difference between 10-year Treasury Bond interest rate and value and growth stocks</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31507616ec0aec31a906ffcb6a74a3a9\" tg-width=\"478\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Therefore, we conclude<b>The core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p>The decline in risk-free interest rates and the decline in relative earnings (value stocks - growth stocks) both reflect changes in the industrial structure of the US economy. The use of capital and technology reduces labor costs and improves corporate efficiency and profitability. Therefore, the weight of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment (see Figure 6).<b>The key question of whether a style reversal will occur in the future is whether the US industrial structure will change, leading to a continued rise in value stock earnings, inflation, and interest rates.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 5: Apart from the divergence during the Internet era (2000), the earnings differential between value and growth dominates the relative returns of the value and growth indices.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b50730f74cd9d5269e52a4816dbcc27a\" tg-width=\"532\" tg-height=\"366\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 6: The weighting of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8b2645041d5028dd3dc4a6684ec26ed\" tg-width=\"480\" tg-height=\"291\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: BEA, BLS, Standard & Poor's, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>Second, if tax increases (and a series of institutional reforms representing a leftward shift in American society) occur, the 40-year downward trend in interest rates may end, and there is a possibility of a trend reversal in the style.</b></p><p>Looking back at the history of interest rates after World War II, the factors that led to the 40-year decline in interest rates remained unchanged.<b>The trend of nominal interest rates mainly depends on real economic growth and inflation.</b>After World War II, the 10-year US Treasury yield was highly consistent with the trends of US GDP growth and core CPI, with its peak occurring in the 1970s.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 7: 10-year Treasury Bond yield vs. US real GDP growth vs. core CPI</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/51766a075b0ad18b0da629cc8019a2c4\" tg-width=\"475\" tg-height=\"326\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>The first phase of the interest rate rise cycle (1946-1970)</b>It is based on genuine prosperity generated by positive feedback from both the supply and demand sides. During World War II, the U.S. government adapted to the times and promoted supply-side reforms, upgraded the supply level of American manufacturing and related industries, accelerated the training of a large number of technical personnel at the rate of a wartime economy, and recreated the barbaric advance of the late 19th century in the application of new technologies. Roosevelt's New Deal pushed for labor relations legislation, narrowed the gap between rich and poor, and allowed American workers to obtain an 8-hour workday and other benefits. However, the increase in relative labor costs, the increase in residents' education level, and the increase in women's labor participation rate pushed labor productivity to a new level. On the demand side, war has severely damaged global industries, leaving everything in ruins in need of reconstruction, and the industrial base urgently needs to be rebuilt. During this period, the economy grew rapidly, inflation was low, the unemployment rate continued to decline, and the gap between the rich and the poor narrowed.<b>Rising interest rates correspond to an acceleration in real economic growth.</b></p><p><b>The second phase of rising interest rates (1970-1981)</b>It is based on the supply shocks brought about by the oil crisis. During the two oil crises, crude oil prices rose from less than $3 a barrel in 1973 to $45 a barrel in 1980. Post-war economic recovery relied heavily on energy support from the petrochemical industry. As crude oil prices rose, the dollar depreciated after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, leading to imported inflation. The 10-year Treasury Bond yield rose to its highest level since the founding of the United States. During this period, the economy experienced frequent recessions, price levels remained high, and unemployment rose.<b>The rise in interest rates mainly corresponds to high inflation caused by supply contraction.</b></p><p><b>After 1981, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth.</b></p><p>On the supply side, global innovation and economic progress since the 1970s have been focused on a narrow area of human activity, primarily related to entertainment, communication, and information collection and processing. This improvement in social well-being has not been included in GDP. \"For other matters of concern to humanity, including food, clothing, housing, transportation, health, and the work environment inside and outside the home, the pace of progress has slowed down after 1970, both quantitatively and qualitatively.\" (Robert Gordon, *The Rise and Fall of American Economic Growth*)</p><p>On the demand side, the deterioration of the income distribution mechanism has led to a long-term shortage of effective demand. The wage control policy, which was relaxed in 1973, was a major reason for the widening wealth gap that followed. Population aging generally occurred in Western countries in the early 1980s. Combined with their high welfare systems, both labor supply and savings declined, and capital investment was insufficient. In addition, in response to global competition, companies in developed countries are relocating their industries to emerging markets to reduce costs, residents' wage growth has stagnated.</p><p><b>Currently, the factors that led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth have not been improved.</b>Population aging and declining fertility rates continue to intensify in developed countries; Global innovation mainly focuses on business models, and hardware investment has not yet led to a qualitative change in improving social production efficiency. Technological advances and globalization have improved efficiency, but they have undermined equity, and governments must make greater efforts to pay attention to vulnerable groups.</p><p>Human society does not evolve linearly, but rather develops in leaps and bounds like a quantum leap. It has been in a level of slow and stable development for a long time, and then suddenly encounters some major changes. Order, systems, and technology begin to undergo profound changes, and the process of history begins to accelerate until it enters the next new level of long-term slow and stable development. The COVID-19 pandemic may be such a major change. When humanity encounters difficulties, cooperation and reform are more likely to emerge, leading to the leapfrog development mentioned above.</p><p><b>Following the COVID-19 pandemic, some factors that could alter the insufficient endogenous driving force for long-term economic growth have begun to emerge.</b>The Democratic Party is willing to reform the wealth distribution system, including raising income tax rates for the wealthy and large corporations, increasing the minimum wage, boosting employment through traditional infrastructure, and increasing transfer payments to low- and middle-income earners. However, the polarization of political opinions between the two parties and society in the United States has made this reform extremely difficult (the Republican Party's opposition to raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour is a microcosm of political polarization). The bipartisan consensus could be antitrust enforcement against large tech companies. Congress is considering forcing tech giants to separate their dominant online platforms from other business units, and the House Judiciary Committee's antitrust subcommittee, led by Democrats, is preparing to propose comprehensive reforms that could, in the long run, encourage innovation (as IBM was spun off in the 1970s), increase social labor productivity, and improve wealth distribution mechanisms.</p><p><b>Once the U.S. government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, the conditions for long-term interest rates to turn upward may arise.</b>The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades.<b>This will also drive a trend upward in the central level of long-term interest rates.</b></p><p><b>In addition, there are potential factors on the supply side that could drive a long-term rebound in interest rates.</b>Under the global trend of \"carbon neutrality,\" the capital market is also driving the \"greening\" of the energy industry, which may lead to insufficient investment in traditional energy. For example, Shell, which is undergoing a more aggressive transformation, plans to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. As a result, its capital expenditure ratio in the upstream sector has been reduced from around 35% to 25-30% after 2025, while its capital expenditure ratio in renewable energy has increased. Correspondingly, the IRR of new capital expenditures also treats the return requirements for upstream sectors and renewable energy differently. The return on capital expenditures in the upstream sector should reach 20-25%, while the return on investment in renewable energy is only required to be no less than 10%. It's not just energy; commodity prices have been low over the past decade, raw material producers have cut capital expenditures to varying degrees, and the COVID-19 pandemic has also accelerated some capacity shedding.