3600秒的守候 personal page - To The Moon

3600秒的守候

3600秒的守候

No personal profile

9Follow

3Followers

0Topic

0Badge

3600秒的守候

2021-06-18

ydydhdhshhd

3600秒的守候

2021-05-27

shshdhdhdhdhdjdjdjrjh

3600秒的守候

2021-04-25

maiijhhhh

Intel CEO: Chip shortage will continue for another two years after weak new quarter earnings results.

3600秒的守候

2021-04-23

ygvhhh

Sorry, the original content has been removed

3600秒的守候

2021-04-05

fffff

3600秒的守候

2021-03-31

pinglun

UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes

3600秒的守候

2021-03-20

will will Rockyoy

The profit and loss distribution chart has been revealed. How are those of you who are chasing Kun Kun and Song Song doing?

3600秒的守候

2021-03-19

power

Zhang Yidong's latest sharing: This is not the beginning of a bear market; the main decline has ended.

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3576741308708587","uuid":"3576741308708587","gmtCreate":1613724978424,"gmtModify":1614781556527,"name":"3600秒的守候","pinyin":"3600mdsh3600miaodeshouhou","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":3,"headSize":9,"tweetSize":49,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":3,"name":"书生虎","nameTw":"書生虎","represent":"努力向上","factor":"发布10条非转发主帖,其中5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":3,"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":"2026.08.13","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":"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":"2026.03.25","exceedPercentage":"80.61%","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":"2021.12.28","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":4,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":2,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":168252298,"gmtCreate":1623977122214,"gmtModify":1703825151624,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"ydydhdhshhd","listText":"ydydhdhshhd","text":"ydydhdhshhd","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":10,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/168252298","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5495,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":132674308,"gmtCreate":1622088656504,"gmtModify":1704179246068,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"shshdhdhdhdhdjdjdjrjh","listText":"shshdhdhdhdhdjdjdjrjh","text":"shshdhdhdhdhdjdjdjrjh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/132674308","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5330,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":375838197,"gmtCreate":1619321532319,"gmtModify":1704722426169,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"maiijhhhh","listText":"maiijhhhh","text":"maiijhhhh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/375838197","repostId":"1168120359","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1168120359","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1619317866,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1168120359?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-25 10:31","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Intel CEO: Chip shortage will continue for another two years after weak new quarter earnings results.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1168120359","media":"腾讯科技","summary":"4月24日消息，美国半导体巨头英特尔刚刚公布了疲软的季度财报，其新任首席执行官帕特·盖尔辛格（Pat Gelsinger）表示，全球芯片供应短缺可能还会持续两年时间。\n盖尔辛格在接受采访时说，几个月来","content":"<p>On April 24, it was reported that US semiconductor giant Intel had just released weak quarterly earnings reports, and its new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, said that the global chip supply shortage may continue for another two years.</p><p>In an interview, Gelsinger said that the chip supply shortage that has affected multiple sectors of the global economy for several months will continue until more capacity comes online to meet chip demand for products ranging from automobiles to electronics. He added, \"It will take some time for people to increase production capacity. When you're building a new factory, things don't change much in the short term.\"</p><p>A global shortage of semiconductor chips has disrupted production across various industries, leading to the temporary closure of automobile factories and reduced supplies of goods such as computers and many home appliances. Chip companies have always been scrambling to help overcome the chip shortage challenge.</p><p>The White House met with executives from the chip and other industries this month to help determine what actions should be taken to address the shortage and strengthen the domestic chip manufacturing industry. President Biden had previously pledged to address the chip shortage and provided $50 billion in funding to the semiconductor industry as part of his massive infrastructure spending plan.</p><p>Gelsinger acknowledged, \"The investment required will be quite substantial.\" The CEO, who took office in February, also pledged to quickly provide some production capacity to help alleviate the chip shortage. Gelsinger is rapidly advancing efforts to revitalize the company, and he expects Intel's sales to reach $77 billion this year, $500 million higher than previously anticipated.</p><p>Intel's earnings report released on Thursday showed that first-quarter sales fell 1% to $19.7 billion, but still exceeded Wall Street expectations. Net income was $3.4 billion, dragged down by legal settlement costs. Excluding its upcoming memory business and other projects, Intel said revenue was $18.6 billion and net income was $5.7 billion.</p><p>This month, Gelsinger outlined an ambitious strategy to make Intel a foundry chipmaker in addition to manufacturing semiconductors to meet domestic demand. The plan includes investing $20 billion to build two new semiconductor factories in Arizona.</p><p>Despite generally strong chip demand, Intel's sales have declined. Bank of America semiconductor analyst Vivek Arya said ahead of Intel's earnings report that Intel's performance was dragged down by several factors, including the surge in demand for personal computers, which was mainly concentrated in low-end devices such as Chromebooks, and Apple abandoning Intel in favor of using internally designed chips in more of its devices.</p><p>Arya also said that after a strong year of data center spending, Intel's spending is expected to grow at a slower pace this year. He predicts that Intel's sales growth will lag behind the industry as a whole, with the industry growth rate reaching 15% this year.</p><p>Gelsinger is trying to rebuild the company, which has repeatedly suffered setbacks and lost to Asian competitors in making state-of-the-art chips. He said last month that the company's latest chip is making progress. Intel also plans to increase the outsourcing of some chip production to keep up with the pace of development.</p><p>The company is also dealing with increasingly fierce competition. Nvidia and AMD, which surpassed Intel last year to become the most valuable chip companies in the United States, have captured more market share. Nvidia also announced this month that it will begin selling CPUs for data centers, a market that Intel has long dominated. Intel also launched enhanced data center chips this month.</p><p>Gelsinger said that although Intel expects sales growth to be slower than its competitors, its goal is to regain lost ground. He said, \"We are working hard to gain more market share.\" But Wall Street analysts are concerned about how long it will take for the chipmaker to close the gap with its competitors.</p><p>Atlantic Securities analyst Ianjit Bhatti said, \"To succeed, we must overcome many major issues and invest early, which are unlikely to yield returns before 2025. In the near future (within 2-3 years), we believe Intel cannot cope with AMD's growing market share.\"</p><p>Samuel Indyk, a senior analyst at the financial news website uk.Investing.com, said: \"The shortage will require chipmakers to spend massively. As Intel tries to regain its title as the most valuable chipmaker in the United States, the costs may be unaffordable for Intel.\"</p><p>Intel's data center business reported sales of $5.6 billion, below analysts' expectations of $5.9 billion. The company stated that the profitability of the business is affected by R&D expenditures and costs associated with increasing the production of new chips.</p><p>Sales in the segment, including laptop chips, grew by more than 8% to $10.6 billion, as the boom in remote learning and working from home during the pandemic fueled a surge in demand in the sector. \"We don't see any signs of slowing demand for personal computers,\" Gelsinger said.</p><p>Intel's efforts to become a foundry chip manufacturer have not been smooth sailing. The company has tried to enter this market before, but with little success. Its main competitors, TSMC and Samsung Electronics, are preparing to implement tens of billions of dollars in spending plans to expand their scale. Last week, TSMC raised its capital expenditure plan for this year to $30 billion, while also raising its sales forecast. Samsung has designated an investment of $116 billion by 2030 to diversify its chip production.</p><p>Gelsinger has stated that Intel is planning to increase its investment in the chip sector, and the company may benefit from bipartisan support for its own chip companies in the United States. For example, Intel is bidding for a Department of Defense contract that helps fund domestic chip manufacturing to meet government security needs.</p>","source":"lsy1580517846866","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>Intel CEO: Chip shortage will continue for another two years after weak new quarter earnings results.</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\">\nIntel CEO: Chip shortage will continue for another two years after weak new quarter earnings results.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">腾讯科技</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-04-25 10:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>On April 24, it was reported that US semiconductor giant Intel had just released weak quarterly earnings reports, and its new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, said that the global chip supply shortage may continue for another two years.</p><p>In an interview, Gelsinger said that the chip supply shortage that has affected multiple sectors of the global economy for several months will continue until more capacity comes online to meet chip demand for products ranging from automobiles to electronics. He added, \"It will take some time for people to increase production capacity. When you're building a new factory, things don't change much in the short term.\"</p><p>A global shortage of semiconductor chips has disrupted production across various industries, leading to the temporary closure of automobile factories and reduced supplies of goods such as computers and many home appliances. Chip companies have always been scrambling to help overcome the chip shortage challenge.</p><p>The White House met with executives from the chip and other industries this month to help determine what actions should be taken to address the shortage and strengthen the domestic chip manufacturing industry. President Biden had previously pledged to address the chip shortage and provided $50 billion in funding to the semiconductor industry as part of his massive infrastructure spending plan.</p><p>Gelsinger acknowledged, \"The investment required will be quite substantial.\" The CEO, who took office in February, also pledged to quickly provide some production capacity to help alleviate the chip shortage. Gelsinger is rapidly advancing efforts to revitalize the company, and he expects Intel's sales to reach $77 billion this year, $500 million higher than previously anticipated.</p><p>Intel's earnings report released on Thursday showed that first-quarter sales fell 1% to $19.7 billion, but still exceeded Wall Street expectations. Net income was $3.4 billion, dragged down by legal settlement costs. Excluding its upcoming memory business and other projects, Intel said revenue was $18.6 billion and net income was $5.7 billion.</p><p>This month, Gelsinger outlined an ambitious strategy to make Intel a foundry chipmaker in addition to manufacturing semiconductors to meet domestic demand. The plan includes investing $20 billion to build two new semiconductor factories in Arizona.</p><p>Despite generally strong chip demand, Intel's sales have declined. Bank of America semiconductor analyst Vivek Arya said ahead of Intel's earnings report that Intel's performance was dragged down by several factors, including the surge in demand for personal computers, which was mainly concentrated in low-end devices such as Chromebooks, and Apple abandoning Intel in favor of using internally designed chips in more of its devices.</p><p>Arya also said that after a strong year of data center spending, Intel's spending is expected to grow at a slower pace this year. He predicts that Intel's sales growth will lag behind the industry as a whole, with the industry growth rate reaching 15% this year.</p><p>Gelsinger is trying to rebuild the company, which has repeatedly suffered setbacks and lost to Asian competitors in making state-of-the-art chips. He said last month that the company's latest chip is making progress. Intel also plans to increase the outsourcing of some chip production to keep up with the pace of development.</p><p>The company is also dealing with increasingly fierce competition. Nvidia and AMD, which surpassed Intel last year to become the most valuable chip companies in the United States, have captured more market share. Nvidia also announced this month that it will begin selling CPUs for data centers, a market that Intel has long dominated. Intel also launched enhanced data center chips this month.</p><p>Gelsinger said that although Intel expects sales growth to be slower than its competitors, its goal is to regain lost ground. He said, \"We are working hard to gain more market share.\" But Wall Street analysts are concerned about how long it will take for the chipmaker to close the gap with its competitors.</p><p>Atlantic Securities analyst Ianjit Bhatti said, \"To succeed, we must overcome many major issues and invest early, which are unlikely to yield returns before 2025. In the near future (within 2-3 years), we believe Intel cannot cope with AMD's growing market share.\"</p><p>Samuel Indyk, a senior analyst at the financial news website uk.Investing.com, said: \"The shortage will require chipmakers to spend massively. As Intel tries to regain its title as the most valuable chipmaker in the United States, the costs may be unaffordable for Intel.\"</p><p>Intel's data center business reported sales of $5.6 billion, below analysts' expectations of $5.9 billion. The company stated that the profitability of the business is affected by R&D expenditures and costs associated with increasing the production of new chips.</p><p>Sales in the segment, including laptop chips, grew by more than 8% to $10.6 billion, as the boom in remote learning and working from home during the pandemic fueled a surge in demand in the sector. \"We don't see any signs of slowing demand for personal computers,\" Gelsinger said.</p><p>Intel's efforts to become a foundry chip manufacturer have not been smooth sailing. The company has tried to enter this market before, but with little success. Its main competitors, TSMC and Samsung Electronics, are preparing to implement tens of billions of dollars in spending plans to expand their scale. Last week, TSMC raised its capital expenditure plan for this year to $30 billion, while also raising its sales forecast. Samsung has designated an investment of $116 billion by 2030 to diversify its chip production.</p><p>Gelsinger has stated that Intel is planning to increase its investment in the chip sector, and the company may benefit from bipartisan support for its own chip companies in the United States. For example, Intel is bidding for a Department of Defense contract that helps fund domestic chip manufacturing to meet government security needs.</p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://new.qq.com/omn/20210425/20210425A01KZ200.html\">腾讯科技</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b9a6f29dbb8b0bd3a3b0a5cf3f9e358","relate_stocks":{"INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://new.qq.com/omn/20210425/20210425A01KZ200.html","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1168120359","content_text":"4月24日消息，美国半导体巨头英特尔刚刚公布了疲软的季度财报，其新任首席执行官帕特·盖尔辛格（Pat Gelsinger）表示，全球芯片供应短缺可能还会持续两年时间。\n盖尔辛格在接受采访时说，几个月来影响全球经济多个领域的芯片供应紧张状况将持续下去，直到更多产能上线，以满足从汽车到电子产品等各种产品的芯片需求。他还称：“这需要一段时间，人们才能增加产能。当你在建新工厂时，情况不会在短期发生太大变化。”\n全球半导体芯片短缺扰乱了各个行业的生产，导致汽车工厂暂时关闭，电脑和许多家电等商品的供应减少。芯片公司始终在争先恐后地帮助克服缺芯挑战。\n美国白宫本月会见了芯片和其他行业的高管，以帮助确定应该采取什么行动来解决短缺问题，并加强国内芯片制造行业。拜登总统此前承诺解决芯片短缺问题，并在其庞大的基础设施支出计划中为半导体行业提供了500亿美元拨款。\n盖尔辛格承认：“所需投资规模将是相当庞大的。”这位自2月份上任的首席执行官还承诺迅速提供部分产能，以帮助缓解芯片短缺问题。盖尔辛格正在快速推进重振公司的努力，他预计今年英特尔的销售额将达到770亿美元，比之前预期的高出5亿美元。\n英特尔周四公布的财报显示，第一季度销售额下滑1%至197亿美元，但仍超出华尔街预期。受法律和解成本的拖累，净收入为34亿美元。不包括即将出售的内存业务和其他项目，英特尔表示，营收为186亿美元，净收入为57亿美元。\n盖尔辛格本月制定了一项雄心勃勃的战略，除了制造半导体以满足内部需求外，英特尔还将成为代工芯片制造商，该计划包括投资200亿美元用于在亚利桑那州新建两家半导体工厂。\n尽管芯片需求普遍强劲，但英特尔的销量还是出现了下降。美国银行半导体分析师维韦克·阿里亚(Vivek Arya)在英特尔公布财报前表示，英特尔业绩受到几个因素的拖累，其中包括个人电脑需求的激增主要集中在Chromebook等低端设备上，而苹果正在放弃英特尔，转而在其更多设备上搭载内部设计芯片。\n阿里亚还说，在经历了强劲的一年数据中心支出之后，英特尔今年的支出预计将以较慢的速度增长。他预计英特尔的销售增长将落后于整个行业，今年整个行业增长率可达15%。\n盖尔辛格正在努力重建这家在制造最先进芯片方面屡屡受挫、并输给了亚洲竞争对手的公司。他在上个月说，该公司的最新芯片正在取得进展。英特尔还计划增加部分芯片生产的外包，以跟上开发步伐。\n该公司还在应对日益激烈的竞争。去年超过英特尔成为美国市值最高芯片公司的英伟达和AMD占据了更多市场份额。英伟达本月还表示，将开始销售用于数据中心的CPU，这是英特尔长期主导的市场。英特尔本月也推出了增强型数据中心芯片。\n盖尔辛格说，尽管英特尔预计销售增长将慢于竞争对手，但它的目标是收复失地。他说：“我们正在努力获得更多市场份额。”但华尔街分析师对这家芯片制造商多久才能弥合与竞争对手的差距表示担忧。\n大西洋证券分析师伊恩吉特·巴哈蒂(Ianjit Bhatti)表示：“要想取得成功，必须克服诸多重大问题，提前投资，在2025年之前不太可能获得回报。近期(2-3年内)，我们认为英特尔无法应对AMD市场份额的增长。”\n财经资讯网站uk.Investing.com的高级分析师塞缪尔·英迪克（Samuel Indyk）说：“短缺将要求芯片制造商大规模支出。在英特尔试图夺回美国市值最高芯片制造商的头衔之际，需要花掉的费用可能实英特尔负担不起的。”\n英特尔的数据中心业务销售额为56亿美元，低于分析师预期的59亿美元。该公司表示，该业务的盈利能力受到研发支出以及与增加新芯片产量相关成本的影响。\n包括笔记本电脑芯片在内的细分市场销售额增长了8%以上，达到106亿美元，原因是疫情期间远程学习和在家工作的热潮推动了这个领域的需求激增。盖尔辛格说：“我们没有看到个人电脑需求放缓的迹象。”\n英特尔成为代工芯片制造商的努力也并非一帆风顺。该公司以前也曾试图打入这个市场，但收效甚微。其主要竞争对手台积电和三星电子正在准备实施数百亿美元支出计划，以扩大规模。台积电上周将今年的资本支出计划上调至300亿美元，同时上调了销售预期。三星已指定到2030年投资1160亿美元，以实现芯片生产的多元化。\n盖尔辛格曾表示，英特尔正计划增加芯片领域投资，该公司可能受益于美国两党对本国芯片公司的支持。例如，英特尔正在竞标国防部的一份合同，该合同帮助为国内芯片制造提供资金，以满足政府的安全需求。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"INTC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5797,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":376457379,"gmtCreate":1619144369591,"gmtModify":1704720318372,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"ygvhhh","listText":"ygvhhh","text":"ygvhhh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/376457379","repostId":"2129086331","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4593,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":349891003,"gmtCreate":1617585622902,"gmtModify":1704700556290,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"fffff","listText":"fffff","text":"fffff","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/349891003","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5105,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":354512882,"gmtCreate":1617187410446,"gmtModify":1704696953959,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"pinglun","listText":"pinglun","text":"pinglun","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/354512882","repostId":"2123022939","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2123022939","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1617186660,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2123022939?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-31 18:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2123022939","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"MW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n\n\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their ","content":"<html><body><font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n</p>\n<p>\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their rating on Apple <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$(AAPL)$</a> to buy from neutral and lifted the price target to $142 from $115. \"While our analysis of iPhone procurement and mix drives our FY22 estimates higher and our 'Core' value to $128 (from $115), our analysis of the auto market and Apple's multi-year investment in the industry (self-driving car licenses and LiDAR patents) suggests to us Apple's auto optionality is worth at least an incremental $14/share,\" they said. UBS says an Apple-branded battery electric vehicle, or BEV, could achieve a 5% market share. Apple shares rose 1.8% in premarket trade, but have skidded 10% this year, hurt by the rise in Treasury yields that has pressured other technology giants. \n</p>\n<p>\n  -Steve Goldstein; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n  <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/END\">$(END)$</a> Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n  March 31, 2021 06:31 ET (10:31 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones &amp; Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font></body></html>","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>UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes</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: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\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\">\nUBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-31 18:31</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><body><font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n</p>\n<p>\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their rating on Apple <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$(AAPL)$</a> to buy from neutral and lifted the price target to $142 from $115. \"While our analysis of iPhone procurement and mix drives our FY22 estimates higher and our 'Core' value to $128 (from $115), our analysis of the auto market and Apple's multi-year investment in the industry (self-driving car licenses and LiDAR patents) suggests to us Apple's auto optionality is worth at least an incremental $14/share,\" they said. UBS says an Apple-branded battery electric vehicle, or BEV, could achieve a 5% market share. Apple shares rose 1.8% in premarket trade, but have skidded 10% this year, hurt by the rise in Treasury yields that has pressured other technology giants. \n</p>\n<p>\n  -Steve Goldstein; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n  <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/END\">$(END)$</a> Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n  March 31, 2021 06:31 ET (10:31 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones &amp; Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"USB":"美国合众银行","AAPL":"苹果","NIO":"蔚来","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"http://dowjonesnews.com/newdjn/logon.aspx?AL=N","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2123022939","content_text":"MW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n\n\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their rating on Apple $(AAPL)$ to buy from neutral and lifted the price target to $142 from $115. \"While our analysis of iPhone procurement and mix drives our FY22 estimates higher and our 'Core' value to $128 (from $115), our analysis of the auto market and Apple's multi-year investment in the industry (self-driving car licenses and LiDAR patents) suggests to us Apple's auto optionality is worth at least an incremental $14/share,\" they said. UBS says an Apple-branded battery electric vehicle, or BEV, could achieve a 5% market share. Apple shares rose 1.8% in premarket trade, but have skidded 10% this year, hurt by the rise in Treasury yields that has pressured other technology giants. \n\n\n  -Steve Goldstein; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n\n\n \n\n\n$(END)$ Dow Jones Newswires\n\n\n  March 31, 2021 06:31 ET (10:31 GMT)\n\n\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9,"TSLA":0.9,"NIO":0.9,"USB":1}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5053,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350581235,"gmtCreate":1616230130627,"gmtModify":1704792355843,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"will will Rockyoy","listText":"will will Rockyoy","text":"will will Rockyoy","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350581235","repostId":"2120102081","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2120102081","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616222637,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2120102081?