</p><p><b>Third, without considering the trend reversal of interest rates, how long can this round of style shift in growth value last?</b></p><p><b>If the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles.</b></p><p>We selected five indicators to examine how value stocks have outperformed growth stocks since 2000: inflation expectations, real interest rates, PMI, CPI, and year-on-year inventory growth. 2000.7-2001.3 and 2008.6-2008.12 were both periods of economic downturn, with PMI, inventory year-on-year, and CPI all declining. Value stocks reaped excess returns under defensive strategies. The remaining four stages all showed economic recovery, with most economic indicators rebounding. Inflation expectations and the CPI rebound are fluctuating at high levels; Except for November 2001 and July 2002, real interest rates began to rise from their bottom, and the PMI fluctuated upwards; Except for 2012.5-2013.7, the inventory cycle is in the restocking phase. Excluding this bull market (September 2020-February 2021) and the long bull period for value stocks (December 2003-June 2006), the average excess return of value stocks was 15.54%.<b>Average duration: 10 months</b>。 The most similar period to this is from March to December 2016. This period was the previous short-cycle recovery period, and the excess return of value stocks was 8.22%, which lasted for 10 months.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 1: Periods of excess returns of value stocks relative to growth stocks over the years</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c79f98fa6d41cc0bb8b40968953959c8\" tg-width=\"492\" tg-height=\"179\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 8: Inflation expectations (%), CPI year-on-year growth (%), and inventory year-on-year growth (%) from 1990 to present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9497187cf6a6026f1ba5e5df2d759692\" tg-width=\"494\" tg-height=\"345\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 9: Real interest rates and PMI 1990-present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b903d79a6e050f784a34a9525ddba907\" tg-width=\"485\" tg-height=\"315\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Looking at the timing of the previous four style reversals (i.e., the RUSSEL 1000 value/growth Index turned from a downward trend to an upward trend),<b>Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points.</b>。 However, after 2008, value stocks could only reap the benefits of rising interest rates or inflation, that is, the early stages when interest rates or inflation rose from the bottom, and could not reap the benefits of peaking. This may be because the market believes that the excess profits of value stocks will not last as long as they did from 2003 to 2006.<b>The market's style inflection point also precedes the relative profitability inflection point.</b></p><p>According to FactSet data, profits in the industrial, materials, and financial sectors are expected to grow by 89%, 40%, and 23% year-on-year in 2021, respectively, while profits in the technology sector are expected to grow by only 18%, indicating that the current value style is dominant.<b>This round of value style has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average.</b></p><p>From a macroeconomic perspective,<b>The CPI may fall after peaking in May, and inflation expectations are already at a historical high (99.5% percentile).</b>。 The slower-than-expected recovery of U.S. shale oil production capacity has given OPEC room to continue cutting production and maintaining high oil prices. Oil prices may fluctuate wildly at high levels in the first half of the year, but inflation expectations may fall along with oil prices in the second half of the year. Based on previous historical experience, inflation expectations are about six months ahead of real interest rates. Therefore, even after inflation expectations decline in the second half of the year, real interest rates still have room to rise. After stripping away the long-term trend, the current real interest rate (around -0.66%) is still at a historically low level (17.4th percentile). The rebound in real interest rates is expected to peak at around 0.2%-0.3%, corresponding to the 70%-80% historical percentile, which is roughly equivalent to the average level in 2019.</p><p><b>Based on our assessment of inflation and real interest rates, the phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end in May of this year. Therefore, the short-term style advantage of value stocks may continue for another quarter, and whether the trend can be reversed in the long run will be determined by a series of institutional reforms that reverse income distribution and the wealth gap.</b></p><p>Looking at specific industries, rising commodity prices, manufacturing inventory replenishment, and rising interest rates were driven by...<b>Finance, energy, industry, and raw materials sectors led the gains during the recovery period.</b>Healthcare, information technology, public utilities, and telecommunications services do not have obvious inventory cycles, while the performance of core consumer goods is relatively stable and relatively less elastic. Non-core consumer goods are overly influenced by amazon.<b>Currently, energy stocks have risen above the historical average, and the gains in financial stocks have also been fully realized.</b>。</p><p>In the short term, we believe<b>Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 2: Performance of various industries during the recovery phase</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6228f37247756967ffbc3aa57083aa9d\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"249\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table></p>","source":"xthgbj","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>How long will the value style of US stocks last?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHow long will the value style of US stocks last?\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">雪涛宏观笔记</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-29 23:09</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The core source of long-term relative returns between value and growth stocks in the US stock market is earnings, not valuation. Unlike the dot-com bubble era, value stocks do not currently have a significant valuation bubble compared to growth stocks (which may all be expensive). In the short term, this round of value stocks has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stages of the style advantage period (comparable to an average of 10 months). Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower the expectation of absolute returns for value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for a style reversal.<b>Introduction:</b></p><p>In August of last year, US value stocks underperformed growth stocks by more than the level during the dot-com bubble for the first time. At that time, the market began to see a shift towards cyclical value stocks, and at the same time, long-term US Treasury yields began to rebound sharply, driving the value/growth ratio back up from historical lows. Since February of this year, the Nasdaq index, which represents the growth style, has been on a pullback/retracement for several consecutive years, while the Dow Jones index, which represents the value style, has repeatedly hit new highs. Now that the style shift has become a reality, discussions about whether the value style of US stocks has reached a long-term inflection point have intensified.</p><p><b>Is the style shift a long-term reversal or a short-term convergence? How much room is left for interpretation?</b>—Let's explore the answer to this question using the Russel 1000 Value and Growth Index as an example.</p><p><b>Key conclusions:</b></p><p><b>First, the core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p><b>Second, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields after 1981 was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth. Currently, the technical and institutional factors that have led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth and a long-term deflationary environment have not been improved.</b></p><p><b>Third, if the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles. Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points, and the market's style inflection point also precedes the relative earnings inflection point.</b></p><p><b>Fourth, in the short term, this round of value style has lasted for 6 months and is in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average. The phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end this May. Therefore, value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks.</b></p><p><b>Fifth, once the US government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, conditions may arise for long-term interest rates to turn upward. The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades, and drive the central trend of long-term interest rates to rise.</b></p><p><b>Sixth, it remains to be seen whether the style divergence between long-term value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 1: Relative returns of the 10-year Treasury Bond yield versus the Russel 1000 Value and Style Index</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/600e3efd47bf1b5bf01a8081ca124909\" tg-width=\"910\" tg-height=\"594\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>I. What determines the relative return of a value/growth style?</b></p><p>The core argument supporting a long-term style reversal is the reversal of the downward trend in long-term US Treasury yields. We analyze the impact of long-term yields on earnings per share and valuations of value and growth stocks.</p><p><b>(1) The direction of long-term US Treasury yields and the difference between value growth EPS are in the same direction.</b></p><p>For value companies and growth companies, financial statement metrics related to operating leverage, such as asset, plant, and equipment turnover and net debt, differ significantly. In a broadly inflationary environment, value companies with relatively high levels of fixed assets will see a more significant improvement in turnover than growth companies. Value companies also have higher net debt levels than growth companies. With inflation resuming, value-based companies will have a relatively smaller burden of repaying principal and interest compared to growth companies. Therefore,<b>The decline in interest rates may indicate a decline in the relative EPS returns of value companies.</b></p><p>Looking at nearly 30 years of history,<b>The difference in EPS between value stocks and growth stocks is relatively consistent with short-term fluctuations in interest rates.</b>。 However, the highs of each cycle have shifted downwards in succession, which is in line with the long-term downward trend of interest rates. Before 2008, short-term monetary policy rates were consistent with the fluctuation pattern of profit spreads, but they gradually diverged after the financial crisis, reflecting a slower response of monetary policy rates to the economic profit cycle. The yield and earnings spread of long-term 10-year US Treasury bonds diverged significantly between 2003 and 2006. The difference between the EPS of value stocks and growth stocks reached a new high in 2007, but the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds was lower than the peak of the previous cycle.</p><p><b>The core of the divergence is also the mystery of Greenspan's long-term interest rate.</b>Short-term interest rates rose, while long-term risk-free interest rates fell. Greenspan's explanation of this includes:</p><p>1. The US economic recovery, coupled with deepening globalization, has led to trading partners accumulating increasingly large dollar surpluses. Globally, the only place capable of absorbing this portion of foreign exchange reserves accumulated from surpluses is the Treasury Bond market in the United States.</p><p>2. With the inevitable increase in the retirement population (especially in developed countries), the underfunding of retirement plans is a growing concern. Both pension funds and insurance companies have had to increase their share of long-term bonds in their portfolios.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 2: Before 2008, the monetary policy cycle and the value-to-growth profit spread were close to each other.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61937bebe0692c423e53ccc1341518ff\" tg-width=\"568\" tg-height=\"296\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 3: The fluctuations in the 10-year US Treasury yields and the profit spread of value growth are relatively consistent.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0213083f3bfc77aed3440308bd2fe7d3\" tg-width=\"824\" tg-height=\"431\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>(2) Declining long-term yields will not make growth stocks more expensive than value stocks.</b></p><p><b>There is a widespread view that a decline in risk-free interest rates will bring more valuation premiums to growth stocks, but this perception is wrong!</b>Although the volatility of Treasury Bond yields does indeed outperform the risk premium difference between value stocks and growth stocks from a short-term perspective, in the longer term, the risk premium of value stocks compared to growth stocks has not widened due to the decline in risk-free interest rates.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 4: Risk premium difference between 10-year Treasury Bond interest rate and value and growth stocks</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31507616ec0aec31a906ffcb6a74a3a9\" tg-width=\"478\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Therefore, we conclude<b>The core source of relative returns between value stocks and growth stocks is earnings, not valuation! Currently, growth stocks do not have a significant valuation bubble compared to value stocks (both may be expensive!), which is significantly different from the dot-com bubble era.</b></p><p>The decline in risk-free interest rates and the decline in relative earnings (value stocks - growth stocks) both reflect changes in the industrial structure of the US economy. The use of capital and technology reduces labor costs and improves corporate efficiency and profitability. Therefore, the weight of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment (see Figure 6).<b>The key question of whether a style reversal will occur in the future is whether the US industrial structure will change, leading to a continued rise in value stock earnings, inflation, and interest rates.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 5: Apart from the divergence during the Internet era (2000), the earnings differential between value and growth dominates the relative returns of the value and growth indices.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b50730f74cd9d5269e52a4816dbcc27a\" tg-width=\"532\" tg-height=\"366\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 6: The weighting of growth stocks, represented by technology, in the stock market does not match their contribution to the economy and employment.</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8b2645041d5028dd3dc4a6684ec26ed\" tg-width=\"480\" tg-height=\"291\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: BEA, BLS, Standard & Poor's, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>Second, if tax increases (and a series of institutional reforms representing a leftward shift in American society) occur, the 40-year downward trend in interest rates may end, and there is a possibility of a trend reversal in the style.</b></p><p>Looking back at the history of interest rates after World War II, the factors that led to the 40-year decline in interest rates remained unchanged.<b>The trend of nominal interest rates mainly depends on real economic growth and inflation.</b>After World War II, the 10-year US Treasury yield was highly consistent with the trends of US GDP growth and core CPI, with its peak occurring in the 1970s.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 7: 10-year Treasury Bond yield vs. US real GDP growth vs. core CPI</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/51766a075b0ad18b0da629cc8019a2c4\" tg-width=\"475\" tg-height=\"326\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><b>The first phase of the interest rate rise cycle (1946-1970)</b>It is based on genuine prosperity generated by positive feedback from both the supply and demand sides. During World War II, the U.S. government adapted to the times and promoted supply-side reforms, upgraded the supply level of American manufacturing and related industries, accelerated the training of a large number of technical personnel at the rate of a wartime economy, and recreated the barbaric advance of the late 19th century in the application of new technologies. Roosevelt's New Deal pushed for labor relations legislation, narrowed the gap between rich and poor, and allowed American workers to obtain an 8-hour workday and other benefits. However, the increase in relative labor costs, the increase in residents' education level, and the increase in women's labor participation rate pushed labor productivity to a new level. On the demand side, war has severely damaged global industries, leaving everything in ruins in need of reconstruction, and the industrial base urgently needs to be rebuilt. During this period, the economy grew rapidly, inflation was low, the unemployment rate continued to decline, and the gap between the rich and the poor narrowed.<b>Rising interest rates correspond to an acceleration in real economic growth.</b></p><p><b>The second phase of rising interest rates (1970-1981)</b>It is based on the supply shocks brought about by the oil crisis. During the two oil crises, crude oil prices rose from less than $3 a barrel in 1973 to $45 a barrel in 1980. Post-war economic recovery relied heavily on energy support from the petrochemical industry. As crude oil prices rose, the dollar depreciated after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, leading to imported inflation. The 10-year Treasury Bond yield rose to its highest level since the founding of the United States. During this period, the economy experienced frequent recessions, price levels remained high, and unemployment rose.<b>The rise in interest rates mainly corresponds to high inflation caused by supply contraction.</b></p><p><b>After 1981, the core reason for the decline in long-term bond yields was the low economic growth rate and low inflation caused by insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth.</b></p><p>On the supply side, global innovation and economic progress since the 1970s have been focused on a narrow area of human activity, primarily related to entertainment, communication, and information collection and processing. This improvement in social well-being has not been included in GDP. \"For other matters of concern to humanity, including food, clothing, housing, transportation, health, and the work environment inside and outside the home, the pace of progress has slowed down after 1970, both quantitatively and qualitatively.\" (Robert Gordon, *The Rise and Fall of American Economic Growth*)</p><p>On the demand side, the deterioration of the income distribution mechanism has led to a long-term shortage of effective demand. The wage control policy, which was relaxed in 1973, was a major reason for the widening wealth gap that followed. Population aging generally occurred in Western countries in the early 1980s. Combined with their high welfare systems, both labor supply and savings declined, and capital investment was insufficient. In addition, in response to global competition, companies in developed countries are relocating their industries to emerging markets to reduce costs, residents' wage growth has stagnated.</p><p><b>Currently, the factors that led to insufficient endogenous momentum for economic growth have not been improved.</b>Population aging and declining fertility rates continue to intensify in developed countries; Global innovation mainly focuses on business models, and hardware investment has not yet led to a qualitative change in improving social production efficiency. Technological advances and globalization have improved efficiency, but they have undermined equity, and governments must make greater efforts to pay attention to vulnerable groups.</p><p>Human society does not evolve linearly, but rather develops in leaps and bounds like a quantum leap. It has been in a level of slow and stable development for a long time, and then suddenly encounters some major changes. Order, systems, and technology begin to undergo profound changes, and the process of history begins to accelerate until it enters the next new level of long-term slow and stable development. The COVID-19 pandemic may be such a major change. When humanity encounters difficulties, cooperation and reform are more likely to emerge, leading to the leapfrog development mentioned above.</p><p><b>Following the COVID-19 pandemic, some factors that could alter the insufficient endogenous driving force for long-term economic growth have begun to emerge.</b>The Democratic Party is willing to reform the wealth distribution system, including raising income tax rates for the wealthy and large corporations, increasing the minimum wage, boosting employment through traditional infrastructure, and increasing transfer payments to low- and middle-income earners. However, the polarization of political opinions between the two parties and society in the United States has made this reform extremely difficult (the Republican Party's opposition to raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour is a microcosm of political polarization). The bipartisan consensus could be antitrust enforcement against large tech companies. Congress is considering forcing tech giants to separate their dominant online platforms from other business units, and the House Judiciary Committee's antitrust subcommittee, led by Democrats, is preparing to propose comprehensive reforms that could, in the long run, encourage innovation (as IBM was spun off in the 1970s), increase social labor productivity, and improve wealth distribution mechanisms.</p><p><b>Once the U.S. government begins to turn left and reform the distribution system based on free capitalism since the Reagan administration, the conditions for long-term interest rates to turn upward may arise.</b>The equalization of income distribution may reverse the long-term deflationary situation caused by the widening gap between the rich and the poor over the past four decades.<b>This will also drive a trend upward in the central level of long-term interest rates.</b></p><p><b>In addition, there are potential factors on the supply side that could drive a long-term rebound in interest rates.</b>Under the global trend of \"carbon neutrality,\" the capital market is also driving the \"greening\" of the energy industry, which may lead to insufficient investment in traditional energy. For example, Shell, which is undergoing a more aggressive transformation, plans to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. As a result, its capital expenditure ratio in the upstream sector has been reduced from around 35% to 25-30% after 2025, while its capital expenditure ratio in renewable energy has increased. Correspondingly, the IRR of new capital expenditures also treats the return requirements for upstream sectors and renewable energy differently. The return on capital expenditures in the upstream sector should reach 20-25%, while the return on investment in renewable energy is only required to be no less than 10%. It's not just energy; commodity prices have been low over the past decade, raw material producers have cut capital expenditures to varying degrees, and the COVID-19 pandemic has also accelerated some capacity shedding.</p><p><b>Third, without considering the trend reversal of interest rates, how long can this round of style shift in growth value last?</b></p><p><b>If the US Treasury Bond market fails to form a long-term bear market, the discussion of value over growth styles may be limited to short-term cycles.</b></p><p>We selected five indicators to examine how value stocks have outperformed growth stocks since 2000: inflation expectations, real interest rates, PMI, CPI, and year-on-year inventory growth. 2000.7-2001.3 and 2008.6-2008.12 were both periods of economic downturn, with PMI, inventory year-on-year, and CPI all declining. Value stocks reaped excess returns under defensive strategies. The remaining four stages all showed economic recovery, with most economic indicators rebounding. Inflation expectations and the CPI rebound are fluctuating at high levels; Except for November 2001 and July 2002, real interest rates began to rise from their bottom, and the PMI fluctuated upwards; Except for 2012.5-2013.7, the inventory cycle is in the restocking phase. Excluding this bull market (September 2020-February 2021) and the long bull period for value stocks (December 2003-June 2006), the average excess return of value stocks was 15.54%.<b>Average duration: 10 months</b>。 The most similar period to this is from March to December 2016. This period was the previous short-cycle recovery period, and the excess return of value stocks was 8.22%, which lasted for 10 months.</p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 1: Periods of excess returns of value stocks relative to growth stocks over the years</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c79f98fa6d41cc0bb8b40968953959c8\" tg-width=\"492\" tg-height=\"179\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 8: Inflation expectations (%), CPI year-on-year growth (%), and inventory year-on-year growth (%) from 1990 to present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9497187cf6a6026f1ba5e5df2d759692\" tg-width=\"494\" tg-height=\"345\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td>Figure 9: Real interest rates and PMI 1990-present</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b903d79a6e050f784a34a9525ddba907\" tg-width=\"485\" tg-height=\"315\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table>Looking at the timing of the previous four style reversals (i.e., the RUSSEL 1000 value/growth Index turned from a downward trend to an upward trend),<b>Nominal interest rates, real interest rates, CPI, and the peaking and falling of inflation expectations are roughly synchronized or leading indicators of inflection points.</b>。 However, after 2008, value stocks could only reap the benefits of rising interest rates or inflation, that is, the early stages when interest rates or inflation rose from the bottom, and could not reap the benefits of peaking. This may be because the market believes that the excess profits of value stocks will not last as long as they did from 2003 to 2006.<b>The market's style inflection point also precedes the relative profitability inflection point.</b></p><p>According to FactSet data, profits in the industrial, materials, and financial sectors are expected to grow by 89%, 40%, and 23% year-on-year in 2021, respectively, while profits in the technology sector are expected to grow by only 18%, indicating that the current value style is dominant.