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-20 14:43","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"The profit and loss distribution chart has been revealed. How are those of you who are chasing Kun Kun and Song Song doing?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2120102081","media":"上海证券报 ","summary":"　　支付宝新开通了基金诊断功能，披露了最近1年持有用户盈亏分布情况。数据显示，近一年，绝大多数追逐“顶流”基金经理或者“网红”基金的基民都暂时陷入了亏损。例如，“公募一哥”张坤管理的易方达蓝筹精选近一年收益率超过118%，但近一年持有用户中，70%以上的投资者亏损幅度超过5%。　　根据支付宝对用户行为特征的分析，放弃定投和追涨杀跌仍然是投资者亏钱的主要原因。","content":"<p><div>How are you all chasing Lanlan, Kunkun, and Songsong? Alipay has launched a new fund diagnostic function, disclosing the profit and loss distribution of users holding funds over the past year. Data shows that in the past year, the vast majority of fund investors who chase \"top\" fund managers or \"internet celebrity\" funds have temporarily suffered losses. For example, the E Fund Blue Chip Selection fund managed by Zhang Kun, the \"top mutual fund manager,\" has achieved a return of over 118% in the past year, but among the users who held it in the past year, more than 70% of the investors suffered losses of more than 5%. According to Alipay's analysis of user behavior characteristics, abandoning dollar-cost averaging and chasing highs and selling lows remain the main reasons why investors lose money. Let's take a look at \"...</p><p><a href=\"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q\">Web page link</a></div></p>","source":"shzqb","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>The profit and loss distribution chart has been revealed. How are those of you who are chasing Kun Kun and Song Song doing?</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\">\nThe profit and loss distribution chart has been revealed. How are those of you who are chasing Kun Kun and Song Song doing?\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">上海证券报 </strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-20 14:43</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><div>How are you all chasing Lanlan, Kunkun, and Songsong? Alipay has launched a new fund diagnostic function, disclosing the profit and loss distribution of users holding funds over the past year. Data shows that in the past year, the vast majority of fund investors who chase \"top\" fund managers or \"internet celebrity\" funds have temporarily suffered losses. For example, the E Fund Blue Chip Selection fund managed by Zhang Kun, the \"top mutual fund manager,\" has achieved a return of over 118% in the past year, but among the users who held it in the past year, more than 70% of the investors suffered losses of more than 5%. According to Alipay's analysis of user behavior characteristics, abandoning dollar-cost averaging and chasing highs and selling lows remain the main reasons why investors lose money. Let's take a look at \"...</p><p><a href=\"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q\">Web page link</a></div></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q\">上海证券报 </a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f25970ebf4293eec7586423288711d3f","relate_stocks":{"399001":"深证成指","399006":"创业板指","09988":"阿里巴巴-W","QNETCN":"纳斯达克中美互联网老虎指数","BABA":"阿里巴巴","000001.SH":"上证指数"},"source_url":"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2120102081","content_text":"追逐兰兰、坤坤、嵩嵩的你们还好吗?支付宝新开通了基金诊断功能，披露了最近1年持有用户盈亏分布情况。数据显示，近一年，绝大多数追逐“顶流”基金经理或者“网红”基金的基民都暂时陷入了亏损。例如，“公募一哥”张坤管理的易方达蓝筹精选近一年收益率超过118%，但近一年持有用户中，70%以上的投资者亏损幅度超过5%。根据支付宝对用户行为特征的分析，放弃定投和追涨杀跌仍然是投资者亏钱的主要原因。我们先来看看“顶流”基金经理管理的基金情况。张坤是公募基金行业首位管理规模超过1000亿元的主动权益基金经理，今年以来频频登上热搜，甚至有了自己的粉丝后援会，可是近一年买入基金的大部分粉丝应该颇为伤心。以张坤管理的易方达蓝筹精选为例，从近一年持有用户盈亏情况来看，支付宝数据显示，逾八成投资者目前是亏损的，其中，亏损超过5%以上的基民占比高达71%。值得注意的是，截至3月18日，易方达蓝筹精选近一年收益率为118.6%，这意味着不少投资者是在高点冲进来的。支付宝也对亏5%以上用户的行为特征进行了分析，15.6%的投资者是由于定投放弃，14.3%的投资者是因为追涨杀跌，8.2%的投资者是因为持仓时间短，另有7.4%的投资者是因为频繁买卖。另一位明星基金经理葛兰管理的中欧医疗健康混合A的支付宝关注人数超过400万人，近一年绝大多数投资者也是亏损的。数据显示，从近一年持有用户盈亏分布来看，盈利的客户占比不到四成，52.5%的投资者亏损超过5%。但从基金本身收益来看，中欧医疗健康混合A近一年收益率超过75%。放弃定投和追涨杀跌仍然是投资者亏钱的主要原因。我们再来看看“网红”基金的情况。招商中证白酒指数基金堪称基金界的“网红”，去年以来霸屏支付宝基金热购榜，去年三季度末该基金规模突破200亿元。截至今年1月8日，规模已飙升至568.47亿元，持有人户数也高达830.76万户。从近一年持有用户盈亏情况来看，超半数投资者是亏损的，其中，30.8%的投资者亏损幅度超过10%，而招商中证白酒指数近一年涨幅超过120%。几乎满仓半导体的诺安成长同样是只“网红”基金，去年年底基金规模高达327亿元。从近一年持有用户盈亏情况来看，只有不到三成投资者实现盈利，55.8%的投资者亏损超过5%。不过，诺安成长近一年的表现并不如人意，截至3月18日，基金净值涨幅为13.23%。从支付宝对用户的行为分析来看，绝大多数亏损的投资者是因为追涨杀跌以及放弃定投。高点买入被套何时能回本？事实上，春节后市场颇为震荡，多只基金节后亏损幅度超过20%，不少刚入市的投资者买在阶段性高点导致被套，心里难免有点恐慌。很多人或许都想问基金到底什么时候才能回本，小编这里有一组数据。兴证全球基金用偏股基金指数对历史数据做了一组测算，回顾偏股基金指数自2008年之后10年的历史数据，计算投资者每一年高点入场后持有基金需要的回本时长。具体来看，如果在2008年的阶段性高点即上证指数5497.9点（也即近10年上证指数最高点位）买入，截至今年3月8日，不考虑申赎费管理费等费用，这笔投资回本需要86个月；2015年上证指数再次冲上5000点，如果在当年的5166.4点最高点买入，这笔投资回本时间大概需要61个月。数据显示，在单笔投资的情况下，在2008年-2018年的最高点买入，只要愿意长期持有最后总会回本，只是回本时间有长有短，平均回本时长为25个月。对于投资者而言，买入基金希望的是获取收益，如果在每年的高点买入，最终持有收益想超过20%，又需要多长时间？数据显示，从整体来看，在每年高点买入，单笔投资收益超过20%平均需要45个月。其中，在2018年5497.9点买入，单笔投资收益要想超过20%，需要87个月；在2015年的5166.4点买入，需要68个月的时间收益才能超过20%。在下跌中定投，则能够摊薄投资者买入成本，加快投资者回本以及获取收益的速度。数据显示，在每年高点投资1万元，从当月月末开始坚持每月月末定投2000元的情况下，平均回本时长则由25个月缩短到13个月，获取20%以上投资收益的平均时间也从45个月缩短到36个月。数据来源：Wind 截至2021/03/08兴证全球基金表示，没有人能准确地预测市场底部，而按部就班地实践定投计划或许是应对市场震荡的一个不错的选择。如果投资者进场后发现自己买在了相对高点，也不用后悔莫及。一方面，优秀的管理人有机会在中长期创造超额收益；另一方面，投资者也可以在市场下跌中坚持定投，摊薄前期高位买入的成本。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"399001":0.9,"399006":0.9,"QNETCN":0.9,"BABA":0.9,"000001.SH":0.9,"09988":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3391,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350904519,"gmtCreate":1616145690031,"gmtModify":1704791504935,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576741308708587","authorIdStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"power","listText":"power","text":"power","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350904519","repostId":"1199276124","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199276124","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"走近最优秀的投资人，聆听客观表达的理性声音，只做最好的原创财富资讯，洞见独立思想，回归资本常识。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"聪明投资者","id":"1072656223","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb7d47b7d71e40bb922cfa2979932b7f"},"pubTimestamp":1616145381,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199276124?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-19 17:16","market":"sh","language":"zh","title":"Zhang Yidong's latest sharing: This is not the beginning of a bear market; the main decline has ended.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199276124","media":"聪明投资者","summary":"“这次不是系统性风险。为什么不是系统性风险？这一次美债收益率超预期上行的根本原因还是美债供求关系的一个失衡，而更核心的原因是美债持有结构的一个质的变化。”\n“我今天在这里想传递给大家的一个重要理念，就","content":"<p><b>\"This is not a systemic risk. Why not a systemic risk? The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is still an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.\"</b></p><p><b>\"One important idea I want to convey to everyone here today is that Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the post-pandemic era, the US Treasury Bond yield has rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse. Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the US Treasury yield would go straight to 3 or 5. Now, let alone 3 or 5, it is difficult to stabilize at 2.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States? It is to use money to buy time to enhance competitiveness and suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, it is to use money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, and externally, it is to use rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.\"</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p><b>\"From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long structural bull market.\"</b></p><p><b>\"This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks. After valuations fall, some people will start to worry that performance will not meet expectations or that fund redemptions will trigger a long sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the space and timing of this market correction.\"</b></p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment; the main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p><b>\"We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the herd speculation lasts. Recently, it has mainly been reflected in a herd speculation among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle. After the recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessment of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position.\" Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this level.</b></p><p><b>\"Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show a trend of upward movement again, which might be a better timing. Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side without panicking too much. If you are trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the second quarter, whether overseas or domestically, the upstream 'inflation' force may reach its peak, which means that it is good news for the manufacturing industry, as manufacturing costs can be alleviated in various aspects; while the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually stronger because it is consumption-driven.\"</b></p><p><b>\"For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side positioning point has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.\"</b></p><p><b>\"China's growth sector targets, especially core assets like the Internet, will recover in the first half of the year, but there are no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.\"</b></p><p>The above is<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/601377\">Industrial Securities</a>Chief Global Strategy Analyst<b>Zhang Yidong,</b>On March 17th, I shared my latest insightful perspectives during a small-scale exchange.</p><p>Recently, US Treasury yields have risen, while the domestic market has experienced a continuous correction. However, Zhang Yidong believes that domestic investors have paid too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p>Zhang Yidong analyzed in detail the core reasons behind the rise in US Treasury yields, believing that US Treasury yields today are no longer as influential as they were 10 years ago, and Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields. From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is a minor correction in the structural bull market, and there will be divergence later.</p><p>He also focused on the opportunities that this adjustment may bring, and which assets can be invested in now.</p><p>The following is the full text of this exchange.<b>Smart Investors is sharing this with everyone with the authorization of General Manager Yidong.</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b7e8fd385528a06c4af634a5db7c134\" tg-width=\"690\" tg-height=\"378\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>It's a pleasure to share with you tonight my report on US Treasury yields, inflation, and style shifts, as well as the later market trends.</p><p><b>There are three types of pessimism among domestic investors</b></p><p><b>That's truly incredibly imaginative.</b></p><p>I.<b>Views on US Treasury yields and inflation</b></p><p>Overall, we believe that returning to the true meaning of the value of core assets is what is important. As for US Treasury bonds and the power struggle between alliances, these are all irrelevant.</p><p>After exchanging ideas, I feel that domestic investors are paying too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p><b>There are currently three types of pessimistic sentiment among domestic investors:</b></p><p>The first sentiment is that the United States is doomed, like the expectation of the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008. They believe that rising US long-term bond yields will trigger US debt risk, which in turn will lead to an increase in global risk-free yields. Ultimately, the double whammy of US bonds and stocks will trigger a global crisis, and China will not fare well either.</p><p>The second emotion, on the contrary, is that the United States is very powerful, that the US economic recovery is very strong, that the US is going to launch an excessive financial war, that the dollar may reverse, and that it is going to exploit the whole world, just like the Southeast Asian financial crisis. This emotion is an overestimation of the United States and a submissive approach.</p><p>The third sentiment is that, regarding the rise in US Treasury yields—those who are unaware of the impressive nature of the situation should first prostrate themselves as a sign of respect to guard against overseas risks.</p><p>These three emotions are truly imaginative.</p><p>With US Treasury yields rising this time, we need to discuss this in depth, understanding not only why, but also why.</p><p>Since mid-February, not all global markets have been falling. Eurozone stock markets such as France and Germany have actually been hitting record highs, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has also been continuously hitting record highs. The Nasdaq has indeed adjusted, but it has remained very restrained. On the contrary, the stock markets in mainland China and Hong Kong have been in a state of confusion since mid-February.</p><p><b>Rising US Treasury yields are not a systemic risk.</b></p><p><b>The more fundamental reason is the qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>It is necessary for us to analyze the core reasons for the rise in US Treasury yields at this time in order to predict whether this is a systemic risk.</p><p>Since the beginning of February, the yield on US Treasury bonds has risen rapidly from 1.15% to the current 1.6%, a rise that has indeed exceeded expectations. Is the rapid rise due to fundamental factors?</p><p>For example, out-of-control inflation and an overheated economy can pose systemic risks.</p><p>However, if the Federal Reserve or the U.S. Treasury can control it, that would be a technical risk.</p><p><b>Clearly, we don't believe this is a systemic risk. Why is it not a systemic risk?</b></p><p><b>The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>In 2008, the proportion of foreign investors outside the United States holding US Treasury bonds was 54%, then in 2015 it was 47%, and then it dropped rapidly to 34% now.</p><p><b>On the one hand, China reformed its exchange rate after 2015, while oil-producing countries in the Middle East ran out of money. Japan's holdings of US Treasury Bond declined significantly after 2015, and the US Treasury bonds that Japan had purchased in a surge since 1985 (with the longest maturity being 30 years) entered the repayment period.</b></p><p><b>Foreign investors' demand for holding US Treasury bonds has weakened significantly.</b></p><p><b>On the other hand, the issuance of US Treasury bonds has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the past 20 years, more than doubling in 2020 compared to 2009. Therefore, under these circumstances, US Treasury yields will rise more than expected in the short term.</b></p><p>As we can see, the bid multiple for the 7-year US Treasury bond auction recently was at a near 20-year low, indicating a lack of investor interest. This situation has led to a temporary imbalance in supply and demand, which in turn has led to an unexpected rise in US long-term Treasury yields.</p><p><b>The influence of US Treasury bonds today is different from that of US Treasury bonds 10 years ago.</b></p><p><b>The structure of US Treasury investors has changed from quantitative to qualitative, with the proportion of foreign investors showing a downward trend, and this impact may be quite far-reaching.</b></p><p>First, the Greenspan mystery of the past is no longer a mystery. Long-term US Treasury yields reflect the normal pace of domestic fiscal policy, while their role as an anchor for global asset pricing is weakening.</p><p>From 1969 until 2015, foreign investors helped the Federal Reserve lower long-term bond yields, even creating a disconnect between long-term and short-term interest rates in the United States. This is the so-called Greenspan mystery.</p><p>Greenspan wanted to go into a short-term rate hike, but it simply couldn't influence long-term interest rates.</p><p>Times have changed, and the influence of US Treasury bonds today is no longer the same as it was 10 years ago.</p><p>Changes in the investor structure of the US Treasury market have made US Treasury yields more sensitive to short-term supply.<b>The tight balance between short-term supply and demand for US Treasury bonds is the main reason for the recent unexpected rise in long-term US Treasury yields.</b></p><p><b>Yellen could delay issuing bonds, or the Federal Reserve could increase its bond purchases, which is normal, not to mention tools like OT and YCC. Therefore, this is not a systemic risk or a trend risk.</b>。</p><p>The concerns expressed by some domestic investors about US inflation expectations and the US economy cannot explain the rise in US Treasury yields; they are at most secondary factors.</p><p>Because the US economy is only just recovering and is far from overheating; In addition, after February 18th, the inflation expectations implied by TIPS were actually stable, or even slightly lower.</p><p>We reviewed the history of US Treasury yields as an anchor for global asset pricing. Whether it was the petrodollar in the 1970s, Japan's increased holdings in the 1980s, or the foreign exchange reserves of emerging markets after the Southeast Asian financial crisis in the 1990s, most of them were held in US Treasury bonds because they have low transaction costs, high liquidity, and high security.</p><p><b>Chinese investors need not worry excessively about fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>Many investors now take it for granted that US Treasury yields are the anchor for pricing global asset allocations, and that any movement can cause a major upheaval.</p><p>However, I think this anchor is actually weakening.</p><p>One point of weakening was the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. After 2008, the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds peaked and declined. Now, the US Treasury Bond market has undergone qualitative changes, and the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds has returned to the level of 2002.</p><p><b>Today I want to convey an important idea to everyone: Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>The current US Treasury bonds are the new US Treasury bonds after the US implemented MMT (Modern Monetary Theory). They better reflect the US fiscal situation and return to their roots—textbooks say that the Treasury Bond market serves changes in domestic fiscal policy.</p><p>The reason why long-term US Treasury yields could previously serve as an anchor for international asset allocation was because various sovereign states and major investment institutions held high levels of US Treasury bonds, which affected all aspects of financial operations. However, now, the main buyer in the US Treasury market is the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Of the $4.68 trillion in Treasury Bond net issued by the U.S. government last year, more than 52% were purchased by the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Gradually, the nature of US Treasury bonds began to shift from being an anchor for international allocation to serving the internal fiscal and financial interests of major powers.</p><p><b>Post-pandemic era</b></p><p><b>Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Extending this further, we say that in a new era of MMT theory, investors' knowledge system needs to be updated and break free from the framework of the 1980s and 90s;</p><p>That framework tells us to pay attention to fiscal discipline and the debt ceiling. Perhaps you still remember the Maastricht Treaty in Europe.</p><p>Under the guidance of MMT theory, hard currency countries have broken through the debt ceiling, and the system of debt expansion, economic growth, and exchange rate correlation in hard currency countries has been reconstructed and is logically consistent.</p><p>For example, in Europe after the European debt crisis, the debt ratio tended to rise; U.S. debt has been rising steadily, now standing at 303% of the total debt ratio, far higher than China's 270%.</p><p>In countries with hard currencies, as long as the international monetary system dominated by the US dollar does not collapse, the implementation period of the MMT new monetary theory will exceed expectations.</p><p>Perhaps some people find it hard to understand why the US virtual economy is so prosperous while the real economy isn't doing so well, and why continuous borrowing hasn't led to the Minsky moment.<b>Why didn't the United States experience a debt crisis?</b></p><p>If this were an emerging market or a country with a soft currency, there is no doubt that its debt would already be very high. When it issues bonds and provides further stimulus, it often experiences inflation domestically and devaluation externally, leading to capital flight and ultimately leading to a debt crisis.</p><p>But now, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has played all her cards to us, saying that as long as fiscal stimulus can drive GDP improvement, it can continue.</p><p>Government debt can be converted into perpetual debt without having to worry about when it will be repaid.</p><p>So essentially, in the internet age where populism is rampant, compared to the various reforms and social changes we are undertaking, Europe and the United States are more willing to spend money and time to solve problems through technological innovation and development over a period of time.</p><p><b>Therefore, we believe that in the post-pandemic era, Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the yield on US Treasury bonds would reach 3% or 5%. Now, let alone 3% or 5%, it is difficult to even stabilize at 2%.</p><p>I do not rule out the possibility that in May this year, the core PCE of the US inflation data may exceed expectations due to the base effect and a new round of fiscal stimulus, which may cause the US Treasury market to panic and the US Treasury yield to surge towards 2%. This is a possibility.</p><p>However, this is unsustainable, which is why we say that if US Treasury yields rebound, it will be difficult to reverse.</p><p><b>The current type of stagflation is different from stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p><b>The current normal is a new type of stagflation, unlike stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p>Everyone can understand \"stagnation,\" but \"inflation\" is different. In stagflation in the 1970s, during the baby boom era, demand was fine, but supply was problematic. There were two oil crises in 1973 and 1978.</p><p>What is the current problem with stagflation? Current demand problems, such as an aging population and a widening gap between the rich and the poor, are suppressing effective demand.</p><p>The current \"inflation\" is more reflected in asset bubbles, such as houses in core locations that are still preserving and increasing their value, as well as core assets in various fields that we are talking about—which are China's most competitive and long-term growth momentum, whether it is cyclical value stocks with steady growth or consumer pharmaceutical technology stocks with better-than-expected growth, etc. These high-quality assets are scarce globally.</p><p>In Europe and the United States, which have implemented MMT, especially the United States, the wheels of economic recovery are still turning, but it is difficult to bring the United States into a new round of comprehensive prosperity.</p><p>Its social problem is deep-seated stagnation. Racial conflicts and the widening gap between the rich and the poor will suppress effective demand. In addition, the United States cannot continue to subsidize lazy people by dropping money on helicopters, because this is not in line with the Protestant spirit of the United States.</p><p><b>Against this backdrop, inflation is not a problem now, and rising US long-term bond yields are not a major issue either.</b></p><p><b>The US strategy is to buy time with money.</b></p><p><b>To enhance competitiveness</b></p><p>Some A-share investors are worried, saying, \"The United States is very powerful, the United States is going to harvest us, and the United States is going to wage a financial war.