<b>This round of value style has lasted for 6 months and may be in the mid-to-late stage of the style advantage period (comparable average of 10 months), and the excess returns have also completed more than half of the historical average.</b></p><p>From a macroeconomic perspective,<b>The CPI may fall after peaking in May, and inflation expectations are already at a historical high (99.5% percentile).</b>。 The slower-than-expected recovery of U.S. shale oil production capacity has given OPEC room to continue cutting production and maintaining high oil prices. Oil prices may fluctuate wildly at high levels in the first half of the year, but inflation expectations may fall along with oil prices in the second half of the year. Based on previous historical experience, inflation expectations are about six months ahead of real interest rates. Therefore, even after inflation expectations decline in the second half of the year, real interest rates still have room to rise. After stripping away the long-term trend, the current real interest rate (around -0.66%) is still at a historically low level (17.4th percentile). The rebound in real interest rates is expected to peak at around 0.2%-0.3%, corresponding to the 70%-80% historical percentile, which is roughly equivalent to the average level in 2019.</p><p><b>Based on our assessment of inflation and real interest rates, the phase of rapid rise in interest rates and inflation may end in May of this year. Therefore, the short-term style advantage of value stocks may continue for another quarter, and whether the trend can be reversed in the long run will be determined by a series of institutional reforms that reverse income distribution and the wealth gap.</b></p><p>Looking at specific industries, rising commodity prices, manufacturing inventory replenishment, and rising interest rates were driven by...<b>Finance, energy, industry, and raw materials sectors led the gains during the recovery period.</b>Healthcare, information technology, public utilities, and telecommunications services do not have obvious inventory cycles, while the performance of core consumer goods is relatively stable and relatively less elastic. Non-core consumer goods are overly influenced by amazon.<b>Currently, energy stocks have risen above the historical average, and the gains in financial stocks have also been fully realized.</b>。</p><p>In the short term, we believe<b>Value stocks, as a recovery trade, are still expected to outperform growth stocks in the coming quarter, but it is recommended to lower expectations for the absolute returns of value stocks. In the long run, it remains to be seen whether the style divide between value and growth can be reversed. If the US government promotes a series of institutional reforms to narrow the wealth gap through tax increases, we should be prepared for the possibility of a style reversal.</b></p><p><table><tbody><tr><td>Table 2: Performance of various industries during the recovery phase</p><p></td></tr><tr><td><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6228f37247756967ffbc3aa57083aa9d\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"249\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p></td></tr><tr><td>Source: Bloomberg, TF Securities Research Institute</p><p></td></tr></tbody></table></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzI0MzMzNzczNQ==&mid=2247495039&idx=1&sn=c64cff2fab379436f872324dadae5a4b&chksm=e96c3217de1bbb01c4cdf1ef8dcdeda0fd65adfedf8aff752e2d35d9bb926099814cf31cf9bb&mpshare=1&scene=23&srcid=03271858VKgyWAwMRniMvBl0&sharer_sharetime=1616837119379&sharer_shareid=fbf3e6a28882bb91c07a361d6d431142#rd\">雪涛宏观笔记</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1fc1f5e2fa377c378fa230c10e0849a2","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzI0MzMzNzczNQ==&mid=2247495039&idx=1&sn=c64cff2fab379436f872324dadae5a4b&chksm=e96c3217de1bbb01c4cdf1ef8dcdeda0fd65adfedf8aff752e2d35d9bb926099814cf31cf9bb&mpshare=1&scene=23&srcid=03271858VKgyWAwMRniMvBl0&sharer_sharetime=1616837119379&sharer_shareid=fbf3e6a28882bb91c07a361d6d431142#rd","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1192792909","content_text":"美股价值股与成长股长期相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值。与科网泡沫时期显著不同的是当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵）。短期来看，本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，可能处于风格优势期的中后期（可比平均10个月），价值股作为复苏交易在未来一个季度仍有望跑赢成长股，但建议放低对价值股绝对收益的预期。长期来看，价值/成长的风格分化能否趋势性逆转仍然未知，如果美国政府通过加税推动一系列缩小贫富差距的制度改革，要做好风格趋势性逆转的心理准备。引言：去年8月，美股价值股跑输成长股的幅度首次超过科网泡沫时期水平，当时市场开始出现转向周期价值股的观点，同一时间长端美债利率开始剧烈反弹，带动价值/成长比值从历史低位回升。今年2月以来，代表成长风格的纳斯达克指数连续回撤，代表价值风格的道琼斯指数屡创新高。当风格切换已成为事实后，关于美股价值风格是否迎来长期拐点的讨论愈演愈烈。风格切换是长期反转还是短期收敛，还有多少演绎空间？——我们以Russel 1000的价值和成长指数为例，探讨该问题的答案。核心结论：第一、价值股与成长股相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值！当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵！），这与科网泡沫时期是显著不同的。第二、1981年后，长期债券利率下行的内核是经济增长内生动能不足带来的低经济增速、低通胀现象。目前来看，导致经济增长内生动能不足、长期通缩环境的技术因素和制度因素仍未得到改善。第三、如果美国国债市场无法形成长期熊市，价值优于成长风格的讨论可能仅仅局限于短周期。名义利率、实际利率、CPI、通胀预期触顶回落大致是拐点同步或领先指标，市场的风格拐点也早于相对盈利拐点。第四、短周期看，本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，处于风格优势期的中后期（可比平均10个月），超额收益也完成了历史均值的一大半。利率和通胀快速上行的阶段可能在今年5月结束。因此价值股作为复苏交易在未来一个季度仍有望跑赢成长股，但建议放低对价值股绝对收益的预期。第五、一旦美国政府开始左转，改革里根政府以来以自由资本主义为基础的分配制度，长期利率转为趋势上行的条件可能出现。收入分配的均衡化可能扭转过去四十年贫富差距拉大带来的长期通缩局面，并推动长期利率中枢趋势性回升。第六、长期价值/成长的风格分化能否趋势性逆转仍然未知，如果美国政府通过加税推动一系列缩小贫富差距的制度改革，要做好可能发生风格趋势性逆转的心理准备。图1：10年期国债收益率与Russel 1000 价值与风格指数相对收益资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所一、价值/成长风格的相对收益由什么决定？支持风格长期反转的核心观点是美债长端收益率下行趋势的扭转。我们从长端收益率对价值股和成长股每股盈利和估值影响的角度予以分析。（1）长端美债收益率方向与价值成长EPS之差同向对于价值型公司和成长型公司来说，与经营杠杆相关的财务报表指标，如资产、工厂和设备的周转率和净债务，有显著的不同。在一个广泛的通货再膨胀环境中，拥有相对较高固定资产水平的价值型公司将比成长型公司在周转率方面有更明显的改善。价值型公司的净债务水平也高于成长型公司。在通货再膨胀的情况下，相对成长型企业，价值型企业还本付息的负担会相对较小。因此，利率的下行可能暗示了价值型公司EPS相对收益的下滑。从近30年的历史来看，价值股与成长股EPS之差与利率短周期波动较为吻合。但每轮周期的高点依次下移，符合利率长期下行的方向。其中短端货币政策利率在2008年前与盈利差波动规律一致，但在金融危机后逐渐背离，反映货币政策利率对经济盈利周期响应变慢。长端十年期美债利率与盈利差在2003-2006年有显著背离，价值股与成长股EPS之差在07年创下新高，但十年期美债利率却比上一轮周期高点更低。背离的核心也是格林斯潘长期利率之谜，短期利率上升，长期无风险利率却下降。格林斯潘对此的解释包括：1. 美国经济复苏叠加全球化程度加深，导致贸易伙伴累积了越来越庞大的美元顺差。而在全球范围内，唯一有能力承接这部分由顺差累积而来的外汇储备的地方，就是美国国债市场。2. 随着退休人口不可避免的增加（尤其是在发达国家），退休计划的资金供给不足日益引起关注。养老基金和保险公司都不得不在自己的投资组合中加大对长期债券的份额。图2：2008年之前，货币政策周期与价值与成长盈利差走势接近资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图3：10Y美债利率与价值成长盈利差的波动较为吻合资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所（2）长端收益率下行并不会导致成长股比价值股更贵一种广泛的观点认为无风险利率的下行会给成长股带来更多的估值溢价，但这个认知是错误的！尽管从短周期的角度看国债收益率的波动的确领先价值股与成长股的风险溢价差，但拉长周期看，价值股相比成长股的风险溢价并没有因为无风险利率的下行而扩大。图4：10年期国债利率与价值同成长股风险溢价差资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所因此，我们总结，价值股与成长股相对收益的核心来源是盈利，而不是估值！当前成长股相比价值股并不存在明显的估值泡沫（可能都贵！），这与科网泡沫时期是显著不同的。无风险利率下行与风格相对盈利（价值股-成长股）的下行均反映了美国经济产业结构的变化。资本和技术的运用减少了人力成本，提高了企业效率和盈利，因此以科技为代表的成长股在股市中的权重与对经济和就业的贡献并不匹配（见图6）。未来是否出现风格逆转的关键问题是美国产业结构是否会发生变化，导致价值股盈利、通胀和利率持续上行。图5：除了科网时期（2000）的背离，价值与成长的盈利差主导了价值与成长指数的相对收益资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图6：以科技为代表的成长股在股市中的权重与对经济和就业的贡献并不匹配资料来源：BEA, BLS, Standard & Poor's，天风证券研究所二、如果出现加税（以及一系列代表美国社会左转的制度改革），四十年利率下行的趋势可能终结，风格有趋势性逆转的可能回顾二战后的利率史，导致利率长达40年下行的因素并未改变。名义利率的走势主要取决于实际经济增长和通胀。二战后，10年期美债收益率与美国GDP增速和核心CPI的走势有较高的一致性，峰值出现在1970年代。图7：10年期国债收益率与美国实际GDP增速与核心CPI资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所利率上升周期的第一阶段（1946年-1970年）建立在供给侧与需求侧正反馈产生的真实繁荣基础上。二战期间，美国政府顺应时势推动了供给侧改革，升级了美国制造业及配套产业的供给水平，以战时经济的速率加速培养了大批量的技术人才，在新技术的应用方面再现了19世纪后期的野蛮式突进。罗斯福新政力推劳资关系立法，贫富分化收窄，让美国工人获得了8小时工作制及其他福利，但相对劳动成本的提升，居民受教育程度、女性劳动参与率的提高将劳动生产率推升至新的高度。需求端，战争重创全球产业，百废待兴，工业基础亟待重建。本阶段经济高速增长，通胀较低，失业率持续下降，贫富分化收窄。利率上升对应的是实际经济增长的加速。利率上升的第二阶段（1970年-1981年）建立在石油危机带来的供给冲击上。两次石油危机期间，原油价格从1973年的每桶不到3美元涨到了1980年的45美元，战后经济复苏高度依赖石油化工产业提供的能源支持，原油价格上涨，布雷顿森林体系破裂后美元贬值，带来输入性通胀，十年期国债收益率升至美国建国以来的最高水平。本阶段，经济频繁衰退，物价水平持续位于高位，失业率上升，利率上升主要对应的是供给收缩带来的高通货膨胀。1981年后，长期债券利率下行的内核是经济增长内生动能不足带来的低经济增速、低通胀现象。供给端，70年代以来的全球创新和经济进步聚焦在人类活动的一个狭窄领域，更多是同娱乐、通信、信息收集和处理有关，而这部分social well-being的提高并没有计入GDP，“对于人类所关心的其他事务，包括食品、服装、住房、交通、健康、家庭内外的工作环境等，无论是从定量还是定性的角度看，在1970年之后进步速度都已经放缓。”（《美国经济增长的起落》罗伯特戈登）需求端，收入分配机制恶化导致了长期的有效需求不足。1973年松绑的工资控制政策是此后贫富分化加剧的一个重要原因。西方国家人口老龄化普遍出现在1980年初期，结合其高福利制度，劳动力供给和储蓄双双下降，资本投资不足；此外，为应对全球竞争发达国家企业将产业迁往新兴市场以降低成本，居民工资增长停滞。目前来看，以上导致经济增长内生动能不足的因素仍未得到改善。发达国家人口老龄化、生育率下降仍在加剧；全球创新主要聚焦于商业模式，硬件投入尚未形成提高社会生产效率的质变；技术进步和全球化提高了效率，但有损公平，政府必须要付出更多努力关注弱势群体。人类社会并不是线性演进的，而是像量子跃迁一样跳跃式发展，长期处在一个缓慢稳定发展的能级，突然遇到一些重大变化，秩序、制度、技术开始发生深刻变化，历史的进程开始加速，直到进入下一个长期缓慢稳定发展的新能级。新冠疫情可能就是这样一个重大变化，当人类遇到困境时，合作和改革才更有可能出现，进入到上面所说的跃迁式发展。新冠疫情之后，一些改变长期经济增长内生动力不足的因素开始若隐若现。民主党有意愿改革财富分配制度，包括提高富人和大企业的所得税率，提高最低工资，传统基建拉动就业，增加对中低收入者的转移支付等。但美国两党、社会的政治观点极化让这项改革变得困难重重（共和党反对将最低工资提升至每小时15美元，即是政治极化的一个缩影）。两党的共识可能是对大型科技企业的反垄断执法，国会考虑迫使科技巨头将它们占据主导地位的在线平台与其他业务部门分开，由民主党人领导的众议院司法委员会反垄断小组委员会准备提出全面改革，这可能在长期会鼓励创新（如同1970年代IBM被分拆），提高社会劳动生产率，改善财富分配机制。一旦美国政府开始左转，改革里根政府以来以自由资本主义为基础的分配制度，长期利率转为趋势上行的条件可能出现。收入分配的均衡化可能扭转过去四十年贫富差距拉大带来的长期通缩局面，并推动长期利率中枢趋势性回升。除此之外，供给侧也存在推动利率长期回升的潜在因素。全球“碳中和”趋势下，资本市场亦在驱动能源行业“绿色化”，这可能导致传统能源投资不足。例如转型比较激进的壳牌公司（Shell）计划到2050年达到碳中和目标。为此，其在上游板块的资本开支比例从35％左右缩减到2025年之后25-30％，而可再生能源资本开支比例提升。相应的，新增资本开支的IRR对上游板块和可再生能源的回报率要求也差别对待，上游板块的资本开支回报率要达到20-25％，而对可再生能源投资回报率要求仅不低于10％。不仅是能源，过去10年大宗商品价格低迷，原材料生产商不同程度地削减了资本开支，新冠疫情也加速了部分产能出清。三、如果不考虑利率的趋势性逆转，这一轮成长价值的风格切换能持续多久？如果美国国债市场无法形成长期熊市，价值优于成长风格的讨论可能仅仅局限于短周期。我们选取了通胀预期、实际利率、PMI、CPI、库存同比5个指标考察2000年以来价值股跑赢成长股的宏观状态。2000.7-2001.3和2008.6-2008.12均是经济下行阶段，PMI、库存同比、CPI均下行，防御策略下价值股收获超额收益。剩余4个阶段均表现为经济复苏，各项经济指标大多处于回升状态。通胀预期和CPI回升在高位震荡；除2001.11-2002.7外，实际利率底部开始攀升，PMI震荡上行；除2012.5-2013.7外，库存周期处于补库阶段。