\"</p><p>I advise people not to overestimate the United States.<b>Great power rivalry is a protracted war.</b>The United States currently lacks the willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis, because its current state is essentially buying time with money and slowly enduring us with rules.</p><p>The current domestic political situation in the United States can actually be referenced by the United States in the early 1970s. At that time, it lost the Vietnam War, and this time it failed to fight the epidemic. The domestic politics in the United States were very torn and turbulent.</p><p>In addition, the external situation at the time was that the Soviet Union and Japan were under strong competitive pressure from the United States in political and economic terms. This time, China was actually under greater pressure to catch up with the US economy than Japan did in the 1970s. The United States was also fabricating the \"China threat theory\" in political, diplomatic and military terms.</p><p>Therefore, at this point, I believe the United States does not actually have enough willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis. If the United States had confidence, it would not have unplugged the internet cable some time ago.</p><p><b>In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States?</b></p><p><b>It's about buying time with money to enhance competitiveness. They are trying to suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, they are using money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, while externally, they are using rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p>Extending this from here, why are we so actively promoting carbon neutrality?</p><p><b>Carbon neutrality is definitely not just a short-term hype.</b>This leads to the situation where steel prices rise, which is carbon neutrality, while clean energy and new energy vehicle prices fall, which is not carbon neutrality; this is just speculation.</p><p><b>We should correctly understand carbon neutrality from the perspective of great power competition.</b></p><p>On the one hand, we plan ahead and know that the United States will restrict us in terms of environmental protection, clean energy, and sustainable development, so we can take the initiative and adjust ourselves more quickly.</p><p>Moreover, by implementing a carbon neutrality strategy, we can build a broader alliance of interests with Europe, which has far-reaching significance.</p><p><b>In summary, the rise in US long-term Treasury yields is unsustainable. It is more of a technical issue and a temporary one. We should be desensitized to US Treasury yields and not be too sensitive.</b></p><p>Because the influence of US Treasury bonds is different now than it was 30 years ago. This is not a harbinger of a crisis. 2021 will definitely not be 2008 or 2018. People's anxiety about this is getting a bit extreme now.</p><p><b>This is a minor correction in the structural bull market.</b></p><p><b>The catalyst is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>II.<b>Opinions on style switching</b></p><p><b>From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b></p><p>Looking ahead to the market, on the one hand, the short-term group buying and selling has experienced great joy, sorrow, and ups and downs. Now, emotions are still unstable and it takes time to restore confidence.</p><p>On the other hand, for core assets, only by basing ourselves on fundamental logic can we achieve steady and long-term success. Truly good companies are not afraid of declines. This is what I told everyone at the beginning of 2016: when the market is volatile, it is actually a good time to select stocks.</p><p><b>Regarding the market outlook, there are several questions that the market is concerned about:</b></p><p><b>The first question is the definition of adjustment—this adjustment is not the beginning of a systemic crisis, but rather a phased consolidation. The catalyst for this consolidation is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>American investors believe that rising US Treasury yields are a normal part of the recovery, and Americans think this is normal. Recently, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has significantly outperformed the Nasdaq Industrial Average. In terms of industry attributes, energy, finance, and industrial equipment have outperformed information technology, but the dynamic P/E in the information technology sector has also declined relatively quickly.</p><p>In the coming months, the European and American economies should enter a stronger recovery phase, because the widespread availability of vaccines, coupled with the implementation of a new round of stimulus of $1.9 trillion, will bring about a retaliatory rebound in consumption. Coupled with the low base, both the economic recovery and inflation data in the United States in the second quarter will be relatively strong.</p><p><b>Therefore, a style shift in 2021 is an inevitable choice for value investing.</b></p><p><b>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks.</b></p><p>We believe<b>US stocks are already leading the global return to value, which means a rebalancing of styles, a reconsideration of cost-effectiveness, and a rebuilding of the valuation system.</b></p><p>In fact, the relative returns of cyclical value in A-shares and Hong Kong stocks over the past month or so are quite obvious. For example, the top-ranked companies in the Hang Seng Index since the beginning of the year are the three major oil companies, financial institutions, and the three major telecom operators, all of which are considered cyclical value.</p><p>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks;</p><p>After valuations fall, some people begin to worry that performance may fall short of expectations or that fund redemptions may trigger a sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the potential and timing of this market correction.</p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment. The main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p>In our report we wrote in February, \"A Newborn Calf Meets a Tiger, Changing Style After the Cold Spring,\" we suggested that the market should have entered a rebound phase in mid-March.</p><p>In fact, since March 12, both A-shares and Hong Kong stocks have been fluctuating upwards, although the momentum has not been strong. We cannot rule out another global setback in May, and we believe that there will not be much downside potential at that time.</p><p>Both the A-share and Hong Kong stock indices are not expensive at all, and are even very cheap compared to overseas markets.<b>At that time, there was little room for A-shares to fall below 3400 points and Hong Kong stocks below 28400 points.</b></p><p><b>Why may the \"late spring cold snap\" come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p><b>US Treasury yields may still have some momentum to rise in the second quarter.</b></p><p>From a time perspective, there may still be two minor risks that have not been fully resolved, which may cause some market disruption.</p><p><b>One risk is that the overall upward trend in US Treasury yields may still have some momentum in the second quarter;</b></p><p>Although we have seen that the upward slope of US Treasury yields has slowed recently, the slowdown in the slope actually tells everyone that this is not a systemic risk, and we can downplay the factor of rising US Treasury yields and start researching and selecting stocks based on fundamentals.</p><p><b>Why do we say that the \"late spring cold snap\" may come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p>This is a historical pattern. Every time the US Treasury volatility index rises to around one standard deviation, it usually enters a period of convergence, which means that the second-order derivative has begun to slow down.</p><p>In April and May, US Treasury yields are likely to surge in the short term, but this is the end of their strength and will peak this year.</p><p>A-share investors are concerned that the $1.9 trillion fiscal bailout plan would normally increase the federal government's debt pressure, but in reality, the U.S. Treasury still has about $1.4 trillion in total account deposits (TGA).</p><p>According to the latest statement from the U.S. Treasury Department, subsequent post-pandemic stimulus will prioritize the use of TGA balances over newly issued debt. The U.S. Treasury Department expects the funding gap and financing plans to decline significantly in the first half of 2021. This is a case where all the bad news has been exhausted.</p><p><b>A-share investors are overly anxious about inflation</b></p><p>Another negative factor,<b>The question is whether the US-style recovery will trigger a run-out and surge in commodity CPI and PPI.</b></p><p>Currently, both foreign investors and the Federal Reserve regard the US recovery as a normal expectation, but many A-share investors seem to be pessimistic. What are they worried about?</p><p>If there are concerns about a strong US economic recovery, global inflation may accelerate, and China will face imported inflation, which could trigger further policy tightening. This concern about inflation is excessive anxiety.</p><p>When excessive concerns about rising inflation will be disproven will have to wait until the latter part of the second quarter of this year, that is, in early May, to see the inflation data for April, and in early June to see the inflation data for May.</p><p>If the inflation data for April is released as early as early May, then the market will also react. If it doesn't react, it will be a premature reaction. When all the negative factors are exhausted, it will become numb.</p><p>It cannot be ruled out that the US core PCE will rise above 3% in April. In the past 10 years, the US core inflation has not risen above 3%. This exceeding expectations is partly due to the very low base caused by the US lockdown policies in April and May last year.</p><p>Secondly, the implementation of the 1.9 trillion yuan fiscal rescue plan in late March, coupled with the rapid rollout of vaccines, and April being the big day of Easter, resulted in a significant rebound in consumption.</p><p>The April inflation data is an anomaly, but capital markets tend to extrapolate linearly, so there may be some disturbances at that time. Even if there are some disturbances, it can actually be seen that all the negative factors have been exhausted, which is precisely a golden opportunity.</p><p>Therefore, I believe that even if inflation exceeds expectations in the later stages, the Federal Reserve will have sufficient tools and power to lower long-term bond yields. After all, the Federal Reserve has many weapons in its arsenal, and there are still methods such as YCC that have not been implemented.</p><p><b>From the Federal Reserve's perspective, when to take action still depends on real interest rates;</b></p><p>Although the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds has risen to 1.6%, the real interest rate for the entire 10-year term is still -0.6%. Apart from the 30-year US Treasury Bond real interest rate turning positive, the others have not yet turned positive.</p><p><b>The timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side; there's no need to panic too much.</b></p><p>III.<b>Market outlook and timing of adjustments</b></p><p>The third thing I want to report and discuss with you is the market outlook and the timing of adjustments.</p><p><b>We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p>Recently, this has mainly been reflected in a group-buying game among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle.</p><p>After a recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessments of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position. Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this location.</p><p>Concerns about whether the negative impact of group speculation will worsen will continue to suppress market risk appetite.</p><p>Currently, fund managers have reported that redemptions are not obvious, and fund investors' sentiment is relatively stable, which is incomparable to the stampede of 2015. However, it may take time to digest the situation.</p><p><b>Now that the price has adjusted to this level, people are confident in the long run, but the static TTM valuation is not particularly attractive.</b></p><p><b>Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show another upward trend, which might be a better timing.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side, so there's no need to panic too much. If you're trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.</b></p><p>Overall, the group-buying game is not an objective result, but rather a self-reinforcing and self-circulating process centered around the requirements of the fund's relative return ranking.</p><p>Previously, they were chasing rallies, but recently they've been selling off prices. This is subjective speculation.</p><p>Therefore, every time the market rally of assets that were heavily invested in in the past ended, it was not due to external shocks. At most, external shocks only triggered a major quarterly correction.</p><p>The key to the true end is whether the medium- to long-term fundamental trend of the related assets has undergone an unexpected reversal. Whether these assets can take off again depends on their performance.</p><p>What we should do now is not worry about whether to participate in a short-term rebound, but rather to focus on the long term and the short term. We should first conduct research to confirm the companies we previously heavily invested in and ensure their fundamentals.</p><p>If you can't find out it's a scam while the price is falling, then you're doomed. For example, LeEco in 2015 either delisted or its fundamental logic was disproven.</p><p>This time, it's more like the core assets of the United States over the past decade or so. These assets also adjust when they fall. For example, Amazon and Google also experienced sharp declines in February 2018. However, the decline of these companies can only improve their cost-effectiveness, not disprove the logic of fundamentals.</p><p>Instead of worrying about the macroeconomic trend now, it's better to focus on stock selection, because the macroeconomic trend has already been reflected in the previous adjustments.</p><p>We have noticed that since February 18, northbound capital has generally seen a net inflow, especially since March, when the inflow has been quite significant.</p><p>It's just that its style is more balanced, from being consumer-oriented to now focusing on performance, including some banks, chemicals, and even steel and real estate.</p><p>Of course, some people wonder if this is speculative capital behavior. The investors we are dealing with, whether they are clients from Europe and America or clients from Singapore, who are relatively far from China, actually have confidence in China because the cost-effectiveness is better, and good assets are scarce in the world.</p><p><b>The subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>IV.<b>Investment Strategy</b></p><p>Finally, here are my investment strategy suggestions for everyone.<b>I believe the label-based style shift has come to an end, and the subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>In the next stage, whether a black cat or a white cat catches a mouse is a good cat. The industry may not be clearly defined, nor will it be a game where steel prices rise while new energy prices fall.</p><p>The most comfortable period for a sectoral rebound in cyclical stocks has passed, and the opportunity for valuation recovery has come to an end.<b>Next, we need to find α within β.</b>This time, China's style shift will not be as strong as that of the United States.</p><p>Recently, the U.S. energy and financial sectors have generally risen due to expanding demand in the U.S.</p><p>China's recovery this time is different from last year. The growth rate of investment in infrastructure or real estate is slowing down marginally, unlike the 4 trillion yuan investment after 2008, or the rise in cyclical stocks in the 2000s due to the surge in demand.</p><p><b>The first step in the style shift is almost complete.</b>。</p><p>China's economic growth rate gradually slowed down in the following quarters, so commodities such as copper or crude oil cannot be expected to rise much further.</p><p><b>My assessment is that copper and even oil prices have reached a high level.</b>Because although Europe and the United States are recovering, this recovery is more driven by consumption than by infrastructure.</p><p>At the same time, China needs to take the opportunity to resolve the risks of existing debt and reduce the government leverage ratio, which is relatively negative for infrastructure and commodity demand. Therefore, in terms of bulk raw materials, the situation in China and Europe and the United States may be offset by a fluctuation.</p><p><b>Therefore, upstream bulk raw materials may have already entered a period of high-level fluctuations and begun to diverge.</b></p><p>Why haven't cyclical stocks plummeted across the board immediately? Previous experience has shown that stocks peak before commodity prices peak.</p><p>This time, it's because of carbon neutrality. Cyclical commodities that benefit from carbon neutrality can continue to rise, which is the logic of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>The second quarter is a boon for the manufacturing industry.</b></p><p><b>The left-hand entry point for growth sectors has arrived.</b></p><p>For midstream manufacturing, opportunities are beginning to become clearly established:</p><p><b>In the second quarter, both overseas and domestically, upstream inflation is likely to reach its peak, which means it's good news for the manufacturing industry.</b>This will alleviate manufacturing costs in various aspects; Meanwhile, the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually more inertial because it is consumption-driven.</p><p>Therefore, for leading manufacturing companies that can secure overseas orders and have global pricing power, it is essentially alpha, for example, now whether...<b>Wanhua for chemicals, or Sany for machinery?</b>In fact, they are all relatively independent entities. They are not completely subject to the fluctuations of cyclical industries, but are beginning to develop an attribute that can transcend cycles.</p><p>Cyclical industries should pay attention to the impact of carbon neutrality in the next stage, especially since some leading manufacturing companies will benefit from carbon neutrality on the one hand, and will also be able to share in the positive effects of the economic recovery in Europe and the United States on the other. Therefore, in the next stage, it is time to start investing in high-quality manufacturing companies.</p><p><b>For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side investment opportunity has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.</b></p><p>The so-called left-side positioning is because previously favored sectors may rebound after falling sharply, but whether this can be sustained depends on profitability. If the profit elasticity is not strong and only the stock has strong long-term stability, then the current dynamic P/E and static P/E cannot allow everyone to buy the dip without any doubts.</p><p>From a short-term perspective, these sectors are in a somewhat awkward position. As soon as a rebound occurs, people will flee. Therefore, these types of assets will subsequently recover, fluctuate, and consolidate their range.</p><p>We believe that,<b>A better time for growth-oriented core assets may be in the mid-to-late second quarter.</b></p><p><b>The long-term cost-effectiveness of core assets like the internet is beginning to become apparent.</b></p><p><b>Corresponding to Hong Kong stocks</b>，<b>First, value stocks such as the financial sector or the three major telecom operators are now being used as a defensive counterattack.</b>I think it's still worth buying if you're not looking for exorbitant profits; it can be considered a relatively good convertible bond.</p><p><b>Secondly, cyclical stocks will diverge; the more stocks that can make alpha, the better.</b>The benefits of inflation are already implicit in stock prices. When inflation truly peaks, stock prices may have already begun to fall because the stock market is more sensitive than the real economy.</p><p>We believe that commodity prices have entered their highest point for the year, even if they haven't reached their peak yet.<b>However, the strongest phase of the upward trend in commodities may have passed;</b></p><p>Commodities are now entering a period of high-level fluctuations and the formation of a top area. Under these circumstances, the impact of demand on cyclical commodities is weakening, and there is an opportunity for carbon neutrality around the 2.0 version of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>Third, China's growth sectors, especially core assets like the internet, are expected to recover in the first half of the year but face no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.</b>。</p><p>This type of asset and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOG\">Google</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">Microsoft</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">Apple</a>Let's benchmark against our leading internet companies; they have stronger growth potential and greater profit elasticity, such as...<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent</a>and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>The valuation is actually very attractive.</p><p>The market's sentiment towards growth-oriented core assets is more of a gradual easing, at least there is no systemic risk. Tencent and Alibaba can stabilize, and Meituan's fluctuations are not a big problem. The market has differing opinions on Xiaomi, and there are so-called problems with military-related companies. However, after falling by 25% since the beginning of the year, the negative factors have begun to be fully exhausted.</p><p>That's why I have the confidence to say that there's little room for Hong Kong stocks to fall below 28,400 points. Once the leading growth stocks in Hong Kong stocks stabilize, other growth stocks can recover. For example, sectors such as property management, education, auto parts, consumer goods, and pharmaceuticals can now look for alpha.</p><p><b>sum up</b></p><p>To summarize in three sentences:</p><p>(a) This<b>This is not a systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but rather a correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b>。</p><p>(II)<b>There is not much room for further downward adjustment.</b>There has been a short-term market rebound, but sentiment is still affected by the negative impact of group buying and speculation. Therefore, the correction may extend into the mid-to-late second quarter, which is a period for right-side positioning.</p><p>(iii) Style switching should not be done blindly. Do not label stocks according to industry attributes. We are now entering the era of stock selection with a left-side layout.</p><p>The relative returns of growth stocks (consumer technology and pharmaceuticals) and cyclical value stocks have converged rapidly over the past two months, and both have now entered the stage of stock selection.</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>Zhang Yidong's latest sharing: This is not the beginning of a bear market; the main decline has ended.</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\">\nZhang Yidong's latest sharing: This is not the beginning of a bear market; the main decline has ended.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1072656223\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb7d47b7d71e40bb922cfa2979932b7f);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">聪明投资者 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-19 17:16</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>\"This is not a systemic risk. Why not a systemic risk? The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is still an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.\"</b></p><p><b>\"One important idea I want to convey to everyone here today is that Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the post-pandemic era, the US Treasury Bond yield has rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse. Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the US Treasury yield would go straight to 3 or 5. Now, let alone 3 or 5, it is difficult to stabilize at 2.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States? It is to use money to buy time to enhance competitiveness and suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, it is to use money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, and externally, it is to use rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.\"</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p><b>\"From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long structural bull market.\"</b></p><p><b>\"This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks. After valuations fall, some people will start to worry that performance will not meet expectations or that fund redemptions will trigger a long sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the space and timing of this market correction.\"</b></p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment; the main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p><b>\"We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the herd speculation lasts. Recently, it has mainly been reflected in a herd speculation among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle. After the recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessment of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position.\" Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this level.</b></p><p><b>\"Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show a trend of upward movement again, which might be a better timing. Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side without panicking too much. If you are trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the second quarter, whether overseas or domestically, the upstream 'inflation' force may reach its peak, which means that it is good news for the manufacturing industry, as manufacturing costs can be alleviated in various aspects; while the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually stronger because it is consumption-driven.\"</b></p><p><b>\"For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side positioning point has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.\"</b></p><p><b>\"China's growth sector targets, especially core assets like the Internet, will recover in the first half of the year, but there are no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.\"</b></p><p>The above is<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/601377\">Industrial Securities</a>Chief Global Strategy Analyst<b>Zhang Yidong,</b>On March 17th, I shared my latest insightful perspectives during a small-scale exchange.</p><p>Recently, US Treasury yields have risen, while the domestic market has experienced a continuous correction. However, Zhang Yidong believes that domestic investors have paid too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p>Zhang Yidong analyzed in detail the core reasons behind the rise in US Treasury yields, believing that US Treasury yields today are no longer as influential as they were 10 years ago, and Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields. From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is a minor correction in the structural bull market, and there will be divergence later.</p><p>He also focused on the opportunities that this adjustment may bring, and which assets can be invested in now.</p><p>The following is the full text of this exchange.<b>Smart Investors is sharing this with everyone with the authorization of General Manager Yidong.</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b7e8fd385528a06c4af634a5db7c134\" tg-width=\"690\" tg-height=\"378\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>It's a pleasure to share with you tonight my report on US Treasury yields, inflation, and style shifts, as well as the later market trends.</p><p><b>There are three types of pessimism among domestic investors</b></p><p><b>That's truly incredibly imaginative.</b></p><p>I.<b>Views on US Treasury yields and inflation</b></p><p>Overall, we believe that returning to the true meaning of the value of core assets is what is important. As for US Treasury bonds and the power struggle between alliances, these are all irrelevant.</p><p>After exchanging ideas, I feel that domestic investors are paying too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p><b>There are currently three types of pessimistic sentiment among domestic investors:</b></p><p>The first sentiment is that the United States is doomed, like the expectation of the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008. They believe that rising US long-term bond yields will trigger US debt risk, which in turn will lead to an increase in global risk-free yields. Ultimately, the double whammy of US bonds and stocks will trigger a global crisis, and China will not fare well either.</p><p>The second emotion, on the contrary, is that the United States is very powerful, that the US economic recovery is very strong, that the US is going to launch an excessive financial war, that the dollar may reverse, and that it is going to exploit the whole world, just like the Southeast Asian financial crisis. This emotion is an overestimation of the United States and a submissive approach.</p><p>The third sentiment is that, regarding the rise in US Treasury yields—those who are unaware of the impressive nature of the situation should first prostrate themselves as a sign of respect to guard against overseas risks.</p><p>These three emotions are truly imaginative.</p><p>With US Treasury yields rising this time, we need to discuss this in depth, understanding not only why, but also why.</p><p>Since mid-February, not all global markets have been falling. Eurozone stock markets such as France and Germany have actually been hitting record highs, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has also been continuously hitting record highs. The Nasdaq has indeed adjusted, but it has remained very restrained. On the contrary, the stock markets in mainland China and Hong Kong have been in a state of confusion since mid-February.</p><p><b>Rising US Treasury yields are not a systemic risk.</b></p><p><b>The more fundamental reason is the qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>It is necessary for us to analyze the core reasons for the rise in US Treasury yields at this time in order to predict whether this is a systemic risk.</p><p>Since the beginning of February, the yield on US Treasury bonds has risen rapidly from 1.15% to the current 1.6%, a rise that has indeed exceeded expectations. Is the rapid rise due to fundamental factors?</p><p>For example, out-of-control inflation and an overheated economy can pose systemic risks.</p><p>However, if the Federal Reserve or the U.S. Treasury can control it, that would be a technical risk.</p><p><b>Clearly, we don't believe this is a systemic risk. Why is it not a systemic risk?</b></p><p><b>The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>In 2008, the proportion of foreign investors outside the United States holding US Treasury bonds was 54%, then in 2015 it was 47%, and then it dropped rapidly to 34% now.</p><p><b>On the one hand, China reformed its exchange rate after 2015, while oil-producing countries in the Middle East ran out of money. Japan's holdings of US Treasury Bond declined significantly after 2015, and the US Treasury bonds that Japan had purchased in a surge since 1985 (with the longest maturity being 30 years) entered the repayment period.</b></p><p><b>Foreign investors' demand for holding US Treasury bonds has weakened significantly.</b></p><p><b>On the other hand, the issuance of US Treasury bonds has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the past 20 years, more than doubling in 2020 compared to 2009. Therefore, under these circumstances, US Treasury yields will rise more than expected in the short term.</b></p><p>As we can see, the bid multiple for the 7-year US Treasury bond auction recently was at a near 20-year low, indicating a lack of investor interest. This situation has led to a temporary imbalance in supply and demand, which in turn has led to an unexpected rise in US long-term Treasury yields.</p><p><b>The influence of US Treasury bonds today is different from that of US Treasury bonds 10 years ago.</b></p><p><b>The structure of US Treasury investors has changed from quantitative to qualitative, with the proportion of foreign investors showing a downward trend, and this impact may be quite far-reaching.</b></p><p>First, the Greenspan mystery of the past is no longer a mystery. Long-term US Treasury yields reflect the normal pace of domestic fiscal policy, while their role as an anchor for global asset pricing is weakening.</p><p>From 1969 until 2015, foreign investors helped the Federal Reserve lower long-term bond yields, even creating a disconnect between long-term and short-term interest rates in the United States. This is the so-called Greenspan mystery.</p><p>Greenspan wanted to go into a short-term rate hike, but it simply couldn't influence long-term interest rates.</p><p>Times have changed, and the influence of US Treasury bonds today is no longer the same as it was 10 years ago.</p><p>Changes in the investor structure of the US Treasury market have made US Treasury yields more sensitive to short-term supply.<b>The tight balance between short-term supply and demand for US Treasury bonds is the main reason for the recent unexpected rise in long-term US Treasury yields.</b></p><p><b>Yellen could delay issuing bonds, or the Federal Reserve could increase its bond purchases, which is normal, not to mention tools like OT and YCC. Therefore, this is not a systemic risk or a trend risk.</b>。</p><p>The concerns expressed by some domestic investors about US inflation expectations and the US economy cannot explain the rise in US Treasury yields; they are at most secondary factors.</p><p>Because the US economy is only just recovering and is far from overheating; In addition, after February 18th, the inflation expectations implied by TIPS were actually stable, or even slightly lower.</p><p>We reviewed the history of US Treasury yields as an anchor for global asset pricing. Whether it was the petrodollar in the 1970s, Japan's increased holdings in the 1980s, or the foreign exchange reserves of emerging markets after the Southeast Asian financial crisis in the 1990s, most of them were held in US Treasury bonds because they have low transaction costs, high liquidity, and high security.</p><p><b>Chinese investors need not worry excessively about fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>Many investors now take it for granted that US Treasury yields are the anchor for pricing global asset allocations, and that any movement can cause a major upheaval.</p><p>However, I think this anchor is actually weakening.</p><p>One point of weakening was the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. After 2008, the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds peaked and declined. Now, the US Treasury Bond market has undergone qualitative changes, and the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds has returned to the level of 2002.</p><p><b>Today I want to convey an important idea to everyone: Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>The current US Treasury bonds are the new US Treasury bonds after the US implemented MMT (Modern Monetary Theory). They better reflect the US fiscal situation and return to their roots—textbooks say that the Treasury Bond market serves changes in domestic fiscal policy.</p><p>The reason why long-term US Treasury yields could previously serve as an anchor for international asset allocation was because various sovereign states and major investment institutions held high levels of US Treasury bonds, which affected all aspects of financial operations. However, now, the main buyer in the US Treasury market is the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Of the $4.68 trillion in Treasury Bond net issued by the U.S. government last year, more than 52% were purchased by the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Gradually, the nature of US Treasury bonds began to shift from being an anchor for international allocation to serving the internal fiscal and financial interests of major powers.</p><p><b>Post-pandemic era</b></p><p><b>Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Extending this further, we say that in a new era of MMT theory, investors' knowledge system needs to be updated and break free from the framework of the 1980s and 90s;</p><p>That framework tells us to pay attention to fiscal discipline and the debt ceiling. Perhaps you still remember the Maastricht Treaty in Europe.</p><p>Under the guidance of MMT theory, hard currency countries have broken through the debt ceiling, and the system of debt expansion, economic growth, and exchange rate correlation in hard currency countries has been reconstructed and is logically consistent.</p><p>For example, in Europe after the European debt crisis, the debt ratio tended to rise; U.S. debt has been rising steadily, now standing at 303% of the total debt ratio, far higher than China's 270%.</p><p>In countries with hard currencies, as long as the international monetary system dominated by the US dollar does not collapse, the implementation period of the MMT new monetary theory will exceed expectations.</p><p>Perhaps some people find it hard to understand why the US virtual economy is so prosperous while the real economy isn't doing so well, and why continuous borrowing hasn't led to the Minsky moment.<b>Why didn't the United States experience a debt crisis?</b></p><p>If this were an emerging market or a country with a soft currency, there is no doubt that its debt would already be very high. When it issues bonds and provides further stimulus, it often experiences inflation domestically and devaluation externally, leading to capital flight and ultimately leading to a debt crisis.</p><p>But now, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has played all her cards to us, saying that as long as fiscal stimulus can drive GDP improvement, it can continue.</p><p>Government debt can be converted into perpetual debt without having to worry about when it will be repaid.</p><p>So essentially, in the internet age where populism is rampant, compared to the various reforms and social changes we are undertaking, Europe and the United States are more willing to spend money and time to solve problems through technological innovation and development over a period of time.</p><p><b>Therefore, we believe that in the post-pandemic era, Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the yield on US Treasury bonds would reach 3% or 5%. Now, let alone 3% or 5%, it is difficult to even stabilize at 2%.</p><p>I do not rule out the possibility that in May this year, the core PCE of the US inflation data may exceed expectations due to the base effect and a new round of fiscal stimulus, which may cause the US Treasury market to panic and the US Treasury yield to surge towards 2%. This is a possibility.</p><p>However, this is unsustainable, which is why we say that if US Treasury yields rebound, it will be difficult to reverse.</p><p><b>The current type of stagflation is different from stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p><b>The current normal is a new type of stagflation, unlike stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p>Everyone can understand \"stagnation,\" but \"inflation\" is different. In stagflation in the 1970s, during the baby boom era, demand was fine, but supply was problematic. There were two oil crises in 1973 and 1978.</p><p>What is the current problem with stagflation? Current demand problems, such as an aging population and a widening gap between the rich and the poor, are suppressing effective demand.</p><p>The current \"inflation\" is more reflected in asset bubbles, such as houses in core locations that are still preserving and increasing their value, as well as core assets in various fields that we are talking about—which are China's most competitive and long-term growth momentum, whether it is cyclical value stocks with steady growth or consumer pharmaceutical technology stocks with better-than-expected growth, etc. These high-quality assets are scarce globally.</p><p>In Europe and the United States, which have implemented MMT, especially the United States, the wheels of economic recovery are still turning, but it is difficult to bring the United States into a new round of comprehensive prosperity.</p><p>Its social problem is deep-seated stagnation. Racial conflicts and the widening gap between the rich and the poor will suppress effective demand. In addition, the United States cannot continue to subsidize lazy people by dropping money on helicopters, because this is not in line with the Protestant spirit of the United States.</p><p><b>Against this backdrop, inflation is not a problem now, and rising US long-term bond yields are not a major issue either.</b></p><p><b>The US strategy is to buy time with money.</b></p><p><b>To enhance competitiveness</b></p><p>Some A-share investors are worried, saying, \"The United States is very powerful, the United States is going to harvest us, and the United States is going to wage a financial war.\"</p><p>I advise people not to overestimate the United States.<b>Great power rivalry is a protracted war.</b>The United States currently lacks the willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis, because its current state is essentially buying time with money and slowly enduring us with rules.</p><p>The current domestic political situation in the United States can actually be referenced by the United States in the early 1970s. At that time, it lost the Vietnam War, and this time it failed to fight the epidemic. The domestic politics in the United States were very torn and turbulent.</p><p>In addition, the external situation at the time was that the Soviet Union and Japan were under strong competitive pressure from the United States in political and economic terms. This time, China was actually under greater pressure to catch up with the US economy than Japan did in the 1970s. The United States was also fabricating the \"China threat theory\" in political, diplomatic and military terms.</p><p>Therefore, at this point, I believe the United States does not actually have enough willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis. If the United States had confidence, it would not have unplugged the internet cable some time ago.</p><p><b>In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States?</b></p><p><b>It's about buying time with money to enhance competitiveness. They are trying to suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, they are using money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, while externally, they are using rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p>Extending this from here, why are we so actively promoting carbon neutrality?</p><p><b>Carbon neutrality is definitely not just a short-term hype.</b>This leads to the situation where steel prices rise, which is carbon neutrality, while clean energy and new energy vehicle prices fall, which is not carbon neutrality; this is just speculation.</p><p><b>We should correctly understand carbon neutrality from the perspective of great power competition.</b></p><p>On the one hand, we plan ahead and know that the United States will restrict us in terms of environmental protection, clean energy, and sustainable development, so we can take the initiative and adjust ourselves more quickly.</p><p>Moreover, by implementing a carbon neutrality strategy, we can build a broader alliance of interests with Europe, which has far-reaching significance.</p><p><b>In summary, the rise in US long-term Treasury yields is unsustainable. It is more of a technical issue and a temporary one. We should be desensitized to US Treasury yields and not be too sensitive.</b></p><p>Because the influence of US Treasury bonds is different now than it was 30 years ago. This is not a harbinger of a crisis. 2021 will definitely not be 2008 or 2018. People's anxiety about this is getting a bit extreme now.</p><p><b>This is a minor correction in the structural bull market.</b></p><p><b>The catalyst is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>II.<b>Opinions on style switching</b></p><p><b>From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b></p><p>Looking ahead to the market, on the one hand, the short-term group buying and selling has experienced great joy, sorrow, and ups and downs. Now, emotions are still unstable and it takes time to restore confidence.</p><p>On the other hand, for core assets, only by basing ourselves on fundamental logic can we achieve steady and long-term success. Truly good companies are not afraid of declines. This is what I told everyone at the beginning of 2016: when the market is volatile, it is actually a good time to select stocks.</p><p><b>Regarding the market outlook, there are several questions that the market is concerned about:</b></p><p><b>The first question is the definition of adjustment—this adjustment is not the beginning of a systemic crisis, but rather a phased consolidation. The catalyst for this consolidation is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>American investors believe that rising US Treasury yields are a normal part of the recovery, and Americans think this is normal. Recently, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has significantly outperformed the Nasdaq Industrial Average. In terms of industry attributes, energy, finance, and industrial equipment have outperformed information technology, but the dynamic P/E in the information technology sector has also declined relatively quickly.</p><p>In the coming months, the European and American economies should enter a stronger recovery phase, because the widespread availability of vaccines, coupled with the implementation of a new round of stimulus of $1.9 trillion, will bring about a retaliatory rebound in consumption. Coupled with the low base, both the economic recovery and inflation data in the United States in the second quarter will be relatively strong.</p><p><b>Therefore, a style shift in 2021 is an inevitable choice for value investing.</b></p><p><b>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks.</b></p><p>We believe<b>US stocks are already leading the global return to value, which means a rebalancing of styles, a reconsideration of cost-effectiveness, and a rebuilding of the valuation system.</b></p><p>In fact, the relative returns of cyclical value in A-shares and Hong Kong stocks over the past month or so are quite obvious. For example, the top-ranked companies in the Hang Seng Index since the beginning of the year are the three major oil companies, financial institutions, and the three major telecom operators, all of which are considered cyclical value.</p><p>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks;</p><p>After valuations fall, some people begin to worry that performance may fall short of expectations or that fund redemptions may trigger a sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the potential and timing of this market correction.</p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment. The main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p>In our report we wrote in February, \"A Newborn Calf Meets a Tiger, Changing Style After the Cold Spring,\" we suggested that the market should have entered a rebound phase in mid-March.</p><p>In fact, since March 12, both A-shares and Hong Kong stocks have been fluctuating upwards, although the momentum has not been strong. We cannot rule out another global setback in May, and we believe that there will not be much downside potential at that time.</p><p>Both the A-share and Hong Kong stock indices are not expensive at all, and are even very cheap compared to overseas markets.<b>At that time, there was little room for A-shares to fall below 3400 points and Hong Kong stocks below 28400 points.</b></p><p><b>Why may the \"late spring cold snap\" come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p><b>US Treasury yields may still have some momentum to rise in the second quarter.