除去本次（2020.9-2021.2）和价值股长牛期（2003.12-2006.06），价值股的超额收益平均为15.54%，平均持续时长为10个月。与本次最为类似的是2016.3-2016.12，此阶段为上一轮小周期复苏期，价值股的超额收益为8.22%，持续了10个月。表1：历次价值股相对成长股超额收益时期资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图8：1990-至今通胀预期(%)、CPI同比增速(%)、库存同比增速(%)资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所图9：1990-至今实际利率和PMI资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所从之前四次风格反转（即RUSSEL 1000 value/growth指数由下行转为上行）时点来看，名义利率、实际利率、CPI、通胀预期触顶回落大致是拐点同步或领先指标。但08年后，价值股只能吃到利率或通胀上行的“鱼身”，也即利率或通胀从底部上行的早期阶段，吃不到冲顶阶段的“鱼尾”，这可能是因为市场认为价值股超额盈利持续时间难以像2003-2006年那么长，市场的风格拐点也早于相对盈利拐点。FactSet的数据显示，预计2021年工业、材料和金融行业的利润将分别同比增长89％、40％和23％，而科技行业的利润仅增长18％，显示当前价值风格占优。本轮价值风格已持续了6个月，可能处于风格优势期的中后期（可比平均10个月），超额收益也完成了历史均值的一大半。宏观指标来看，CPI可能在5月冲顶后回落，通胀预期也已经处在历史高位（99.5%分位）。美国页岩油产能恢复不及预期给了OPEC继续减产维持高油价的空间，上半年油价可能在高位剧烈震荡，但下半年通胀预期可能随油价回落。从之前几轮历史经验来看，通胀预期领先实际利率半年左右，因此下半年通胀预期回落后，实际利率仍有上行空间。剥离长期趋势后，当前实际利率（-0.66%左右）仍然处在历史较低水平（17.4%分位）。预计实际利率的反弹高点大约在0.2%-0.3%左右，对应70%-80%历史分位，约等于2019年的平均水平。根据我们对通胀和实际利率的判断，利率和通胀快速上行的阶段可能在今年5月结束。因此，价值股的短期风格优势可能仍能持续一个季度，长期是否能趋势性逆转将由一系列逆转收入分配和贫富差距的制度改革所决定。具体行业来看，大宗商品涨价、制造业补库和利率上行推动金融、能源、工业和原材料等行业在复苏期涨幅领先。医疗保健，信息技术、公共事业、电信服务没有明显的库存周期，核心消费品业绩较为稳定，相对弹性较小。非核心消费品受amazon影响过大。目前能源股涨幅已超过历史均值水平，金融股的涨幅也已充分兑现。短期来看，我们认为价值股作为复苏交易在未来一个季度仍有望跑赢成长股，但建议放低对价值股绝对收益的预期；长期来看，价值/成长的风格分化能否趋势性逆转仍然未知，如果美国政府通过加税推动一系列缩小贫富差距的制度改革，要做好可能发生风格趋势性逆转的心理准备。表2：各行业在复苏阶段表现资料来源：Bloomberg，天风证券研究所","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":6682,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":196856248,"gmtCreate":1621044005684,"gmtModify":1704352343716,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"O","listText":"O","text":"O","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/196856248","repostId":"2135983330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5564,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":327904505,"gmtCreate":1616045509607,"gmtModify":1704790168379,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"2233","listText":"2233","text":"2233","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327904505","repostId":"1146319399","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1146319399","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616029606,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1146319399?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-18 09:06","market":"sh","language":"zh","title":"Bilibili's Hong Kong IPO begins today, with an entry fee of approximately HK$19,959 per lot.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1146319399","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"3月18日消息，$哔哩哔哩 $于2021年3月18日至3月23日招股，公开发售价将不超过每股香港发售股份988.00港元，每手20股，股票代码为“ 9626”。预计将在2021年3月29日（星期一）挂牌上市。每手20股，入场费19959.12港元。乙组门槛为6000股，申购所需资金约5987763.46港元。截至2021年3月17日美股收盘，哔哩哔哩的总市值已达到392亿美元。根据招股书，哔哩哔哩尚未实现盈利，2018年至2020年产生净亏损人民币5.65亿元、13.04亿元及30.54亿元。","content":"<p>March 18th news,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI\">Bilibili</a>（<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">$(09626)$</a>.HK) will conduct its IPO from March 18 to March 23, 2021. The public offering price will not exceed HK$988.00 per Hong Kong offer share, with 20 shares per lot, and the stock code \"9626\". It is expected to be listed on Monday, March 29, 2021.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da523cc810f669b6583bebf395b1d418\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"442\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><b>Subscription ladder:</b></p><p>Each lot contains 20 shares, with an entry fee of HK$19,959.12.</p><p>The threshold for Group B is 6,000 shares, and the funds required for subscription are approximately HK$5,987,763.46.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/244f0536c2e47327abe28219456ab2c7\" tg-width=\"653\" tg-height=\"372\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It is understood that Bilibili originated as an ACG content-based community website founded in 2009. It has now developed into an iconic brand for China's younger generation and a leading video community, providing a wealth of rich content to meet the diverse interests of young people. The platform centers on professional user-generated videos (PUGVs), supplemented by live streaming and professional organization-generated videos (OGVs), with content categories covering many fields such as lifestyle, games, entertainment, animation, technology and knowledge.</p><p>In March 2018, the company went public on NASDAQ in the United States under the ticker symbol \"BILI\". In the nearly three years since its listing,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI.US\">Bilibili</a>The stock price has risen by more than 800%. As of the US stock market close on March 17, 2021, Bilibili's total market capitalization had reached $39.2 billion.</p><p>Bilibili has a large and rapidly growing user base. In Q4 2020, the platform had 202 million monthly active users, a year-on-year increase of 55%. Meanwhile, Bilibili's mobile monthly active users grew by 49% between 2019 and 2020, ranking as the highest growth rate among China's top ten video mobile apps in 2020, higher than the average growth rate of the other nine video mobile apps during the same period (11.9%).</p><p>In terms of revenue structure, the company has achieved diversified monetization models, mainly generating revenue from mobile games, value-added services, advertising, e-commerce and other aspects. Benefiting from the rapid growth of its various business segments, Bilibili's revenue has grown rapidly in recent years. From 2018 to 2020, the company's net revenue was RMB 4.129 billion, RMB 6.778 billion and RMB 11.999 billion respectively, with a compound annual growth rate of 70.5%. The gross profit margin for the same periods was 20.7%, 17.6% and 23.7%, respectively.</p><p>According to its prospectus, Bilibili has not yet achieved profitability, incurring net losses of RMB 565 million, RMB 1.304 billion, and RMB 3.054 billion from 2018 to 2020, respectively.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8ffa01204ffbd3bc6a65cb3cca169162\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"646\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In terms of industry, China's pan-video platforms mainly commercialize through advertising, mobile games, live streaming, membership and paid content, and other channels. Since 2016, various commercialization channels in China's pan-video market have grown significantly and are expected to continue to expand at a relatively high rate in the future. Among them, Generation Z+, as the driving force and trend leader of various types of online consumption in China, is regarded as the golden group in the pan-video market.</p><p>Video content has become an important way for Generation Z+ to communicate and interact. In 2020, Generation Z+ reached 452 million people, 74.3% of whom watched various forms of video content, and this penetration rate is expected to further increase to 99.1% by 2025.</p><p>Generation Z+ has become the most important pillar of China's pan-video market, accounting for 64.8% of the market size in 2019. The per capita output value increased from RMB 516 in 2016 to RMB 1,280 in 2019, and then to RMB 3,042 in 2025.</p><p>It is worth noting that, according to the prospectus, Chairman and CEO Chen Rui holds 14.2% of the shares, making him the largest shareholder of the company;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent Holdings</a>Holding 12.4% of the shares, it is its second-largest shareholder; President Xu Yi holds 8% of the shares, making him the company's third-largest shareholder;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>Taobao China Holdings Limited is the fourth largest shareholder, holding 6.7% of the shares.</p><p>Regarding the use of funds, based on the upper limit of the offer price of HK$988, the IPO is expected to receive net proceeds of approximately HK$24.3 billion from the global offering (after deducting underwriting commissions and other estimated expenses related to the global offering). The company intends to use the net proceeds from the share offering for the following purposes: 50% for the company's content to support the company's healthy and high-quality user growth; 20% is used for research and development; 20% is used for sales and marketing; 10% for general corporate purposes and working capital needs.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bilibili's Hong Kong IPO begins today, with an entry fee of approximately HK$19,959 per lot.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBilibili's Hong Kong IPO begins today, with an entry fee of approximately HK$19,959 per lot.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-18 09:06</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>March 18th news,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI\">Bilibili</a>（<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">$(09626)$</a>.HK) will conduct its IPO from March 18 to March 23, 2021. The public offering price will not exceed HK$988.00 per Hong Kong offer share, with 20 shares per lot, and the stock code \"9626\". It is expected to be listed on Monday, March 29, 2021.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da523cc810f669b6583bebf395b1d418\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"442\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><b>Subscription ladder:</b></p><p>Each lot contains 20 shares, with an entry fee of HK$19,959.12.