</b></p><p>From a time perspective, there may still be two minor risks that have not been fully resolved, which may cause some market disruption.</p><p><b>One risk is that the overall upward trend in US Treasury yields may still have some momentum in the second quarter;</b></p><p>Although we have seen that the upward slope of US Treasury yields has slowed recently, the slowdown in the slope actually tells everyone that this is not a systemic risk, and we can downplay the factor of rising US Treasury yields and start researching and selecting stocks based on fundamentals.</p><p><b>Why do we say that the \"late spring cold snap\" may come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p>This is a historical pattern. Every time the US Treasury volatility index rises to around one standard deviation, it usually enters a period of convergence, which means that the second-order derivative has begun to slow down.</p><p>In April and May, US Treasury yields are likely to surge in the short term, but this is the end of their strength and will peak this year.</p><p>A-share investors are concerned that the $1.9 trillion fiscal bailout plan would normally increase the federal government's debt pressure, but in reality, the U.S. Treasury still has about $1.4 trillion in total account deposits (TGA).</p><p>According to the latest statement from the U.S. Treasury Department, subsequent post-pandemic stimulus will prioritize the use of TGA balances over newly issued debt. The U.S. Treasury Department expects the funding gap and financing plans to decline significantly in the first half of 2021. This is a case where all the bad news has been exhausted.</p><p><b>A-share investors are overly anxious about inflation</b></p><p>Another negative factor,<b>The question is whether the US-style recovery will trigger a run-out and surge in commodity CPI and PPI.</b></p><p>Currently, both foreign investors and the Federal Reserve regard the US recovery as a normal expectation, but many A-share investors seem to be pessimistic. What are they worried about?</p><p>If there are concerns about a strong US economic recovery, global inflation may accelerate, and China will face imported inflation, which could trigger further policy tightening. This concern about inflation is excessive anxiety.</p><p>When excessive concerns about rising inflation will be disproven will have to wait until the latter part of the second quarter of this year, that is, in early May, to see the inflation data for April, and in early June to see the inflation data for May.</p><p>If the inflation data for April is released as early as early May, then the market will also react. If it doesn't react, it will be a premature reaction. When all the negative factors are exhausted, it will become numb.</p><p>It cannot be ruled out that the US core PCE will rise above 3% in April. In the past 10 years, the US core inflation has not risen above 3%. This exceeding expectations is partly due to the very low base caused by the US lockdown policies in April and May last year.</p><p>Secondly, the implementation of the 1.9 trillion yuan fiscal rescue plan in late March, coupled with the rapid rollout of vaccines, and April being the big day of Easter, resulted in a significant rebound in consumption.</p><p>The April inflation data is an anomaly, but capital markets tend to extrapolate linearly, so there may be some disturbances at that time. Even if there are some disturbances, it can actually be seen that all the negative factors have been exhausted, which is precisely a golden opportunity.</p><p>Therefore, I believe that even if inflation exceeds expectations in the later stages, the Federal Reserve will have sufficient tools and power to lower long-term bond yields. After all, the Federal Reserve has many weapons in its arsenal, and there are still methods such as YCC that have not been implemented.</p><p><b>From the Federal Reserve's perspective, when to take action still depends on real interest rates;</b></p><p>Although the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds has risen to 1.6%, the real interest rate for the entire 10-year term is still -0.6%. Apart from the 30-year US Treasury Bond real interest rate turning positive, the others have not yet turned positive.</p><p><b>The timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side; there's no need to panic too much.</b></p><p>III.<b>Market outlook and timing of adjustments</b></p><p>The third thing I want to report and discuss with you is the market outlook and the timing of adjustments.</p><p><b>We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p>Recently, this has mainly been reflected in a group-buying game among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle.</p><p>After a recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessments of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position. Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this location.</p><p>Concerns about whether the negative impact of group speculation will worsen will continue to suppress market risk appetite.</p><p>Currently, fund managers have reported that redemptions are not obvious, and fund investors' sentiment is relatively stable, which is incomparable to the stampede of 2015. However, it may take time to digest the situation.</p><p><b>Now that the price has adjusted to this level, people are confident in the long run, but the static TTM valuation is not particularly attractive.</b></p><p><b>Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show another upward trend, which might be a better timing.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side, so there's no need to panic too much. If you're trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.</b></p><p>Overall, the group-buying game is not an objective result, but rather a self-reinforcing and self-circulating process centered around the requirements of the fund's relative return ranking.</p><p>Previously, they were chasing rallies, but recently they've been selling off prices. This is subjective speculation.</p><p>Therefore, every time the market rally of assets that were heavily invested in in the past ended, it was not due to external shocks. At most, external shocks only triggered a major quarterly correction.</p><p>The key to the true end is whether the medium- to long-term fundamental trend of the related assets has undergone an unexpected reversal. Whether these assets can take off again depends on their performance.</p><p>What we should do now is not worry about whether to participate in a short-term rebound, but rather to focus on the long term and the short term. We should first conduct research to confirm the companies we previously heavily invested in and ensure their fundamentals.</p><p>If you can't find out it's a scam while the price is falling, then you're doomed. For example, LeEco in 2015 either delisted or its fundamental logic was disproven.</p><p>This time, it's more like the core assets of the United States over the past decade or so. These assets also adjust when they fall. For example, Amazon and Google also experienced sharp declines in February 2018. However, the decline of these companies can only improve their cost-effectiveness, not disprove the logic of fundamentals.</p><p>Instead of worrying about the macroeconomic trend now, it's better to focus on stock selection, because the macroeconomic trend has already been reflected in the previous adjustments.</p><p>We have noticed that since February 18, northbound capital has generally seen a net inflow, especially since March, when the inflow has been quite significant.</p><p>It's just that its style is more balanced, from being consumer-oriented to now focusing on performance, including some banks, chemicals, and even steel and real estate.</p><p>Of course, some people wonder if this is speculative capital behavior. The investors we are dealing with, whether they are clients from Europe and America or clients from Singapore, who are relatively far from China, actually have confidence in China because the cost-effectiveness is better, and good assets are scarce in the world.</p><p><b>The subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>IV.<b>Investment Strategy</b></p><p>Finally, here are my investment strategy suggestions for everyone.<b>I believe the label-based style shift has come to an end, and the subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>In the next stage, whether a black cat or a white cat catches a mouse is a good cat. The industry may not be clearly defined, nor will it be a game where steel prices rise while new energy prices fall.</p><p>The most comfortable period for a sectoral rebound in cyclical stocks has passed, and the opportunity for valuation recovery has come to an end.<b>Next, we need to find α within β.</b>This time, China's style shift will not be as strong as that of the United States.</p><p>Recently, the U.S. energy and financial sectors have generally risen due to expanding demand in the U.S.</p><p>China's recovery this time is different from last year. The growth rate of investment in infrastructure or real estate is slowing down marginally, unlike the 4 trillion yuan investment after 2008, or the rise in cyclical stocks in the 2000s due to the surge in demand.</p><p><b>The first step in the style shift is almost complete.</b>。</p><p>China's economic growth rate gradually slowed down in the following quarters, so commodities such as copper or crude oil cannot be expected to rise much further.</p><p><b>My assessment is that copper and even oil prices have reached a high level.</b>Because although Europe and the United States are recovering, this recovery is more driven by consumption than by infrastructure.</p><p>At the same time, China needs to take the opportunity to resolve the risks of existing debt and reduce the government leverage ratio, which is relatively negative for infrastructure and commodity demand. Therefore, in terms of bulk raw materials, the situation in China and Europe and the United States may be offset by a fluctuation.</p><p><b>Therefore, upstream bulk raw materials may have already entered a period of high-level fluctuations and begun to diverge.</b></p><p>Why haven't cyclical stocks plummeted across the board immediately? Previous experience has shown that stocks peak before commodity prices peak.</p><p>This time, it's because of carbon neutrality. Cyclical commodities that benefit from carbon neutrality can continue to rise, which is the logic of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>The second quarter is a boon for the manufacturing industry.</b></p><p><b>The left-hand entry point for growth sectors has arrived.</b></p><p>For midstream manufacturing, opportunities are beginning to become clearly established:</p><p><b>In the second quarter, both overseas and domestically, upstream inflation is likely to reach its peak, which means it's good news for the manufacturing industry.</b>This will alleviate manufacturing costs in various aspects; Meanwhile, the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually more inertial because it is consumption-driven.</p><p>Therefore, for leading manufacturing companies that can secure overseas orders and have global pricing power, it is essentially alpha, for example, now whether...<b>Wanhua for chemicals, or Sany for machinery?</b>In fact, they are all relatively independent entities. They are not completely subject to the fluctuations of cyclical industries, but are beginning to develop an attribute that can transcend cycles.</p><p>Cyclical industries should pay attention to the impact of carbon neutrality in the next stage, especially since some leading manufacturing companies will benefit from carbon neutrality on the one hand, and will also be able to share in the positive effects of the economic recovery in Europe and the United States on the other. Therefore, in the next stage, it is time to start investing in high-quality manufacturing companies.</p><p><b>For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side investment opportunity has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.</b></p><p>The so-called left-side positioning is because previously favored sectors may rebound after falling sharply, but whether this can be sustained depends on profitability. If the profit elasticity is not strong and only the stock has strong long-term stability, then the current dynamic P/E and static P/E cannot allow everyone to buy the dip without any doubts.</p><p>From a short-term perspective, these sectors are in a somewhat awkward position. As soon as a rebound occurs, people will flee. Therefore, these types of assets will subsequently recover, fluctuate, and consolidate their range.</p><p>We believe that,<b>A better time for growth-oriented core assets may be in the mid-to-late second quarter.</b></p><p><b>The long-term cost-effectiveness of core assets like the internet is beginning to become apparent.</b></p><p><b>Corresponding to Hong Kong stocks</b>，<b>First, value stocks such as the financial sector or the three major telecom operators are now being used as a defensive counterattack.</b>I think it's still worth buying if you're not looking for exorbitant profits; it can be considered a relatively good convertible bond.</p><p><b>Secondly, cyclical stocks will diverge; the more stocks that can make alpha, the better.</b>The benefits of inflation are already implicit in stock prices. When inflation truly peaks, stock prices may have already begun to fall because the stock market is more sensitive than the real economy.</p><p>We believe that commodity prices have entered their highest point for the year, even if they haven't reached their peak yet.<b>However, the strongest phase of the upward trend in commodities may have passed;</b></p><p>Commodities are now entering a period of high-level fluctuations and the formation of a top area. Under these circumstances, the impact of demand on cyclical commodities is weakening, and there is an opportunity for carbon neutrality around the 2.0 version of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>Third, China's growth sectors, especially core assets like the internet, are expected to recover in the first half of the year but face no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.</b>。</p><p>This type of asset and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOG\">Google</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">Microsoft</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">Apple</a>Let's benchmark against our leading internet companies; they have stronger growth potential and greater profit elasticity, such as...<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent</a>and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>The valuation is actually very attractive.</p><p>The market's sentiment towards growth-oriented core assets is more of a gradual easing, at least there is no systemic risk. Tencent and Alibaba can stabilize, and Meituan's fluctuations are not a big problem. The market has differing opinions on Xiaomi, and there are so-called problems with military-related companies. However, after falling by 25% since the beginning of the year, the negative factors have begun to be fully exhausted.</p><p>That's why I have the confidence to say that there's little room for Hong Kong stocks to fall below 28,400 points. Once the leading growth stocks in Hong Kong stocks stabilize, other growth stocks can recover. For example, sectors such as property management, education, auto parts, consumer goods, and pharmaceuticals can now look for alpha.</p><p><b>sum up</b></p><p>To summarize in three sentences:</p><p>(a) This<b>This is not a systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but rather a correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b>。</p><p>(II)<b>There is not much room for further downward adjustment.</b>There has been a short-term market rebound, but sentiment is still affected by the negative impact of group buying and speculation. Therefore, the correction may extend into the mid-to-late second quarter, which is a period for right-side positioning.</p><p>(iii) Style switching should not be done blindly. Do not label stocks according to industry attributes. We are now entering the era of stock selection with a left-side layout.</p><p>The relative returns of growth stocks (consumer technology and pharmaceuticals) and cyclical value stocks have converged rapidly over the past two months, and both have now entered the stage of stock selection.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ebb146d9df27844cb787ad545c50986d","relate_stocks":{"399001":"深证成指","399006":"创业板指","000001.SH":"上证指数"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199276124","content_text":"“这次不是系统性风险。为什么不是系统性风险？这一次美债收益率超预期上行的根本原因还是美债供求关系的一个失衡，而更核心的原因是美债持有结构的一个质的变化。”\n“我今天在这里想传递给大家的一个重要理念，就是中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率的波动。”\n“后疫情时代，美国的国债收益率有反弹，但难反转。历史上看每次出现金融危机，都是美债收益率直接干到3或者干到5，现在别说干到3或5了，能够稳住在2都很难。”\n“中长期而言，中美大国博弈是持久战，美国更可能的策略是什么？是用钱买时间来增强竞争力。来去压制中国的竞争力。对内用钱买时间来去恢复美国的竞争力，对外利用规则联合盟友来压制我们中国的竞争力。\n未来，美国要跟我们竞赛，在先进制造业、科技和内需方面竞赛，这三方面最终将是中美大国博弈在经济层面的三个聚焦点。”\n“从中长期的角度来看，现在不是系统性风险的开始，也不是一个熊市的开始，而是结构性长牛一次小小的修正。”\n“这一次的调整对于成长股来说可能会矫枉过正，估值杀下来以后有人会开始担心业绩不达预期或者赎回基金引发多杀多恶性循环，这种情况下，很多人担心这次行情调整的空间和时间。\n我认为后续调整空间不大，主要的下跌已经结束，后面会有分化。”\n“调整时间我们觉得是取决于抱团博弈的负面冲击延续多久。近期主要是体现在成长股的一个抱团博弈，最近是从良性循环走向恶性循环。经过了近期的快速调整以后，基于行业分析师对于公司长期判断，我们认为成长型的核心资产的估值已经进入到中长期合理的位置。所以外国投资者最近也在不断的开始买。这个位置下行空间不大。”\n“也许到了二季度后期，刚刚讲的海外的利空叠加国内政策的软化，国内的经济数值开始回落，那时，行情再出现趋势性的上涨，可能时间节点更好。现在可以选股做左侧，不用太恐慌了，如果是做右侧，可以再稍稍的等一等。”\n“二季度无论海外还是国内，上游‘胀’的力量可能都会到高点，这意味着对于制造业是个福音，制造业的成本各方面能够有所缓解；而同时欧美的复苏因为是消费驱动的，惯性其实更强一些。”\n“对于成长型的板块，无论是消费还是医药，立足长期而言，左侧布局点其实也已经来临了，那些跟风的不坚定分子现在已经开始出局。”\n“中国的成长领域标的特别是互联网这种核心资产，上半年后续是休养生息但没有大的系统性风险，长期的性价比已经开始凸显了。”\n以上，是兴业证券首席全球策略分析师张忆东，3月17日在一场小范围的交流中，分享的最新精彩观点。\n最近美债收益率收益率上行，国内市场连续回调，而在张忆东看来，国内投资者对于美债收益率上行的这个事过度关注了。\n张忆东详细分析了这次美债收益率上行背后的核心原因，认为现在的美债已经跟10年前的美债不是同一个影响力了，中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率的波动。从中长期的角度来看，这是结构性长牛一次小小的修正，后面会有分化。\n同时，他还重点谈到了这次调整可能带来的机会，哪些资产现在已经可以开始布局。\n以下是此次交流全文，聪明投资者经忆东总授权，分享给大家。\n\n很高兴今天晚上跟大家一起分享，汇报关于美债收益率、通胀和风格切换的问题，以及关于市场后期走向的问题。\n国内投资者有三种悲观情绪\n真是属于脑洞大开\n一、对于美债收益率和通胀的看法\n总体来说，我们觉得回到核心资产的价值真谛，这才是重要的。对于美债以及抱团博弈，这都是浮云。\n交流下来，我感觉国内的投资者对于美债收益率上行的这个事过度关注了。\n现在国内投资者有三种悲观的情绪：\n第一种情绪，觉得美国要完，像是2008年次贷的那种预期，觉得美国长债收益率上行会引发美国的债务风险，进而导致全球的无风险收益率的上行，最终美国债股双杀引发全球危机，中国也好不了；\n第二种情绪，相反，觉得美国很厉害，觉得美国经济复苏很强，美国要搞超限金融战了，美元可能要反转了，要割全世界韭菜了，就像是东南亚金融危机，，这一种情绪是对美国过度高估，投降主义；\n第三种情绪是，对于美债收益率上行——不明觉厉，先卧倒为敬，以防范海外的风险。\n这三种情绪真是属于脑洞大开。\n这一次美债收益率上行，我们要深入的聊一聊，知其然更要知其所以然。\n从2月中旬到现在，全球市场并不是全都在跌，法国、德国等欧元区股市其实是在创历史新高，道琼斯也不断地创历史新高，纳斯达克确实调整了但也还是很克制的，反而，中国内地和中国香港股市从2月中旬到现在调得七荤八素的。\n美债收益率上行不是系统性风险\n更核心的原因是美债持有结构质的变化\n我们有必要在这个时候梳理一下美债收益率上行的核心原因，从而来预判这究竟是不是一个系统性风险？\n从2月初开始，美债收益率从1.15%快速攀升到现在的1.6%，升得这么快确实超出预期。升得快的背后是不是基本面的因素？\n比如说通胀失控、经济过热，如果是这些因素，会带来系统性的风险。\n但是，如果美联储或者美国财政部能够控制到的话，那就是技术性的风险。\n很显然我们认为这次不是系统性风险。为什么不是系统性风险？\n这一次美债收益率超预期上行的根本原因还是美债供求关系的一个失衡，而更核心的原因是美债持有结构的一个质的变化。\n2008年美国之外的外国投资者持有美债的比重是54%，然后到了2015年是47%，之后下降的飞快，现在是34%。\n一方面中国2015年以后汇率改革了，而中东的产油国也没钱了，日本持有的美国国债规模在2015年之后出现了明显的下滑，日本从1985年开始井喷式购买的美债（期限最长的为30年）进入偿还期了。\n外国投资者持有美债的需求明显的减弱。\n另一方面，新冠疫情之后美债的发行较过去20年有大幅提升，2020年比2009年增加了一倍多，所以这种情况下短期就会使得美债利率上行超预期。\n可以看到前段时间7年期美债的拍卖的竞拍倍数是差不多20年的低位，投资者兴趣索然，这种情况推动了阶段性的供需关系的一个失衡，进而推动了美国长债利率超预期的上行。\n现在的美债跟10年前的美债不是同一个影响力\n美债投资者结构从量变到质变，外国投资者的占比出现了趋势性的下行，这个影响可能是比较深远的。\n首先，过去的格林斯潘之谜不再谜了，美债长端利率反映的是国内财政政策的正常节奏，而作为全球资产定价之锚的作用在弱化。\n从1969年一直到2015年，外国投资者帮助美联储压低了长债利率，甚至使得美国的长端利率和短端利率产生了脱节，这就是所谓的格林斯潘之迷。\n格林斯潘想要去在短端加息，但是根本无法传导影响长端利率。\n此一时彼一时，现在的美债已经跟10年前的美债不是同一个影响力了。\n现在美债市场投资者结构的变化，使得美债收益率对于短期的供给更加敏感，美债短期供求关系的紧平衡，这才是近期美债长端利率超预期上行的主要原因。\n耶伦可以发债缓一下，或者说美联储购债力度大一点，这都很正常，更不用说还有OT、YCC等工具。所以这不是一个系统性风险或者趋势性风险。\n部分国内投资者担心的美国通胀预期和美国经济，无法解释美债收益率上行，最多只是次要因素。\n因为美国经济只是刚刚复苏，远不是过热；另外，通胀预期2月18号之后，事实上TIPS所隐含的通胀预期是平稳的，甚至略有下降。\n我们把美债收益率作为全球资产定价之锚的历史做了一个回顾，无论是70年代石油美元还是80年代的日本增持，还是说到90年代东南亚金融危机后新兴市场的外汇储备大部分放在了美债，因为美债是低交易成本高流动性高安全性的。\n中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率波动\n现在不少投资者理所当然地认为，美债收益率就是全球大类资产配置定价的锚，一旦动了就地动山摇。\n但是，我认为这个锚其实在发生弱化。\n弱化的一个节点是在2008年次贷危机，2008年以后海外投资者持有美债的比重就见顶回落了，如今美国国债市场已经产生了质的变化，海外投资者持有美债的比重回到了2002年的水平。\n我今天在这里想传递给大家的一个重要理念，就是中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率的波动。\n现在的美债是美国践行MMT（现代货币理论）之后的新美债，它更加反映美国财政状况，回归了本源——教科书上讲国债市场是服务于国内财政政策的变化。\n之所以此前美债长端利率能够作为国际大类资产配置的锚，是因为各个主权国家和主要的投资机构都高度持有美债从而影响到方方面面的金融运行，但是现在，美债市场里边的主要购买者是美联储。\n去年美国政府净发行的4.68万亿美金的国债，其中52%以上是美联储买的。\n慢慢地，美债的属性从一个国际配置的锚的属性开始转向作为一个为大国内部财政金融服务的属性。\n后疫情时代\n美国的国债收益率有反弹，但难反转\n再延伸一点，我们说在一个MMT理论的新时代，投资者的知识体系要更新，摆脱八九十年代的框架；\n那个框架告诉我们要注意财政的纪律、要注意债务上限，也许大家还记得当初欧洲的马斯特里赫特条约。\nMMT理论的指导下，硬货币国家已经突破了债务上限，硬货币国家的债务扩展-经济增长-汇率相关作用的体系已经重构并且逻辑自洽。\n比如说欧债危机以后的欧洲，债务率有趋势性的上移；美国债务一路向上走，现在是303%的总债务率，远高于中国的270%。\n在硬货币的国家，只要美元主导的国际货币体系不崩盘，MMT新货币理论实施的期限就会超预期。\n也许大家感觉很不能理解，美国虚拟经济太繁荣、而实体经济并不太好，为啥不断借债就是没有导致明斯基时刻，为啥美国没有发生债务危机？\n如果这是一个新兴市场、一个软货币的国家，毫无疑问，债务已经很高了，然后再发债、再进行刺激的时候，它往往对内是通胀，对外是贬值，资本外逃，最终会导致债务危机。\n但是现在，美国财政部长耶伦已经把牌都打给我们看了，她的意思是说：只要财政刺激能够推动GDP的改善，这就可以持续下去。\n政府债务可以变为永续债，根本不用考虑什么时候要还。\n所以本质上来说，在民粹主义盛行的互联网时代，相比起我们在做的各种改革和社会的变革，欧洲和美国更愿意花钱买时间，通过科技创新、经过一段时间的发展去解决。\n所以，我们认为，后疫情时代，美国的国债收益率有反弹，但难反转。\n历史上看每次出现金融危机，都是美债收益率直接干到3或者干到5，现在别说干到3或5了，能够稳住在2都很难。\n我不排除今年5月份，有可能美国通胀数据核心PCE在基数效应以及新一轮的财政刺激下超预期，导致美债市场可能慌一慌，美债收益率向2冲一冲，有这个可能性；\n但是，难以持续，所以我们说美债收益率有反弹难反转。\n现在的新型滞胀不同于70年代的滞涨\n现在的常态是新型滞胀，不同于70年代的滞涨。\n“滞”，大家都能理解，但是“胀”是不一样的，因为在70年代的滞涨，那是婴儿潮的时代，需求没问题，但是供给有问题，1973年和1978年两次石油危机。\n现在的滞胀的问题是什么？现在需求有问题，人口老龄化，贫富差距拉大等等压制有效需求；\n现在的“胀”更多的体现在资产泡沫，比如说核心地段的房子还是保值增值的，以及我们讲的各个领域的核心资产——就是中国最具有核心竞争力、长期成长动能的，无论是增长稳健的周期价值股，还是成长超预期的消费医药科技等等，这些优质资产都是全球稀缺的。\n实施MMT的欧美，特别是美国，目前的经济复苏的轮子还是转的，但是很难带来美国进入新的一轮全面繁荣；\n它的社会问题是深层次的“滞”，种族矛盾、贫富差距拉大等问题都会抑制有效需求，另外，美国不可能一直靠直升机撒钱去补贴懒人，因为这不符合美国的新教精神。\n在这种背景下，现在的通胀不是问题，美国长债利率上行也不是大问题。\n美国的策略是用钱买时间\n来增强竞争力\n有些A股投资者担心说“美国很厉害，美国要收割我们，美国要搞金融战了”。\n我劝大家不必太高估美国，大国博弈是持久战，美国现在没有足够的意愿和信心来挑起金融危机，因为他现在的状态其实是用钱来买时间，用规则慢慢熬我们。\n美国当前的国内政治形势可以借鉴的其实是上世纪70年代初的美国，当时是打输了越战，这一次是抗击疫情失利，美国国内的政治非常撕裂动荡；\n另外，当时的外部形势是，苏联和日本分别在政治经济对美国有了很强的竞争压力，而这一次中国其实比70年代的日本对美国经济的赶超压力更大，在政治外交军事上美国也在编造“中国威胁论”。\n所以，这个时候我认为美国其实没有足够的意愿和信心去挑起金融危机，如果美国有信心的话，它也不会前段时间拔网线了。\n中长期而言，中美大国博弈是持久战，美国更可能的策略是什么？\n是用钱买时间来增强竞争力。来去压制中国的竞争力。对内用钱买时间来去恢复美国的竞争力，对外利用规则联合盟友来压制我们中国的竞争力。\n未来，美国要跟我们竞赛，在先进制造业、科技和内需方面竞赛，这三方面最终将是中美大国博弈在经济层面的三个聚焦点。\n从这里引申一下，为什么我们很积极的推动碳中和？\n碳中和绝对不是单纯的短期题材炒作，从而出现钢铁涨了就是碳中和，清洁能源和新能源车下跌的就不是碳中和，这是炒作而已。\n从大国博弈的高度来正确认知碳中和，\n一方面是我们提前未雨绸缪，知道美国要从环保、清洁能源、可持续发展等方面来限制我们，那我们自己主动、更快地调整自己；\n而且，我们通过实施碳中和战略可以和欧洲建立一个更广泛的利益同盟，这一方面的意义更加深远。\n总结一下，美国的长债利率上行是不可持续的，它更多是一个技术性问题，是一个阶段性问题，要对美债利率脱敏，不要太敏感。\n因为现在的美债影响力已经跟过去的30年不一样了。这一次不是危机的前兆，2021年肯定不是2008年也不是2018年，现在大家对此的焦虑情绪有点极端了。\n现在是结构性长牛一次小小的修正\n催化剂是美国复苏带动全球股市风格切换\n二、对于风格切换的看法\n从中长期的角度来看，现在不是系统性风险的开始，也不是一个熊市的开始，而是结构性长牛一次小小的修正。\n我们展望市场行情，一方面，短期抱团博弈经历了大喜大悲大起大伏，现在情绪还不稳定，需要时间来修复信心。\n但另一方面，对于核心资产，立足基本面逻辑才能行稳致远，真正的好公司不怕跌、跌不怕，这是我2016年初就跟大家讲的，市场震荡的时候其实是选股的好时机。\n关于行情的展望，有几个市场关注的问题：\n第一个问题，是调整的界定——这次调整不是系统性危机的开始，其实就是阶段性的休整，休整的催化剂是美国复苏带动全球股市风格切换。\n美国投资者觉得美债收益率上行是正常的复苏伴生物，美国人觉得这很正常，最近美国道琼斯指数明显跑赢纳斯达克指数，从行业属性上看，能源、金融、工业设备跑赢了信息技术，但是信息技术领域的动态市盈率下降的也比较快。\n未来几个月欧美经济应该进入到更加强劲的复苏阶段，因为疫苗普及，加之1.9万亿美元新一轮的刺激落地，都会带来消费的报复性反弹，再加上低基数，所以美国二季度无论是经济复苏的数据还是通胀的数据，都会比较强劲。\n所以，2021年风格切换是价值投资的必然选择。\n这次调整对于成长股来说可能会矫枉过正\n我们认为美股其实已经在引领着全球的价值回归，就是风格的再平衡、性价比的重新考量和估值体系的再建。\n事实上A股和港股最近一个多月周期价值的相对收益很明显，比如恒指年初以来排名靠前的是三桶油、金融和三大运营商，这些都属于周期价值之类的。\n这一次的调整对于成长股来说可能会矫枉过正；\n估值杀下来以后有人会开始担心业绩不达预期或者赎回基金引发多杀多恶性循环，这种情况下，很多人担心这次行情调整的空间和时间。\n我认为后续调整空间不大，主要的下跌已经结束，后面会有分化。\n在我们2月写的报告《初生牛犊遇到虎，倒春寒后换风格》里提出，行情在三月中应该进入了一个反弹阶段。\n事实上从3月12日到现在，无论A股还是港股基本上还是震荡上行的，虽然力度不强。不排除5月份全球又会有一个波折，我们判断那个时候向下跌的空间也是不大的；\n无论是A股和港股大指数一点都不贵，跟海外市场相比甚至是很便宜，那时A股3400点以下、港股的28400点以下没啥空间。\n为什么3月中旬“倒春寒”可能告一段落甚至结束\n美债收益率上行在二季度可能还有一定的惯性\n从时间的维度来看，现在可能还有两个小风险没有完全的释放干净，可能会引发市场的一些干扰。\n一个风险是整体美债收益率上行在二季度可能还有一定的惯性；\n虽然我们也看到从近期美债收益率上行的斜率已经放缓了，其实斜率放缓就是告诉大家这不是一个系统性风险，可以淡化美债收益率上行的因素，开始围绕基本面去调研选股。\n为什么我们说3月中旬“倒春寒”可能告一段落甚至结束？\n这是一种历史规律，美债波动率指数每次升到一倍标准差附近，大多数的时候会进入震荡收敛了，也就是说会预示到二阶导数已经开始斜率放缓。\n到了四五月份，很可能美债收益率收益率会短期冲一下，但这是强弩之末了，年内见顶。\nA股投资者担心1.9万亿美元财政救助计划正常来说会加重联邦政府的债务压力，但事实上因为当前美国财政部总账户存款（TGA）中仍有约1.4万亿元。\n根据美国财政部最新表态，后续疫后刺激将优先使用TGA余额而非新发行债务。美国财政部预期2021上半年资金缺口、融资计划都将明显下降。这是一个利空出尽。\nA股投资者对通胀的担心过度焦虑了\n另外一个利空，就是究竟美国式的复苏会不会引发大宗商品CPI、PPI的失控和飙升。\n现在来看，无论是外国投资者还是美联储，都是把美国的复苏的当做一种正常预期，但是不少A股投资者好像比较悲观，他们担心的是什么？\n担心美国经济强复苏的话，全球的通胀可能会加速，中国就会面临着输入型的通胀，从而会不会引发政策进一步收紧。这种对通胀的担心是太过度焦虑了。\n什么时候对于通胀上行的过度担忧能够被证伪，这就要等今年的二季度后期，也就是5月上旬看4月份的通胀数据，6月上旬看5月份的通胀数据。\n快则5月上旬是4月份通胀数据公布出来，那么该反应的市场也会反应了，不反应也就属于提前反应了，利空出尽的时候反而就麻木了。\n不排除美国4月的核心PCE会上升到3%以上，近10年美国的核心通胀都没有上到3%以上，超预期一是因为去年4月~5月份美国lock down政策导致基数非常低，\n二是因为，3月下旬1.9万亿的财政救助计划实施再叠加了疫苗的普及也比较快，4月份又是复活节的大日子，所以，消费的报复性反弹还是比较明显的。\n4月份的通胀数据是一个异常值，但是资本市场往往会线性外推，所以可能那个时候会有一些扰动。即便有些扰动，其实可以看做是利空出尽，这恰恰是一个黄金坑。\n所以我认为即使后期通胀超预期，美联储也是有足够的工具和力量去压低长债利率的。毕竟美联储武器库里面的武器很多，还有YCC等手段没实施。\n从美联储的角度看什么时候要动手，还是要看实际利率；\n现在虽然十年期美债收益率上升到1.6%了，但是整个十年期实际利率还是在-0.6%，除了30年美国国债实际利率转正以外，其他的都还没转正。\n调整时间取决于抱团博弈的负面冲击延续多久\n现在可以选股做左侧，不用太恐慌了\n三、对市场的展望和调整的时间\n第三个要跟大家汇报交流的是对市场的展望和调整的时间。\n调整时间我们觉得是取决于抱团博弈的负面冲击延续多久。\n近期主要是体现在成长股的一个抱团博弈，最近是从良性循环走向恶性循环。\n经过了近期的快速调整以后，基于行业分析师对于公司长期判断，我们认为成长型的核心资产的估值已经进入到中长期合理的位置。所以外国投资者最近也在不断的开始买。这个位置下行空间不大。\n对抱团博弈的负面冲击会不会恶化的担忧，仍将压制市场风险偏好。\n目前基金经理反馈说赎回不明显，基金投资者的心态还是比较的稳定，跟2015年的那种多杀多的踩踏是不可同日而语的，但是，后面可能还需要时间去消化。\n现在调整到这个位置，长期来看大家是有信心的，但是静态TTM估值还不算特别有吸引力；\n也许到了二季度后期，刚刚讲的海外的利空叠加国内政策的软化，国内的经济数值开始回落，那时，行情再出现趋势性的上涨，可能时间节点更好。\n现在可以选股做左侧，不用太恐慌了，如果是做右侧，可以再稍稍的等一等。\n总体来说，抱团博弈其实不是一种客观结果，而是来围绕着基金的相对收益排名的要求，形成了自我强化和自我循环。\n之前是追涨，最近一段时间就是杀跌，它这种是主观投机。\n所以过去每一次抱团资产的行情终结，都不是因为外部冲击，外部冲击最多只是引发季度性的大调整，\n真正终结的关键、还是相关资产的中长期的基本面趋势是否发生了超预期的反转。后续这些资产能不能再出发，关键还是在于业绩。\n现在该做的不是去操心要不要参与短期反弹，而是要以长打短，先去调研来确认一下此前我们重仓的这些公司，要保证它的基本面。\n不能跌着跌着发现是骗子，那就完了，比如2015年乐视之类的，要么退市，要么基本面逻辑被证伪了。\n这一次更像是过去十几年美国的那些美国核心资产，这些资产跌的时候也会调整，比如Amazon和Google在2018年的2月份也有大跌过。但是这些公司跌了以后只能是使得它的性价比更好了，而不是基本面的逻辑证伪了。\n现在与其操心宏观大势，不如来做选股，因为宏观大势已经在前面的调整中反应出来了。\n我们关注到从2月18日以来，北向资金总体来说是净流入，特别是3月份以来，流入其实是比较明显的；\n只是说它的风格更加平衡一些，从此前的偏消费，到现在业绩为王，一些银行、化工，甚至钢铁和地产都有。\n当然有人疑惑这是不是游资行为，我们在接触的、无论是欧美的客户还是新加坡的客户，这些离中国比较远一点的投资者对中国其实是有信心的，因为性价比更好了，好资产在全球是稀缺的。\n后续风格会转向盈利驱动\n四、投资策略\n最后是我给大家的投资策略建议。我认为标签式的风格转换已经告一段落了，后续的风格会转向盈利驱动。\n下阶段，黑猫白猫抓住老鼠就是好猫，行业上未必是说泾渭分明，不是钢铁涨而新能源就要跌的博弈。\n周期股板块性反弹最舒服的阶段已经过去了，估值修复的机会告一段落，后面要在β里面找α，这一次中国风格切换不会像美国那么强。\n最近美国的能源和金融板块普涨，这是因为美国存在需求的扩张。\n中国这次复苏跟去年已经不一样了，基建或者房地产的投资增速在边际放缓，不像2008年之后的4万亿，或者说像00年代加入WTO、城镇化工业化，那个时候周期股上涨都是因为需求的大爆发。\n现在风格切换的第一步已经差不多了。\n中国经济增速后几个季度是逐步回落的，所以不能指望铜或者原油这一类的大宗商品还能够涨多少。\n我的判断是铜价甚至油价到了一个高位区域了，因为虽然欧美在复苏，这种复苏更多是消费驱动，而不是基建驱动；\n与此同时，中国要趁机化解存量债务风险，降低政府杠杆率，对于基建、大宗商品需求相对是负面的，所以大宗原物料而言，中国和欧美的情况可能会有一个此消彼长的对冲。\n所以上游的大宗原物料可能已经进入高位震荡、开始分化了。\n为什么周期股还没有立刻全线的暴跌，以前的经验是大宗商品价格见顶之前，股票就先见顶了？\n这次是因为碳中和，大宗周期品受益于碳中和的还能继续涨，这是供给侧改革的逻辑。\n二季度对于制造业是个福音\n成长型板块左侧布局点已经来临\n对于中游制造业来看，机会正开始慢慢明显确立：\n二季度无论海外还是国内，上游“胀”的力量可能都会到高点，这意味着对于制造业是个福音，制造业的成本各方面能够有所缓解；而同时欧美的复苏因为是消费驱动的，惯性其实更强一些。\n所以，对于这种能够拿到海外订单以及在全球有定价权的制造业龙头，本质上是α，比如说现在无论是万华之于化工，还是三一之于机械，其实都是一个相对独立的存在，它并没有完全受制于周期行业的波动，而是开始走出来一个穿越周期的属性。\n周期行业下阶段要重视碳中和的影响，特别是有些制造业龙头一方面受益于碳中和，另一方面亦能够分享到欧美经济复苏带来的利好，所以，下个阶段可以动手布局制造业的优质公司了。\n对于成长型的板块，无论是消费还是医药，立足长期而言，左侧布局点其实也已经来临了，那些跟风的不坚定分子现在已经开始出局。\n所谓左侧布局，因为前期抱团板块可能会跌深反弹，但能否持续还是要看盈利，如果盈利弹性不强而只是长期稳定性强的股票，那现在的动态市盈率和静态市盈率还不能让大家毫无疑虑地抄底。\n从短期角度来看，这些板块的地位有点尴尬，一反弹就会有人出逃，因此这一类的资产后续休养生息、上上下下、夯实箱体的过程。\n我们认为，成长型的核心资产更好的时机可能是在二季度的中后期。\n互联网这种核心资产长期性价比开始凸显\n对应到港股里面，首先，金融或三大运营商这些价值股，现在作为防守反击，不求暴利的标的我觉得还是可以拿的，可以视为比较好的一个可转债。\n其次，周期股会分化，越是能做出α的越会好一些，而通胀带来的收益其实已经隐含在股价里了，通胀真正见峰值的时候，股价可能就已经开始跌了，因为股市比实体经济会更敏感一些。\n我们判断大宗商品价格已经进入年内的高点区域，就算还没有到大顶部，但大宗商品上行最强的阶段可能已经过去了；\n现在大宗商品进入到高位震荡、构筑顶部区域的时期，在这种情况下，需求对于周期品的影响在弱化，这个时候围绕着供给侧改革的2.0版的碳中和是有机会的。\n第三，中国的成长领域标的特别是互联网这种核心资产，上半年后续是休养生息但没有大的系统性风险，长期的性价比已经开始凸显了。\n把这一类资产跟谷歌、微软、苹果去对标一下，我们的互联网龙头有更强的增长性、更强的利润弹性，比如像腾讯和阿里巴巴的估值其实是非常有吸引力的。\n市场对于成长型的核心资产更多是一种情绪的慢慢疏解，至少没有系统性风险，腾讯阿里巴巴能稳住，美团上下波动也没大问题，市场对于小米的看法有分歧，有所谓涉军企业的问题，但从年初以来跌了25%以后开始有点利空出尽的状态。\n所以这些才让我有底气说港股28400点以下没啥空间的。港股的成长龙头稳住之后，其他的成长股就能回暖，比如物业、教育、汽车汽车零部件、消费和医药这些板块，现在都可以找找α。\n总结\n三句话简单概括一下：\n（一）这不是系统性风险，不是一个熊市的开始，而是结构性长牛的一次修正。\n（二）后续调整空间下行并不大，短期市场有反弹，但情绪依然受到抱团博弈负向冲击的影响，所以，调整时间有可能延续到二季度中后期，才是右侧布局的一个时期。\n（三）风格切换不能盲目，不要按照行业属性贴标签式选边站，现在开始进入到左侧布局的选股时代。\n成长股（消费科技医药）跟周期价值股过去两个月相对收益的快速收敛，现在双方都已经进入到个股精选的阶段。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"399001":0.9,"399006":0.9,"000001.SH":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4702,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":168252298,"gmtCreate":1623977122214,"gmtModify":1703825151624,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"ydydhdhshhd","listText":"ydydhdhshhd","text":"ydydhdhshhd","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":10,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/168252298","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5495,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":375838197,"gmtCreate":1619321532319,"gmtModify":1704722426169,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"maiijhhhh","listText":"maiijhhhh","text":"maiijhhhh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/375838197","repostId":"1168120359","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1168120359","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1619317866,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1168120359?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-25 10:31","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Intel CEO: Chip shortage will continue for another two years after weak new quarter earnings results.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1168120359","media":"腾讯科技","summary":"4月24日消息，美国半导体巨头英特尔刚刚公布了疲软的季度财报，其新任首席执行官帕特·盖尔辛格（Pat Gelsinger）表示，全球芯片供应短缺可能还会持续两年时间。\n盖尔辛格在接受采访时说，几个月来","content":"<p>On April 24, it was reported that US semiconductor giant Intel had just released weak quarterly earnings reports, and its new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, said that the global chip supply shortage may continue for another two years.</p><p>In an interview, Gelsinger said that the chip supply shortage that has affected multiple sectors of the global economy for several months will continue until more capacity comes online to meet chip demand for products ranging from automobiles to electronics. He added, \"It will take some time for people to increase production capacity. When you're building a new factory, things don't change much in the short term.\"</p><p>A global shortage of semiconductor chips has disrupted production across various industries, leading to the temporary closure of automobile factories and reduced supplies of goods such as computers and many home appliances. Chip companies have always been scrambling to help overcome the chip shortage challenge.</p><p>The White House met with executives from the chip and other industries this month to help determine what actions should be taken to address the shortage and strengthen the domestic chip manufacturing industry. President Biden had previously pledged to address the chip shortage and provided $50 billion in funding to the semiconductor industry as part of his massive infrastructure spending plan.</p><p>Gelsinger acknowledged, \"The investment required will be quite substantial.\" The CEO, who took office in February, also pledged to quickly provide some production capacity to help alleviate the chip shortage. Gelsinger is rapidly advancing efforts to revitalize the company, and he expects Intel's sales to reach $77 billion this year, $500 million higher than previously anticipated.</p><p>Intel's earnings report released on Thursday showed that first-quarter sales fell 1% to $19.7 billion, but still exceeded Wall Street expectations. Net income was $3.4 billion, dragged down by legal settlement costs. Excluding its upcoming memory business and other projects, Intel said revenue was $18.6 billion and net income was $5.7 billion.</p><p>This month, Gelsinger outlined an ambitious strategy to make Intel a foundry chipmaker in addition to manufacturing semiconductors to meet domestic demand. The plan includes investing $20 billion to build two new semiconductor factories in Arizona.</p><p>Despite generally strong chip demand, Intel's sales have declined. Bank of America semiconductor analyst Vivek Arya said ahead of Intel's earnings report that Intel's performance was dragged down by several factors, including the surge in demand for personal computers, which was mainly concentrated in low-end devices such as Chromebooks, and Apple abandoning Intel in favor of using internally designed chips in more of its devices.</p><p>Arya also said that after a strong year of data center spending, Intel's spending is expected to grow at a slower pace this year. He predicts that Intel's sales growth will lag behind the industry as a whole, with the industry growth rate reaching 15% this year.</p><p>Gelsinger is trying to rebuild the company, which has repeatedly suffered setbacks and lost to Asian competitors in making state-of-the-art chips. He said last month that the company's latest chip is making progress. Intel also plans to increase the outsourcing of some chip production to keep up with the pace of development.</p><p>The company is also dealing with increasingly fierce competition. Nvidia and AMD, which surpassed Intel last year to become the most valuable chip companies in the United States, have captured more market share. Nvidia also announced this month that it will begin selling CPUs for data centers, a market that Intel has long dominated. Intel also launched enhanced data center chips this month.</p><p>Gelsinger said that although Intel expects sales growth to be slower than its competitors, its goal is to regain lost ground. He said, \"We are working hard to gain more market share.\" But Wall Street analysts are concerned about how long it will take for the chipmaker to close the gap with its competitors.</p><p>Atlantic Securities analyst Ianjit Bhatti said, \"To succeed, we must overcome many major issues and invest early, which are unlikely to yield returns before 2025. In the near future (within 2-3 years), we believe Intel cannot cope with AMD's growing market share.\"</p><p>Samuel Indyk, a senior analyst at the financial news website uk.Investing.com, said: \"The shortage will require chipmakers to spend massively. As Intel tries to regain its title as the most valuable chipmaker in the United States, the costs may be unaffordable for Intel.\"</p><p>Intel's data center business reported sales of $5.6 billion, below analysts' expectations of $5.9 billion. The company stated that the profitability of the business is affected by R&D expenditures and costs associated with increasing the production of new chips.</p><p>Sales in the segment, including laptop chips, grew by more than 8% to $10.6 billion, as the boom in remote learning and working from home during the pandemic fueled a surge in demand in the sector. \"We don't see any signs of slowing demand for personal computers,\" Gelsinger said.</p><p>Intel's efforts to become a foundry chip manufacturer have not been smooth sailing. The company has tried to enter this market before, but with little success. Its main competitors, TSMC and Samsung Electronics, are preparing to implement tens of billions of dollars in spending plans to expand their scale. Last week, TSMC raised its capital expenditure plan for this year to $30 billion, while also raising its sales forecast. Samsung has designated an investment of $116 billion by 2030 to diversify its chip production.</p><p>Gelsinger has stated that Intel is planning to increase its investment in the chip sector, and the company may benefit from bipartisan support for its own chip companies in the United States. For example, Intel is bidding for a Department of Defense contract that helps fund domestic chip manufacturing to meet government security needs.</p>","source":"lsy1580517846866","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>Intel CEO: Chip shortage will continue for another two years after weak new quarter earnings results.</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\">\nIntel CEO: Chip shortage will continue for another two years after weak new quarter earnings results.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">腾讯科技</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-04-25 10:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>On April 24, it was reported that US semiconductor giant Intel had just released weak quarterly earnings reports, and its new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, said that the global chip supply shortage may continue for another two years.</p><p>In an interview, Gelsinger said that the chip supply shortage that has affected multiple sectors of the global economy for several months will continue until more capacity comes online to meet chip demand for products ranging from automobiles to electronics. He added, \"It will take some time for people to increase production capacity. When you're building a new factory, things don't change much in the short term.\"</p><p>A global shortage of semiconductor chips has disrupted production across various industries, leading to the temporary closure of automobile factories and reduced supplies of goods such as computers and many home appliances. Chip companies have always been scrambling to help overcome the chip shortage challenge.</p><p>The White House met with executives from the chip and other industries this month to help determine what actions should be taken to address the shortage and strengthen the domestic chip manufacturing industry. President Biden had previously pledged to address the chip shortage and provided $50 billion in funding to the semiconductor industry as part of his massive infrastructure spending plan.</p><p>Gelsinger acknowledged, \"The investment required will be quite substantial.\" The CEO, who took office in February, also pledged to quickly provide some production capacity to help alleviate the chip shortage. Gelsinger is rapidly advancing efforts to revitalize the company, and he expects Intel's sales to reach $77 billion this year, $500 million higher than previously anticipated.</p><p>Intel's earnings report released on Thursday showed that first-quarter sales fell 1% to $19.7 billion, but still exceeded Wall Street expectations. Net income was $3.4 billion, dragged down by legal settlement costs. Excluding its upcoming memory business and other projects, Intel said revenue was $18.6 billion and net income was $5.7 billion.</p><p>This month, Gelsinger outlined an ambitious strategy to make Intel a foundry chipmaker in addition to manufacturing semiconductors to meet domestic demand. The plan includes investing $20 billion to build two new semiconductor factories in Arizona.</p><p>Despite generally strong chip demand, Intel's sales have declined. Bank of America semiconductor analyst Vivek Arya said ahead of Intel's earnings report that Intel's performance was dragged down by several factors, including the surge in demand for personal computers, which was mainly concentrated in low-end devices such as Chromebooks, and Apple abandoning Intel in favor of using internally designed chips in more of its devices.</p><p>Arya also said that after a strong year of data center spending, Intel's spending is expected to grow at a slower pace this year. He predicts that Intel's sales growth will lag behind the industry as a whole, with the industry growth rate reaching 15% this year.</p><p>Gelsinger is trying to rebuild the company, which has repeatedly suffered setbacks and lost to Asian competitors in making state-of-the-art chips. He said last month that the company's latest chip is making progress. Intel also plans to increase the outsourcing of some chip production to keep up with the pace of development.</p><p>The company is also dealing with increasingly fierce competition. Nvidia and AMD, which surpassed Intel last year to become the most valuable chip companies in the United States, have captured more market share. Nvidia also announced this month that it will begin selling CPUs for data centers, a market that Intel has long dominated. Intel also launched enhanced data center chips this month.</p><p>Gelsinger said that although Intel expects sales growth to be slower than its competitors, its goal is to regain lost ground. He said, \"We are working hard to gain more market share.\" But Wall Street analysts are concerned about how long it will take for the chipmaker to close the gap with its competitors.</p><p>Atlantic Securities analyst Ianjit Bhatti said, \"To succeed, we must overcome many major issues and invest early, which are unlikely to yield returns before 2025. In the near future (within 2-3 years), we believe Intel cannot cope with AMD's growing market share.\"</p><p>Samuel Indyk, a senior analyst at the financial news website uk.Investing.com, said: \"The shortage will require chipmakers to spend massively. As Intel tries to regain its title as the most valuable chipmaker in the United States, the costs may be unaffordable for Intel.\"</p><p>Intel's data center business reported sales of $5.6 billion, below analysts' expectations of $5.9 billion. The company stated that the profitability of the business is affected by R&D expenditures and costs associated with increasing the production of new chips.</p><p>Sales in the segment, including laptop chips, grew by more than 8% to $10.6 billion, as the boom in remote learning and working from home during the pandemic fueled a surge in demand in the sector. \"We don't see any signs of slowing demand for personal computers,\" Gelsinger said.</p><p>Intel's efforts to become a foundry chip manufacturer have not been smooth sailing. The company has tried to enter this market before, but with little success. Its main competitors, TSMC and Samsung Electronics, are preparing to implement tens of billions of dollars in spending plans to expand their scale. Last week, TSMC raised its capital expenditure plan for this year to $30 billion, while also raising its sales forecast. Samsung has designated an investment of $116 billion by 2030 to diversify its chip production.</p><p>Gelsinger has stated that Intel is planning to increase its investment in the chip sector, and the company may benefit from bipartisan support for its own chip companies in the United States. For example, Intel is bidding for a Department of Defense contract that helps fund domestic chip manufacturing to meet government security needs.</p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://new.qq.com/omn/20210425/20210425A01KZ200.html\">腾讯科技</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b9a6f29dbb8b0bd3a3b0a5cf3f9e358","relate_stocks":{"INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://new.qq.com/omn/20210425/20210425A01KZ200.html","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1168120359","content_text":"4月24日消息，美国半导体巨头英特尔刚刚公布了疲软的季度财报，其新任首席执行官帕特·盖尔辛格（Pat Gelsinger）表示，全球芯片供应短缺可能还会持续两年时间。\n盖尔辛格在接受采访时说，几个月来影响全球经济多个领域的芯片供应紧张状况将持续下去，直到更多产能上线，以满足从汽车到电子产品等各种产品的芯片需求。他还称：“这需要一段时间，人们才能增加产能。当你在建新工厂时，情况不会在短期发生太大变化。”\n全球半导体芯片短缺扰乱了各个行业的生产，导致汽车工厂暂时关闭，电脑和许多家电等商品的供应减少。芯片公司始终在争先恐后地帮助克服缺芯挑战。\n美国白宫本月会见了芯片和其他行业的高管，以帮助确定应该采取什么行动来解决短缺问题，并加强国内芯片制造行业。拜登总统此前承诺解决芯片短缺问题，并在其庞大的基础设施支出计划中为半导体行业提供了500亿美元拨款。\n盖尔辛格承认：“所需投资规模将是相当庞大的。”这位自2月份上任的首席执行官还承诺迅速提供部分产能，以帮助缓解芯片短缺问题。盖尔辛格正在快速推进重振公司的努力，他预计今年英特尔的销售额将达到770亿美元，比之前预期的高出5亿美元。\n英特尔周四公布的财报显示，第一季度销售额下滑1%至197亿美元，但仍超出华尔街预期。受法律和解成本的拖累，净收入为34亿美元。不包括即将出售的内存业务和其他项目，英特尔表示，营收为186亿美元，净收入为57亿美元。\n盖尔辛格本月制定了一项雄心勃勃的战略，除了制造半导体以满足内部需求外，英特尔还将成为代工芯片制造商，该计划包括投资200亿美元用于在亚利桑那州新建两家半导体工厂。\n尽管芯片需求普遍强劲，但英特尔的销量还是出现了下降。美国银行半导体分析师维韦克·阿里亚(Vivek Arya)在英特尔公布财报前表示，英特尔业绩受到几个因素的拖累，其中包括个人电脑需求的激增主要集中在Chromebook等低端设备上，而苹果正在放弃英特尔，转而在其更多设备上搭载内部设计芯片。\n阿里亚还说，在经历了强劲的一年数据中心支出之后，英特尔今年的支出预计将以较慢的速度增长。他预计英特尔的销售增长将落后于整个行业，今年整个行业增长率可达15%。\n盖尔辛格正在努力重建这家在制造最先进芯片方面屡屡受挫、并输给了亚洲竞争对手的公司。他在上个月说，该公司的最新芯片正在取得进展。英特尔还计划增加部分芯片生产的外包，以跟上开发步伐。\n该公司还在应对日益激烈的竞争。去年超过英特尔成为美国市值最高芯片公司的英伟达和AMD占据了更多市场份额。英伟达本月还表示，将开始销售用于数据中心的CPU，这是英特尔长期主导的市场。英特尔本月也推出了增强型数据中心芯片。\n盖尔辛格说，尽管英特尔预计销售增长将慢于竞争对手，但它的目标是收复失地。他说：“我们正在努力获得更多市场份额。”但华尔街分析师对这家芯片制造商多久才能弥合与竞争对手的差距表示担忧。\n大西洋证券分析师伊恩吉特·巴哈蒂(Ianjit Bhatti)表示：“要想取得成功，必须克服诸多重大问题，提前投资，在2025年之前不太可能获得回报。近期(2-3年内)，我们认为英特尔无法应对AMD市场份额的增长。”\n财经资讯网站uk.Investing.com的高级分析师塞缪尔·英迪克（Samuel Indyk）说：“短缺将要求芯片制造商大规模支出。在英特尔试图夺回美国市值最高芯片制造商的头衔之际，需要花掉的费用可能实英特尔负担不起的。”\n英特尔的数据中心业务销售额为56亿美元，低于分析师预期的59亿美元。该公司表示，该业务的盈利能力受到研发支出以及与增加新芯片产量相关成本的影响。\n包括笔记本电脑芯片在内的细分市场销售额增长了8%以上，达到106亿美元，原因是疫情期间远程学习和在家工作的热潮推动了这个领域的需求激增。盖尔辛格说：“我们没有看到个人电脑需求放缓的迹象。”\n英特尔成为代工芯片制造商的努力也并非一帆风顺。该公司以前也曾试图打入这个市场，但收效甚微。其主要竞争对手台积电和三星电子正在准备实施数百亿美元支出计划，以扩大规模。台积电上周将今年的资本支出计划上调至300亿美元，同时上调了销售预期。三星已指定到2030年投资1160亿美元，以实现芯片生产的多元化。\n盖尔辛格曾表示，英特尔正计划增加芯片领域投资，该公司可能受益于美国两党对本国芯片公司的支持。例如，英特尔正在竞标国防部的一份合同，该合同帮助为国内芯片制造提供资金，以满足政府的安全需求。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"INTC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5797,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350904519,"gmtCreate":1616145690031,"gmtModify":1704791504935,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"power","listText":"power","text":"power","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350904519","repostId":"1199276124","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199276124","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"走近最优秀的投资人，聆听客观表达的理性声音，只做最好的原创财富资讯，洞见独立思想，回归资本常识。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"聪明投资者","id":"1072656223","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb7d47b7d71e40bb922cfa2979932b7f"},"pubTimestamp":1616145381,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199276124?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-19 17:16","market":"sh","language":"zh","title":"Zhang Yidong's latest sharing: This is not the beginning of a bear market; the main decline has ended.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199276124","media":"聪明投资者","summary":"“这次不是系统性风险。为什么不是系统性风险？这一次美债收益率超预期上行的根本原因还是美债供求关系的一个失衡，而更核心的原因是美债持有结构的一个质的变化。”\n“我今天在这里想传递给大家的一个重要理念，就","content":"<p><b>\"This is not a systemic risk. Why not a systemic risk? The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is still an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.\"</b></p><p><b>\"One important idea I want to convey to everyone here today is that Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the post-pandemic era, the US Treasury Bond yield has rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse. Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the US Treasury yield would go straight to 3 or 5. Now, let alone 3 or 5, it is difficult to stabilize at 2.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States? It is to use money to buy time to enhance competitiveness and suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, it is to use money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, and externally, it is to use rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.\"</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p><b>\"From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long structural bull market.\"</b></p><p><b>\"This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks. After valuations fall, some people will start to worry that performance will not meet expectations or that fund redemptions will trigger a long sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the space and timing of this market correction.\"</b></p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment; the main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p><b>\"We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the herd speculation lasts. Recently, it has mainly been reflected in a herd speculation among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle. After the recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessment of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position.\" Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this level.</b></p><p><b>\"Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show a trend of upward movement again, which might be a better timing. Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side without panicking too much. If you are trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the second quarter, whether overseas or domestically, the upstream 'inflation' force may reach its peak, which means that it is good news for the manufacturing industry, as manufacturing costs can be alleviated in various aspects; while the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually stronger because it is consumption-driven.\"</b></p><p><b>\"For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side positioning point has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.\"</b></p><p><b>\"China's growth sector targets, especially core assets like the Internet, will recover in the first half of the year, but there are no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.\"</b></p><p>The above is<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/601377\">Industrial Securities</a>Chief Global Strategy Analyst<b>Zhang Yidong,</b>On March 17th, I shared my latest insightful perspectives during a small-scale exchange.</p><p>Recently, US Treasury yields have risen, while the domestic market has experienced a continuous correction. However, Zhang Yidong believes that domestic investors have paid too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p>Zhang Yidong analyzed in detail the core reasons behind the rise in US Treasury yields, believing that US Treasury yields today are no longer as influential as they were 10 years ago, and Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields. From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is a minor correction in the structural bull market, and there will be divergence later.