</p><p>The threshold for Group B is 6,000 shares, and the funds required for subscription are approximately HK$5,987,763.46.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/244f0536c2e47327abe28219456ab2c7\" tg-width=\"653\" tg-height=\"372\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It is understood that Bilibili originated as an ACG content-based community website founded in 2009. It has now developed into an iconic brand for China's younger generation and a leading video community, providing a wealth of rich content to meet the diverse interests of young people. The platform centers on professional user-generated videos (PUGVs), supplemented by live streaming and professional organization-generated videos (OGVs), with content categories covering many fields such as lifestyle, games, entertainment, animation, technology and knowledge.</p><p>In March 2018, the company went public on NASDAQ in the United States under the ticker symbol \"BILI\". In the nearly three years since its listing,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI.US\">Bilibili</a>The stock price has risen by more than 800%. As of the US stock market close on March 17, 2021, Bilibili's total market capitalization had reached $39.2 billion.</p><p>Bilibili has a large and rapidly growing user base. In Q4 2020, the platform had 202 million monthly active users, a year-on-year increase of 55%. Meanwhile, Bilibili's mobile monthly active users grew by 49% between 2019 and 2020, ranking as the highest growth rate among China's top ten video mobile apps in 2020, higher than the average growth rate of the other nine video mobile apps during the same period (11.9%).</p><p>In terms of revenue structure, the company has achieved diversified monetization models, mainly generating revenue from mobile games, value-added services, advertising, e-commerce and other aspects. Benefiting from the rapid growth of its various business segments, Bilibili's revenue has grown rapidly in recent years. From 2018 to 2020, the company's net revenue was RMB 4.129 billion, RMB 6.778 billion and RMB 11.999 billion respectively, with a compound annual growth rate of 70.5%. The gross profit margin for the same periods was 20.7%, 17.6% and 23.7%, respectively.</p><p>According to its prospectus, Bilibili has not yet achieved profitability, incurring net losses of RMB 565 million, RMB 1.304 billion, and RMB 3.054 billion from 2018 to 2020, respectively.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8ffa01204ffbd3bc6a65cb3cca169162\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"646\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In terms of industry, China's pan-video platforms mainly commercialize through advertising, mobile games, live streaming, membership and paid content, and other channels. Since 2016, various commercialization channels in China's pan-video market have grown significantly and are expected to continue to expand at a relatively high rate in the future. Among them, Generation Z+, as the driving force and trend leader of various types of online consumption in China, is regarded as the golden group in the pan-video market.</p><p>Video content has become an important way for Generation Z+ to communicate and interact. In 2020, Generation Z+ reached 452 million people, 74.3% of whom watched various forms of video content, and this penetration rate is expected to further increase to 99.1% by 2025.</p><p>Generation Z+ has become the most important pillar of China's pan-video market, accounting for 64.8% of the market size in 2019. The per capita output value increased from RMB 516 in 2016 to RMB 1,280 in 2019, and then to RMB 3,042 in 2025.</p><p>It is worth noting that, according to the prospectus, Chairman and CEO Chen Rui holds 14.2% of the shares, making him the largest shareholder of the company;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent Holdings</a>Holding 12.4% of the shares, it is its second-largest shareholder; President Xu Yi holds 8% of the shares, making him the company's third-largest shareholder;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>Taobao China Holdings Limited is the fourth largest shareholder, holding 6.7% of the shares.</p><p>Regarding the use of funds, based on the upper limit of the offer price of HK$988, the IPO is expected to receive net proceeds of approximately HK$24.3 billion from the global offering (after deducting underwriting commissions and other estimated expenses related to the global offering). The company intends to use the net proceeds from the share offering for the following purposes: 50% for the company's content to support the company's healthy and high-quality user growth; 20% is used for research and development; 20% is used for sales and marketing; 10% for general corporate purposes and working capital needs.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7c7f2e3ab9856d4cdcb423e2c4f7a729","relate_stocks":{"BILI":"哔哩哔哩","09626":"哔哩哔哩-W"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1146319399","content_text":"3月18日消息，哔哩哔哩（$(09626)$.HK）于2021年3月18日至3月23日招股，公开发售价将不超过每股香港发售股份988.00港元，每手20股，股票代码为“ 9626”。预计将在2021年3月29日（星期一）挂牌上市。申购阶梯：每手20股，入场费19959.12港元。乙组门槛为6000股，申购所需资金约5987763.46港元。据悉，哔哩哔哩起源于2009年创立的ACG内容型社区网站，目前已发展成为中国年轻一代的标志性品牌及领先的视频社区，提供大量丰富的内容以满足年轻人多元的兴趣。平台以专业用户生成视频（PUGV）为中心，辅以直播、专业机构生成视频（OGV）等，内容品类覆盖生活、游戏、娱乐、动漫、科技和知识等众多领域。2018年3月，公司在美国纳斯达克上市，代码“BILI”，上市近三年以来，哔哩哔哩的股价已经上涨超800%。截至2021年3月17日美股收盘，哔哩哔哩的总市值已达到392亿美元。哔哩哔哩拥有庞大且快速增长的用户基础。20Q4，平台月活用户达到2.02亿人，同比增长55%。同时，哔哩哔哩移动端月活用户于2019年至2020年间增长49%，为2020年中国前十大视频移动端应用中移动端月活用户增长幅度最高，高于其余九大视频移动端应用在同期的平均增长率(11.9%)。营收结构方面，公司实现了多元的变现模式，主要从移动游戏、增值服务、广告、电商及其他方面带来收入。受益于各业务板块高速增长，哔哩哔哩近年来营收增长迅猛，2018年至2020年，公司净营业额分别为人民币41.29亿元、67.78亿元及119.99亿元，复合年增长率为70.5%；同期毛利率分别为20.7%、17.6%及23.7%。根据招股书，哔哩哔哩尚未实现盈利，2018年至2020年产生净亏损人民币5.65亿元、13.04亿元及30.54亿元。行业方面，中国的泛视频平台主要通过广告、移动游戏、直播、会员和付费内容及其他渠道进行商业化。自2016年以来，中国泛视频市场的各种商业化渠道显著增长，预期未来将以相对较高的速度继续扩张。其中，Z+世代作为中国各类线上消费的驱动力和趋势引领者，被视为泛视频市场的黄金群体。视频内容已经成为Z+世代交流和互动的重要途径。2020年Z+世代达到4.52亿人，其中74.3%观看各种形式的视频内容，预期到2025年此渗透率将进一步提升到99.1%。Z+世代已成为中国泛视频市场最重要的支柱，2019年占泛视频市场市场规模的64.8%，人均产值从2016年的人民币516元增加至2019年的人民币1280元，再到2025年的人民币3042元。值得关注的是，根据招股书显示，董事会主席兼CEO陈睿持股14.2%，为公司最大股东；腾讯控股持股12.4%为其第二大股东；总裁徐逸持股8%，为公司第三大股东；阿里巴巴淘宝中国控股有限公司为第四大股东，持股6.7%。筹资用途方面，以发售价的上限988港元计算，此次IPO预计自全球发售收取所得款项净额约243亿港元（经扣除包销佣金及与全球发售有关的其他估计开支）。公司拟将股份发售所得款项净额用于以下用途：50%用于公司的内容以支持公司的健康和高质量的用户增长；20%用于研发；20%用于销售及营销；10%用于一般公司用途及运营资本需要。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"09626":0.9,"BILI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5109,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":115403717,"gmtCreate":1623025463439,"gmtModify":1704194427157,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hao","listText":"Hao","text":"Hao","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/115403717","repostId":"1151287045","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5078,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":341531767,"gmtCreate":1617839269459,"gmtModify":1704703710096,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"？","listText":"？","text":"？","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/341531767","repostId":"2125072521","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4786,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353965204,"gmtCreate":1616456446908,"gmtModify":1704794250984,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/353965204","repostId":"2121510889","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2121510889","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616456389,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2121510889?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 07:39","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Tencent Music's Q4 and full-year financial reports were strong, and its stock price once hit a new high in after-hours trading.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2121510889","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"盘前，市场对腾讯音乐娱乐集团即将发布的财报普遍感到乐观，助推了腾讯音乐股价的强劲表现，其盘中股价一度上冲至31.12美元，创下上市以来的新高，并报收于30.89美元。在腾讯音乐公布财报后，其盘后股价一度涨超2.14%，并创下31.55美元的历史新高。其中环比净增长为430万，付费率达9%，高于第三季度的8%和2019年同期的6.2%。","content":"<p>March 23 - After the US stock market closed on Monday, March 22,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TME\">Tencent Music</a>(TME.US) released its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2020.</p><p>Following the release of its financial report, its stock price rose by more than 2.14% in after-hours trading, reaching a record high of $31.55.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/205ce59be0c5db585c7e736c69dd28fb\" tg-width=\"615\" tg-height=\"510\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The financial report shows that the company's revenue in the fourth quarter was RMB 8.34 billion (US$1.28 billion), a year-on-year increase of 14.3%, compared with market expectations of RMB 8.334 billion and RMB 7.293 billion in the same period last year. Among them, online music service revenue increased by 29.0% year-on-year, higher than the 25.9% in the third quarter of 2020. Revenue from music subscription services was RMB 1.58 billion (US$242 million), representing a year-on-year increase of 41.9%. Advertising services recorded a year-on-year growth of over 100% in the fourth quarter of 2020.