</p><p>He also focused on the opportunities that this adjustment may bring, and which assets can be invested in now.</p><p>The following is the full text of this exchange.<b>Smart Investors is sharing this with everyone with the authorization of General Manager Yidong.</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b7e8fd385528a06c4af634a5db7c134\" tg-width=\"690\" tg-height=\"378\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>It's a pleasure to share with you tonight my report on US Treasury yields, inflation, and style shifts, as well as the later market trends.</p><p><b>There are three types of pessimism among domestic investors</b></p><p><b>That's truly incredibly imaginative.</b></p><p>I.<b>Views on US Treasury yields and inflation</b></p><p>Overall, we believe that returning to the true meaning of the value of core assets is what is important. As for US Treasury bonds and the power struggle between alliances, these are all irrelevant.</p><p>After exchanging ideas, I feel that domestic investors are paying too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p><b>There are currently three types of pessimistic sentiment among domestic investors:</b></p><p>The first sentiment is that the United States is doomed, like the expectation of the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008. They believe that rising US long-term bond yields will trigger US debt risk, which in turn will lead to an increase in global risk-free yields. Ultimately, the double whammy of US bonds and stocks will trigger a global crisis, and China will not fare well either.</p><p>The second emotion, on the contrary, is that the United States is very powerful, that the US economic recovery is very strong, that the US is going to launch an excessive financial war, that the dollar may reverse, and that it is going to exploit the whole world, just like the Southeast Asian financial crisis. This emotion is an overestimation of the United States and a submissive approach.</p><p>The third sentiment is that, regarding the rise in US Treasury yields—those who are unaware of the impressive nature of the situation should first prostrate themselves as a sign of respect to guard against overseas risks.</p><p>These three emotions are truly imaginative.</p><p>With US Treasury yields rising this time, we need to discuss this in depth, understanding not only why, but also why.</p><p>Since mid-February, not all global markets have been falling. Eurozone stock markets such as France and Germany have actually been hitting record highs, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has also been continuously hitting record highs. The Nasdaq has indeed adjusted, but it has remained very restrained. On the contrary, the stock markets in mainland China and Hong Kong have been in a state of confusion since mid-February.</p><p><b>Rising US Treasury yields are not a systemic risk.</b></p><p><b>The more fundamental reason is the qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>It is necessary for us to analyze the core reasons for the rise in US Treasury yields at this time in order to predict whether this is a systemic risk.</p><p>Since the beginning of February, the yield on US Treasury bonds has risen rapidly from 1.15% to the current 1.6%, a rise that has indeed exceeded expectations. Is the rapid rise due to fundamental factors?</p><p>For example, out-of-control inflation and an overheated economy can pose systemic risks.</p><p>However, if the Federal Reserve or the U.S. Treasury can control it, that would be a technical risk.</p><p><b>Clearly, we don't believe this is a systemic risk. Why is it not a systemic risk?</b></p><p><b>The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>In 2008, the proportion of foreign investors outside the United States holding US Treasury bonds was 54%, then in 2015 it was 47%, and then it dropped rapidly to 34% now.</p><p><b>On the one hand, China reformed its exchange rate after 2015, while oil-producing countries in the Middle East ran out of money. Japan's holdings of US Treasury Bond declined significantly after 2015, and the US Treasury bonds that Japan had purchased in a surge since 1985 (with the longest maturity being 30 years) entered the repayment period.</b></p><p><b>Foreign investors' demand for holding US Treasury bonds has weakened significantly.</b></p><p><b>On the other hand, the issuance of US Treasury bonds has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the past 20 years, more than doubling in 2020 compared to 2009. Therefore, under these circumstances, US Treasury yields will rise more than expected in the short term.</b></p><p>As we can see, the bid multiple for the 7-year US Treasury bond auction recently was at a near 20-year low, indicating a lack of investor interest. This situation has led to a temporary imbalance in supply and demand, which in turn has led to an unexpected rise in US long-term Treasury yields.</p><p><b>The influence of US Treasury bonds today is different from that of US Treasury bonds 10 years ago.</b></p><p><b>The structure of US Treasury investors has changed from quantitative to qualitative, with the proportion of foreign investors showing a downward trend, and this impact may be quite far-reaching.</b></p><p>First, the Greenspan mystery of the past is no longer a mystery. Long-term US Treasury yields reflect the normal pace of domestic fiscal policy, while their role as an anchor for global asset pricing is weakening.</p><p>From 1969 until 2015, foreign investors helped the Federal Reserve lower long-term bond yields, even creating a disconnect between long-term and short-term interest rates in the United States. This is the so-called Greenspan mystery.</p><p>Greenspan wanted to go into a short-term rate hike, but it simply couldn't influence long-term interest rates.</p><p>Times have changed, and the influence of US Treasury bonds today is no longer the same as it was 10 years ago.</p><p>Changes in the investor structure of the US Treasury market have made US Treasury yields more sensitive to short-term supply.<b>The tight balance between short-term supply and demand for US Treasury bonds is the main reason for the recent unexpected rise in long-term US Treasury yields.</b></p><p><b>Yellen could delay issuing bonds, or the Federal Reserve could increase its bond purchases, which is normal, not to mention tools like OT and YCC. Therefore, this is not a systemic risk or a trend risk.</b>。</p><p>The concerns expressed by some domestic investors about US inflation expectations and the US economy cannot explain the rise in US Treasury yields; they are at most secondary factors.</p><p>Because the US economy is only just recovering and is far from overheating; In addition, after February 18th, the inflation expectations implied by TIPS were actually stable, or even slightly lower.</p><p>We reviewed the history of US Treasury yields as an anchor for global asset pricing. Whether it was the petrodollar in the 1970s, Japan's increased holdings in the 1980s, or the foreign exchange reserves of emerging markets after the Southeast Asian financial crisis in the 1990s, most of them were held in US Treasury bonds because they have low transaction costs, high liquidity, and high security.</p><p><b>Chinese investors need not worry excessively about fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>Many investors now take it for granted that US Treasury yields are the anchor for pricing global asset allocations, and that any movement can cause a major upheaval.</p><p>However, I think this anchor is actually weakening.</p><p>One point of weakening was the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. After 2008, the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds peaked and declined. Now, the US Treasury Bond market has undergone qualitative changes, and the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds has returned to the level of 2002.</p><p><b>Today I want to convey an important idea to everyone: Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>The current US Treasury bonds are the new US Treasury bonds after the US implemented MMT (Modern Monetary Theory). They better reflect the US fiscal situation and return to their roots—textbooks say that the Treasury Bond market serves changes in domestic fiscal policy.</p><p>The reason why long-term US Treasury yields could previously serve as an anchor for international asset allocation was because various sovereign states and major investment institutions held high levels of US Treasury bonds, which affected all aspects of financial operations. However, now, the main buyer in the US Treasury market is the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Of the $4.68 trillion in Treasury Bond net issued by the U.S. government last year, more than 52% were purchased by the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Gradually, the nature of US Treasury bonds began to shift from being an anchor for international allocation to serving the internal fiscal and financial interests of major powers.</p><p><b>Post-pandemic era</b></p><p><b>Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Extending this further, we say that in a new era of MMT theory, investors' knowledge system needs to be updated and break free from the framework of the 1980s and 90s;</p><p>That framework tells us to pay attention to fiscal discipline and the debt ceiling. Perhaps you still remember the Maastricht Treaty in Europe.</p><p>Under the guidance of MMT theory, hard currency countries have broken through the debt ceiling, and the system of debt expansion, economic growth, and exchange rate correlation in hard currency countries has been reconstructed and is logically consistent.</p><p>For example, in Europe after the European debt crisis, the debt ratio tended to rise; U.S. debt has been rising steadily, now standing at 303% of the total debt ratio, far higher than China's 270%.</p><p>In countries with hard currencies, as long as the international monetary system dominated by the US dollar does not collapse, the implementation period of the MMT new monetary theory will exceed expectations.</p><p>Perhaps some people find it hard to understand why the US virtual economy is so prosperous while the real economy isn't doing so well, and why continuous borrowing hasn't led to the Minsky moment.<b>Why didn't the United States experience a debt crisis?</b></p><p>If this were an emerging market or a country with a soft currency, there is no doubt that its debt would already be very high. When it issues bonds and provides further stimulus, it often experiences inflation domestically and devaluation externally, leading to capital flight and ultimately leading to a debt crisis.</p><p>But now, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has played all her cards to us, saying that as long as fiscal stimulus can drive GDP improvement, it can continue.</p><p>Government debt can be converted into perpetual debt without having to worry about when it will be repaid.</p><p>So essentially, in the internet age where populism is rampant, compared to the various reforms and social changes we are undertaking, Europe and the United States are more willing to spend money and time to solve problems through technological innovation and development over a period of time.</p><p><b>Therefore, we believe that in the post-pandemic era, Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the yield on US Treasury bonds would reach 3% or 5%. Now, let alone 3% or 5%, it is difficult to even stabilize at 2%.</p><p>I do not rule out the possibility that in May this year, the core PCE of the US inflation data may exceed expectations due to the base effect and a new round of fiscal stimulus, which may cause the US Treasury market to panic and the US Treasury yield to surge towards 2%. This is a possibility.</p><p>However, this is unsustainable, which is why we say that if US Treasury yields rebound, it will be difficult to reverse.</p><p><b>The current type of stagflation is different from stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p><b>The current normal is a new type of stagflation, unlike stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p>Everyone can understand \"stagnation,\" but \"inflation\" is different. In stagflation in the 1970s, during the baby boom era, demand was fine, but supply was problematic. There were two oil crises in 1973 and 1978.</p><p>What is the current problem with stagflation? Current demand problems, such as an aging population and a widening gap between the rich and the poor, are suppressing effective demand.</p><p>The current \"inflation\" is more reflected in asset bubbles, such as houses in core locations that are still preserving and increasing their value, as well as core assets in various fields that we are talking about—which are China's most competitive and long-term growth momentum, whether it is cyclical value stocks with steady growth or consumer pharmaceutical technology stocks with better-than-expected growth, etc. These high-quality assets are scarce globally.</p><p>In Europe and the United States, which have implemented MMT, especially the United States, the wheels of economic recovery are still turning, but it is difficult to bring the United States into a new round of comprehensive prosperity.</p><p>Its social problem is deep-seated stagnation. Racial conflicts and the widening gap between the rich and the poor will suppress effective demand. In addition, the United States cannot continue to subsidize lazy people by dropping money on helicopters, because this is not in line with the Protestant spirit of the United States.</p><p><b>Against this backdrop, inflation is not a problem now, and rising US long-term bond yields are not a major issue either.</b></p><p><b>The US strategy is to buy time with money.</b></p><p><b>To enhance competitiveness</b></p><p>Some A-share investors are worried, saying, \"The United States is very powerful, the United States is going to harvest us, and the United States is going to wage a financial war.\"</p><p>I advise people not to overestimate the United States.<b>Great power rivalry is a protracted war.</b>The United States currently lacks the willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis, because its current state is essentially buying time with money and slowly enduring us with rules.</p><p>The current domestic political situation in the United States can actually be referenced by the United States in the early 1970s. At that time, it lost the Vietnam War, and this time it failed to fight the epidemic. The domestic politics in the United States were very torn and turbulent.</p><p>In addition, the external situation at the time was that the Soviet Union and Japan were under strong competitive pressure from the United States in political and economic terms. This time, China was actually under greater pressure to catch up with the US economy than Japan did in the 1970s. The United States was also fabricating the \"China threat theory\" in political, diplomatic and military terms.</p><p>Therefore, at this point, I believe the United States does not actually have enough willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis. If the United States had confidence, it would not have unplugged the internet cable some time ago.</p><p><b>In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States?</b></p><p><b>It's about buying time with money to enhance competitiveness. They are trying to suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, they are using money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, while externally, they are using rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p>Extending this from here, why are we so actively promoting carbon neutrality?</p><p><b>Carbon neutrality is definitely not just a short-term hype.</b>This leads to the situation where steel prices rise, which is carbon neutrality, while clean energy and new energy vehicle prices fall, which is not carbon neutrality; this is just speculation.</p><p><b>We should correctly understand carbon neutrality from the perspective of great power competition.</b></p><p>On the one hand, we plan ahead and know that the United States will restrict us in terms of environmental protection, clean energy, and sustainable development, so we can take the initiative and adjust ourselves more quickly.</p><p>Moreover, by implementing a carbon neutrality strategy, we can build a broader alliance of interests with Europe, which has far-reaching significance.</p><p><b>In summary, the rise in US long-term Treasury yields is unsustainable. It is more of a technical issue and a temporary one. We should be desensitized to US Treasury yields and not be too sensitive.</b></p><p>Because the influence of US Treasury bonds is different now than it was 30 years ago. This is not a harbinger of a crisis. 2021 will definitely not be 2008 or 2018. People's anxiety about this is getting a bit extreme now.</p><p><b>This is a minor correction in the structural bull market.</b></p><p><b>The catalyst is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>II.<b>Opinions on style switching</b></p><p><b>From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b></p><p>Looking ahead to the market, on the one hand, the short-term group buying and selling has experienced great joy, sorrow, and ups and downs. Now, emotions are still unstable and it takes time to restore confidence.</p><p>On the other hand, for core assets, only by basing ourselves on fundamental logic can we achieve steady and long-term success. Truly good companies are not afraid of declines. This is what I told everyone at the beginning of 2016: when the market is volatile, it is actually a good time to select stocks.</p><p><b>Regarding the market outlook, there are several questions that the market is concerned about:</b></p><p><b>The first question is the definition of adjustment—this adjustment is not the beginning of a systemic crisis, but rather a phased consolidation. The catalyst for this consolidation is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>American investors believe that rising US Treasury yields are a normal part of the recovery, and Americans think this is normal. Recently, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has significantly outperformed the Nasdaq Industrial Average. In terms of industry attributes, energy, finance, and industrial equipment have outperformed information technology, but the dynamic P/E in the information technology sector has also declined relatively quickly.</p><p>In the coming months, the European and American economies should enter a stronger recovery phase, because the widespread availability of vaccines, coupled with the implementation of a new round of stimulus of $1.9 trillion, will bring about a retaliatory rebound in consumption. Coupled with the low base, both the economic recovery and inflation data in the United States in the second quarter will be relatively strong.</p><p><b>Therefore, a style shift in 2021 is an inevitable choice for value investing.</b></p><p><b>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks.</b></p><p>We believe<b>US stocks are already leading the global return to value, which means a rebalancing of styles, a reconsideration of cost-effectiveness, and a rebuilding of the valuation system.</b></p><p>In fact, the relative returns of cyclical value in A-shares and Hong Kong stocks over the past month or so are quite obvious. For example, the top-ranked companies in the Hang Seng Index since the beginning of the year are the three major oil companies, financial institutions, and the three major telecom operators, all of which are considered cyclical value.</p><p>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks;</p><p>After valuations fall, some people begin to worry that performance may fall short of expectations or that fund redemptions may trigger a sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the potential and timing of this market correction.</p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment. The main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p>In our report we wrote in February, \"A Newborn Calf Meets a Tiger, Changing Style After the Cold Spring,\" we suggested that the market should have entered a rebound phase in mid-March.</p><p>In fact, since March 12, both A-shares and Hong Kong stocks have been fluctuating upwards, although the momentum has not been strong. We cannot rule out another global setback in May, and we believe that there will not be much downside potential at that time.</p><p>Both the A-share and Hong Kong stock indices are not expensive at all, and are even very cheap compared to overseas markets.<b>At that time, there was little room for A-shares to fall below 3400 points and Hong Kong stocks below 28400 points.</b></p><p><b>Why may the \"late spring cold snap\" come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p><b>US Treasury yields may still have some momentum to rise in the second quarter.</b></p><p>From a time perspective, there may still be two minor risks that have not been fully resolved, which may cause some market disruption.</p><p><b>One risk is that the overall upward trend in US Treasury yields may still have some momentum in the second quarter;</b></p><p>Although we have seen that the upward slope of US Treasury yields has slowed recently, the slowdown in the slope actually tells everyone that this is not a systemic risk, and we can downplay the factor of rising US Treasury yields and start researching and selecting stocks based on fundamentals.</p><p><b>Why do we say that the \"late spring cold snap\" may come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p>This is a historical pattern. Every time the US Treasury volatility index rises to around one standard deviation, it usually enters a period of convergence, which means that the second-order derivative has begun to slow down.</p><p>In April and May, US Treasury yields are likely to surge in the short term, but this is the end of their strength and will peak this year.</p><p>A-share investors are concerned that the $1.9 trillion fiscal bailout plan would normally increase the federal government's debt pressure, but in reality, the U.S. Treasury still has about $1.4 trillion in total account deposits (TGA).</p><p>According to the latest statement from the U.S. Treasury Department, subsequent post-pandemic stimulus will prioritize the use of TGA balances over newly issued debt. The U.S. Treasury Department expects the funding gap and financing plans to decline significantly in the first half of 2021. This is a case where all the bad news has been exhausted.</p><p><b>A-share investors are overly anxious about inflation</b></p><p>Another negative factor,<b>The question is whether the US-style recovery will trigger a run-out and surge in commodity CPI and PPI.</b></p><p>Currently, both foreign investors and the Federal Reserve regard the US recovery as a normal expectation, but many A-share investors seem to be pessimistic. What are they worried about?</p><p>If there are concerns about a strong US economic recovery, global inflation may accelerate, and China will face imported inflation, which could trigger further policy tightening. This concern about inflation is excessive anxiety.</p><p>When excessive concerns about rising inflation will be disproven will have to wait until the latter part of the second quarter of this year, that is, in early May, to see the inflation data for April, and in early June to see the inflation data for May.</p><p>If the inflation data for April is released as early as early May, then the market will also react. If it doesn't react, it will be a premature reaction. When all the negative factors are exhausted, it will become numb.</p><p>It cannot be ruled out that the US core PCE will rise above 3% in April. In the past 10 years, the US core inflation has not risen above 3%. This exceeding expectations is partly due to the very low base caused by the US lockdown policies in April and May last year.</p><p>Secondly, the implementation of the 1.9 trillion yuan fiscal rescue plan in late March, coupled with the rapid rollout of vaccines, and April being the big day of Easter, resulted in a significant rebound in consumption.