</p><p>Net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the fourth quarter was RMB 1.2 billion (US$183 million), with earnings per ADS of RMB 0.71, compared to market expectations of RMB 0.68 and RMB 0.62 in the same period last year.</p><p>In the fourth quarter, the number of paying online music users reached 56 million, a year-on-year increase of 40.4%, and a net quarter-on-quarter increase of 4.3 million. The payment rate broke a historic 9%, higher than 8% in the third quarter and 6.2% in the same period of 2019.</p><p>It is worth noting that in the fourth quarter of 2020, the number of the company's long audio albums increased by 370% year-on-year, greatly enriching the long audio content pool; The penetration rate of long-form audio MAUs increased from 5.5% in the same period last year to 14.8%, and the average daily usage time of long-form audio users continued to grow.</p><p>Revenue for the full year of 2020 increased by 14.6% year-on-year to RMB 29.15 billion (US$4.47 billion), and net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the full year of 2020 increased by 4.3% year-on-year to RMB 4.16 billion (US$637 million).</p><p>Mr. Peng Jiaxin, CEO of Tencent Music, said: “By investing in multiple music formats, we have further strengthened our content leadership and increased user engagement, which is reflected in the continuous growth of total user time on our platform. Our initial investment in long audio has begun to pay off, and in the fourth quarter of 2020, the penetration rate of long audio in our user base reached 15%, up from 6% in the same period last year.”</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Tencent Music's Q4 and full-year financial reports were strong, and its stock price once hit a new high in after-hours trading.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTencent Music's Q4 and full-year financial reports were strong, and its stock price once hit a new high in after-hours trading.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-23 07:39</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>March 23 - After the US stock market closed on Monday, March 22,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TME\">Tencent Music</a>(TME.US) released its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2020.</p><p>Following the release of its financial report, its stock price rose by more than 2.14% in after-hours trading, reaching a record high of $31.55.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/205ce59be0c5db585c7e736c69dd28fb\" tg-width=\"615\" tg-height=\"510\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The financial report shows that the company's revenue in the fourth quarter was RMB 8.34 billion (US$1.28 billion), a year-on-year increase of 14.3%, compared with market expectations of RMB 8.334 billion and RMB 7.293 billion in the same period last year. Among them, online music service revenue increased by 29.0% year-on-year, higher than the 25.9% in the third quarter of 2020. Revenue from music subscription services was RMB 1.58 billion (US$242 million), representing a year-on-year increase of 41.9%. Advertising services recorded a year-on-year growth of over 100% in the fourth quarter of 2020.</p><p>Net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the fourth quarter was RMB 1.2 billion (US$183 million), with earnings per ADS of RMB 0.71, compared to market expectations of RMB 0.68 and RMB 0.62 in the same period last year.</p><p>In the fourth quarter, the number of paying online music users reached 56 million, a year-on-year increase of 40.4%, and a net quarter-on-quarter increase of 4.3 million. The payment rate broke a historic 9%, higher than 8% in the third quarter and 6.2% in the same period of 2019.</p><p>It is worth noting that in the fourth quarter of 2020, the number of the company's long audio albums increased by 370% year-on-year, greatly enriching the long audio content pool; The penetration rate of long-form audio MAUs increased from 5.5% in the same period last year to 14.8%, and the average daily usage time of long-form audio users continued to grow.</p><p>Revenue for the full year of 2020 increased by 14.6% year-on-year to RMB 29.15 billion (US$4.47 billion), and net profit attributable to shareholders of the company for the full year of 2020 increased by 4.3% year-on-year to RMB 4.16 billion (US$637 million).</p><p>Mr. Peng Jiaxin, CEO of Tencent Music, said: “By investing in multiple music formats, we have further strengthened our content leadership and increased user engagement, which is reflected in the continuous growth of total user time on our platform. Our initial investment in long audio has begun to pay off, and in the fourth quarter of 2020, the penetration rate of long audio in our user base reached 15%, up from 6% in the same period last year.”</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/06c120bbb961941a6910f63352c38f2b","relate_stocks":{"TME":"腾讯音乐"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2121510889","content_text":"3月23日讯，3月22日(周一)美股收盘后，腾讯音乐(TME.US)公布了2020年四季度及全年财报。公布财报后，其盘后股价一度涨超2.14%，并创下31.55美元的历史新高。财报显示，公司四季度营收为人民币83.4亿元(12.8亿美元)，同比增长14.3%，市场预期83.34亿元，去年同期72.93亿元。其中，在线音乐服务收入同比增长29.0%，高于2020年第三季度的25.9%。音乐订阅服务收入为人民币15.8亿元(2.42亿美元)，同比增长41.9%。广告服务在2020年第四季度录得超过100%的同比增长。四季度归属于公司股东的净利润为人民币12亿元(1.83亿美元)，每ADS盈利0.71元，市场预期0.68元，去年同期0.62元。四季度在线音乐付费用户达到5600万，同比增长40.4%，环比净增长为430万，付费率历史性破9%，高于第三季度的8%和2019年同期的6.2%。值得注意的是，2020年第四季度，公司长音频专辑数量同比增长370%，极大丰富了长音频内容池；长音频MAU渗透率从去年同期的5.5%增长至14.8%，长音频用户日均使用时长持续增长。2020年全年收入同比增长14.6%至人民币291.5亿元(44.7亿美元)，2020年全年归属于公司股东的净利润同比增长4.3%至人民币41.6亿元(6.37亿美元)。腾讯音乐首席执行官彭迦信先生表示：“通过投资多种格式的音乐类型，我们进一步加强了内容的领先性，提高了用户的参与度，这体现在用户在我们平台上的总使用时间的连续增长。我们最初在长音频方面的投资开始得到回报，2020年第四季度长音频在我们用户群中的渗透率达到15%，高于去年同期的6%。”","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TME":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4353,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":359514553,"gmtCreate":1616412647872,"gmtModify":1704793691276,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hao","listText":"Hao","text":"Hao","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/359514553","repostId":"1159315281","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1159315281","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616406415,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1159315281?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-22 17:46","market":"hk","language":"zh","title":"Bilibili's margin trading subscriptions reached HK$35.55 billion, an excess of 52.3 times.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1159315281","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"综合券商数据显示，哔哩哔哩的孖展认购金额达355.5亿港元，相当于公开招股部分超额认购52.3倍。","content":"<p>According to data from securities firms,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">Bilibili</a>The margin subscription amount reached HK$35.55 billion, equivalent to a 52.3 times oversubscription in the public offering.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bilibili's margin trading subscriptions reached HK$35.55 billion, an excess of 52.3 times.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBilibili's margin trading subscriptions reached HK$35.55 billion, an excess of 52.3 times.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-22 17:46</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>According to data from securities firms,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09626\">Bilibili</a>The margin subscription amount reached HK$35.55 billion, equivalent to a 52.3 times oversubscription in the public offering.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5864d278f2595d2e7918e2cb2d118419","relate_stocks":{"BILI":"哔哩哔哩","09626":"哔哩哔哩-W"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1159315281","content_text":"综合券商数据显示，哔哩哔哩的孖展认购金额达355.5亿港元，相当于公开招股部分超额认购52.3倍。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BILI":0.9,"09626":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4531,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":324040427,"gmtCreate":1615946300669,"gmtModify":1704788775364,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Down&nbsp;","listText":"Down&nbsp;","text":"Down","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bf42df917a2bc4c06b34b1a97f97a44","width":"1440","height":"4156"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324040427","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4291,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":324057851,"gmtCreate":1615946219673,"gmtModify":1704788775906,"author":{"id":"3576125208282503","authorId":"3576125208282503","name":"馒头卡喉咙啦","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e3661a8bd6543d698929e7f6942179db","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576125208282503","idStr":"3576125208282503"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Expect to fall","listText":"Expect to fall","text":"Expect to fall","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bdeaaf7f546e9569ce127096cb7292b","width":"1440","height":"4156"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324057851","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4822,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}