</p><p>The April inflation data is an anomaly, but capital markets tend to extrapolate linearly, so there may be some disturbances at that time. Even if there are some disturbances, it can actually be seen that all the negative factors have been exhausted, which is precisely a golden opportunity.</p><p>Therefore, I believe that even if inflation exceeds expectations in the later stages, the Federal Reserve will have sufficient tools and power to lower long-term bond yields. After all, the Federal Reserve has many weapons in its arsenal, and there are still methods such as YCC that have not been implemented.</p><p><b>From the Federal Reserve's perspective, when to take action still depends on real interest rates;</b></p><p>Although the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds has risen to 1.6%, the real interest rate for the entire 10-year term is still -0.6%. Apart from the 30-year US Treasury Bond real interest rate turning positive, the others have not yet turned positive.</p><p><b>The timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side; there's no need to panic too much.</b></p><p>III.<b>Market outlook and timing of adjustments</b></p><p>The third thing I want to report and discuss with you is the market outlook and the timing of adjustments.</p><p><b>We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p>Recently, this has mainly been reflected in a group-buying game among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle.</p><p>After a recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessments of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position. Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this location.</p><p>Concerns about whether the negative impact of group speculation will worsen will continue to suppress market risk appetite.</p><p>Currently, fund managers have reported that redemptions are not obvious, and fund investors' sentiment is relatively stable, which is incomparable to the stampede of 2015. However, it may take time to digest the situation.</p><p><b>Now that the price has adjusted to this level, people are confident in the long run, but the static TTM valuation is not particularly attractive.</b></p><p><b>Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show another upward trend, which might be a better timing.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side, so there's no need to panic too much. If you're trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.</b></p><p>Overall, the group-buying game is not an objective result, but rather a self-reinforcing and self-circulating process centered around the requirements of the fund's relative return ranking.</p><p>Previously, they were chasing rallies, but recently they've been selling off prices. This is subjective speculation.</p><p>Therefore, every time the market rally of assets that were heavily invested in in the past ended, it was not due to external shocks. At most, external shocks only triggered a major quarterly correction.</p><p>The key to the true end is whether the medium- to long-term fundamental trend of the related assets has undergone an unexpected reversal. Whether these assets can take off again depends on their performance.</p><p>What we should do now is not worry about whether to participate in a short-term rebound, but rather to focus on the long term and the short term. We should first conduct research to confirm the companies we previously heavily invested in and ensure their fundamentals.</p><p>If you can't find out it's a scam while the price is falling, then you're doomed. For example, LeEco in 2015 either delisted or its fundamental logic was disproven.</p><p>This time, it's more like the core assets of the United States over the past decade or so. These assets also adjust when they fall. For example, Amazon and Google also experienced sharp declines in February 2018. However, the decline of these companies can only improve their cost-effectiveness, not disprove the logic of fundamentals.</p><p>Instead of worrying about the macroeconomic trend now, it's better to focus on stock selection, because the macroeconomic trend has already been reflected in the previous adjustments.</p><p>We have noticed that since February 18, northbound capital has generally seen a net inflow, especially since March, when the inflow has been quite significant.</p><p>It's just that its style is more balanced, from being consumer-oriented to now focusing on performance, including some banks, chemicals, and even steel and real estate.</p><p>Of course, some people wonder if this is speculative capital behavior. The investors we are dealing with, whether they are clients from Europe and America or clients from Singapore, who are relatively far from China, actually have confidence in China because the cost-effectiveness is better, and good assets are scarce in the world.</p><p><b>The subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>IV.<b>Investment Strategy</b></p><p>Finally, here are my investment strategy suggestions for everyone.<b>I believe the label-based style shift has come to an end, and the subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>In the next stage, whether a black cat or a white cat catches a mouse is a good cat. The industry may not be clearly defined, nor will it be a game where steel prices rise while new energy prices fall.</p><p>The most comfortable period for a sectoral rebound in cyclical stocks has passed, and the opportunity for valuation recovery has come to an end.<b>Next, we need to find α within β.</b>This time, China's style shift will not be as strong as that of the United States.</p><p>Recently, the U.S. energy and financial sectors have generally risen due to expanding demand in the U.S.</p><p>China's recovery this time is different from last year. The growth rate of investment in infrastructure or real estate is slowing down marginally, unlike the 4 trillion yuan investment after 2008, or the rise in cyclical stocks in the 2000s due to the surge in demand.</p><p><b>The first step in the style shift is almost complete.</b>。</p><p>China's economic growth rate gradually slowed down in the following quarters, so commodities such as copper or crude oil cannot be expected to rise much further.</p><p><b>My assessment is that copper and even oil prices have reached a high level.</b>Because although Europe and the United States are recovering, this recovery is more driven by consumption than by infrastructure.</p><p>At the same time, China needs to take the opportunity to resolve the risks of existing debt and reduce the government leverage ratio, which is relatively negative for infrastructure and commodity demand. Therefore, in terms of bulk raw materials, the situation in China and Europe and the United States may be offset by a fluctuation.</p><p><b>Therefore, upstream bulk raw materials may have already entered a period of high-level fluctuations and begun to diverge.</b></p><p>Why haven't cyclical stocks plummeted across the board immediately? Previous experience has shown that stocks peak before commodity prices peak.</p><p>This time, it's because of carbon neutrality. Cyclical commodities that benefit from carbon neutrality can continue to rise, which is the logic of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>The second quarter is a boon for the manufacturing industry.</b></p><p><b>The left-hand entry point for growth sectors has arrived.</b></p><p>For midstream manufacturing, opportunities are beginning to become clearly established:</p><p><b>In the second quarter, both overseas and domestically, upstream inflation is likely to reach its peak, which means it's good news for the manufacturing industry.</b>This will alleviate manufacturing costs in various aspects; Meanwhile, the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually more inertial because it is consumption-driven.</p><p>Therefore, for leading manufacturing companies that can secure overseas orders and have global pricing power, it is essentially alpha, for example, now whether...<b>Wanhua for chemicals, or Sany for machinery?</b>In fact, they are all relatively independent entities. They are not completely subject to the fluctuations of cyclical industries, but are beginning to develop an attribute that can transcend cycles.</p><p>Cyclical industries should pay attention to the impact of carbon neutrality in the next stage, especially since some leading manufacturing companies will benefit from carbon neutrality on the one hand, and will also be able to share in the positive effects of the economic recovery in Europe and the United States on the other. Therefore, in the next stage, it is time to start investing in high-quality manufacturing companies.</p><p><b>For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side investment opportunity has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.</b></p><p>The so-called left-side positioning is because previously favored sectors may rebound after falling sharply, but whether this can be sustained depends on profitability. If the profit elasticity is not strong and only the stock has strong long-term stability, then the current dynamic P/E and static P/E cannot allow everyone to buy the dip without any doubts.</p><p>From a short-term perspective, these sectors are in a somewhat awkward position. As soon as a rebound occurs, people will flee. Therefore, these types of assets will subsequently recover, fluctuate, and consolidate their range.</p><p>We believe that,<b>A better time for growth-oriented core assets may be in the mid-to-late second quarter.</b></p><p><b>The long-term cost-effectiveness of core assets like the internet is beginning to become apparent.</b></p><p><b>Corresponding to Hong Kong stocks</b>，<b>First, value stocks such as the financial sector or the three major telecom operators are now being used as a defensive counterattack.</b>I think it's still worth buying if you're not looking for exorbitant profits; it can be considered a relatively good convertible bond.</p><p><b>Secondly, cyclical stocks will diverge; the more stocks that can make alpha, the better.</b>The benefits of inflation are already implicit in stock prices. When inflation truly peaks, stock prices may have already begun to fall because the stock market is more sensitive than the real economy.</p><p>We believe that commodity prices have entered their highest point for the year, even if they haven't reached their peak yet.<b>However, the strongest phase of the upward trend in commodities may have passed;</b></p><p>Commodities are now entering a period of high-level fluctuations and the formation of a top area. Under these circumstances, the impact of demand on cyclical commodities is weakening, and there is an opportunity for carbon neutrality around the 2.0 version of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>Third, China's growth sectors, especially core assets like the internet, are expected to recover in the first half of the year but face no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.</b>。</p><p>This type of asset and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOG\">Google</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">Microsoft</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">Apple</a>Let's benchmark against our leading internet companies; they have stronger growth potential and greater profit elasticity, such as...<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent</a>and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>The valuation is actually very attractive.</p><p>The market's sentiment towards growth-oriented core assets is more of a gradual easing, at least there is no systemic risk. Tencent and Alibaba can stabilize, and Meituan's fluctuations are not a big problem. The market has differing opinions on Xiaomi, and there are so-called problems with military-related companies. However, after falling by 25% since the beginning of the year, the negative factors have begun to be fully exhausted.</p><p>That's why I have the confidence to say that there's little room for Hong Kong stocks to fall below 28,400 points. Once the leading growth stocks in Hong Kong stocks stabilize, other growth stocks can recover. For example, sectors such as property management, education, auto parts, consumer goods, and pharmaceuticals can now look for alpha.</p><p><b>sum up</b></p><p>To summarize in three sentences:</p><p>(a) This<b>This is not a systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but rather a correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b>。</p><p>(II)<b>There is not much room for further downward adjustment.</b>There has been a short-term market rebound, but sentiment is still affected by the negative impact of group buying and speculation. Therefore, the correction may extend into the mid-to-late second quarter, which is a period for right-side positioning.</p><p>(iii) Style switching should not be done blindly. Do not label stocks according to industry attributes. We are now entering the era of stock selection with a left-side layout.</p><p>The relative returns of growth stocks (consumer technology and pharmaceuticals) and cyclical value stocks have converged rapidly over the past two months, and both have now entered the stage of stock selection.</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>Zhang Yidong's latest sharing: This is not the beginning of a bear market; the main decline has ended.</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\">\nZhang Yidong's latest sharing: This is not the beginning of a bear market; the main decline has ended.\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1072656223\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb7d47b7d71e40bb922cfa2979932b7f);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">聪明投资者 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-19 17:16</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>\"This is not a systemic risk. Why not a systemic risk? The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is still an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.\"</b></p><p><b>\"One important idea I want to convey to everyone here today is that Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the post-pandemic era, the US Treasury Bond yield has rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse. Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the US Treasury yield would go straight to 3 or 5. Now, let alone 3 or 5, it is difficult to stabilize at 2.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States? It is to use money to buy time to enhance competitiveness and suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, it is to use money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, and externally, it is to use rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.\"</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p><b>\"From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long structural bull market.\"</b></p><p><b>\"This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks. After valuations fall, some people will start to worry that performance will not meet expectations or that fund redemptions will trigger a long sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the space and timing of this market correction.\"</b></p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment; the main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p><b>\"We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the herd speculation lasts. Recently, it has mainly been reflected in a herd speculation among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle. After the recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessment of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position.\" Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this level.</b></p><p><b>\"Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show a trend of upward movement again, which might be a better timing. Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side without panicking too much. If you are trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.\"</b></p><p><b>\"In the second quarter, whether overseas or domestically, the upstream 'inflation' force may reach its peak, which means that it is good news for the manufacturing industry, as manufacturing costs can be alleviated in various aspects; while the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually stronger because it is consumption-driven.\"</b></p><p><b>\"For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side positioning point has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.\"</b></p><p><b>\"China's growth sector targets, especially core assets like the Internet, will recover in the first half of the year, but there are no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.\"</b></p><p>The above is<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/601377\">Industrial Securities</a>Chief Global Strategy Analyst<b>Zhang Yidong,</b>On March 17th, I shared my latest insightful perspectives during a small-scale exchange.</p><p>Recently, US Treasury yields have risen, while the domestic market has experienced a continuous correction. However, Zhang Yidong believes that domestic investors have paid too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p>Zhang Yidong analyzed in detail the core reasons behind the rise in US Treasury yields, believing that US Treasury yields today are no longer as influential as they were 10 years ago, and Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields. From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is a minor correction in the structural bull market, and there will be divergence later.</p><p>He also focused on the opportunities that this adjustment may bring, and which assets can be invested in now.</p><p>The following is the full text of this exchange.<b>Smart Investors is sharing this with everyone with the authorization of General Manager Yidong.</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b7e8fd385528a06c4af634a5db7c134\" tg-width=\"690\" tg-height=\"378\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>It's a pleasure to share with you tonight my report on US Treasury yields, inflation, and style shifts, as well as the later market trends.</p><p><b>There are three types of pessimism among domestic investors</b></p><p><b>That's truly incredibly imaginative.</b></p><p>I.<b>Views on US Treasury yields and inflation</b></p><p>Overall, we believe that returning to the true meaning of the value of core assets is what is important. As for US Treasury bonds and the power struggle between alliances, these are all irrelevant.</p><p>After exchanging ideas, I feel that domestic investors are paying too much attention to the rise in US Treasury yields.</p><p><b>There are currently three types of pessimistic sentiment among domestic investors:</b></p><p>The first sentiment is that the United States is doomed, like the expectation of the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008. They believe that rising US long-term bond yields will trigger US debt risk, which in turn will lead to an increase in global risk-free yields. Ultimately, the double whammy of US bonds and stocks will trigger a global crisis, and China will not fare well either.</p><p>The second emotion, on the contrary, is that the United States is very powerful, that the US economic recovery is very strong, that the US is going to launch an excessive financial war, that the dollar may reverse, and that it is going to exploit the whole world, just like the Southeast Asian financial crisis. This emotion is an overestimation of the United States and a submissive approach.</p><p>The third sentiment is that, regarding the rise in US Treasury yields—those who are unaware of the impressive nature of the situation should first prostrate themselves as a sign of respect to guard against overseas risks.</p><p>These three emotions are truly imaginative.</p><p>With US Treasury yields rising this time, we need to discuss this in depth, understanding not only why, but also why.</p><p>Since mid-February, not all global markets have been falling. Eurozone stock markets such as France and Germany have actually been hitting record highs, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has also been continuously hitting record highs. The Nasdaq has indeed adjusted, but it has remained very restrained. On the contrary, the stock markets in mainland China and Hong Kong have been in a state of confusion since mid-February.</p><p><b>Rising US Treasury yields are not a systemic risk.</b></p><p><b>The more fundamental reason is the qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>It is necessary for us to analyze the core reasons for the rise in US Treasury yields at this time in order to predict whether this is a systemic risk.</p><p>Since the beginning of February, the yield on US Treasury bonds has risen rapidly from 1.15% to the current 1.6%, a rise that has indeed exceeded expectations. Is the rapid rise due to fundamental factors?</p><p>For example, out-of-control inflation and an overheated economy can pose systemic risks.</p><p>However, if the Federal Reserve or the U.S. Treasury can control it, that would be a technical risk.</p><p><b>Clearly, we don't believe this is a systemic risk. Why is it not a systemic risk?</b></p><p><b>The fundamental reason for the unexpected rise in US Treasury yields this time is an imbalance in the supply and demand of US Treasury bonds, but the more core reason is a qualitative change in the holding structure of US Treasury bonds.</b></p><p>In 2008, the proportion of foreign investors outside the United States holding US Treasury bonds was 54%, then in 2015 it was 47%, and then it dropped rapidly to 34% now.</p><p><b>On the one hand, China reformed its exchange rate after 2015, while oil-producing countries in the Middle East ran out of money. Japan's holdings of US Treasury Bond declined significantly after 2015, and the US Treasury bonds that Japan had purchased in a surge since 1985 (with the longest maturity being 30 years) entered the repayment period.</b></p><p><b>Foreign investors' demand for holding US Treasury bonds has weakened significantly.</b></p><p><b>On the other hand, the issuance of US Treasury bonds has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the past 20 years, more than doubling in 2020 compared to 2009. Therefore, under these circumstances, US Treasury yields will rise more than expected in the short term.</b></p><p>As we can see, the bid multiple for the 7-year US Treasury bond auction recently was at a near 20-year low, indicating a lack of investor interest. This situation has led to a temporary imbalance in supply and demand, which in turn has led to an unexpected rise in US long-term Treasury yields.</p><p><b>The influence of US Treasury bonds today is different from that of US Treasury bonds 10 years ago.</b></p><p><b>The structure of US Treasury investors has changed from quantitative to qualitative, with the proportion of foreign investors showing a downward trend, and this impact may be quite far-reaching.</b></p><p>First, the Greenspan mystery of the past is no longer a mystery. Long-term US Treasury yields reflect the normal pace of domestic fiscal policy, while their role as an anchor for global asset pricing is weakening.</p><p>From 1969 until 2015, foreign investors helped the Federal Reserve lower long-term bond yields, even creating a disconnect between long-term and short-term interest rates in the United States. This is the so-called Greenspan mystery.</p><p>Greenspan wanted to go into a short-term rate hike, but it simply couldn't influence long-term interest rates.</p><p>Times have changed, and the influence of US Treasury bonds today is no longer the same as it was 10 years ago.</p><p>Changes in the investor structure of the US Treasury market have made US Treasury yields more sensitive to short-term supply.<b>The tight balance between short-term supply and demand for US Treasury bonds is the main reason for the recent unexpected rise in long-term US Treasury yields.</b></p><p><b>Yellen could delay issuing bonds, or the Federal Reserve could increase its bond purchases, which is normal, not to mention tools like OT and YCC. Therefore, this is not a systemic risk or a trend risk.</b>。</p><p>The concerns expressed by some domestic investors about US inflation expectations and the US economy cannot explain the rise in US Treasury yields; they are at most secondary factors.</p><p>Because the US economy is only just recovering and is far from overheating; In addition, after February 18th, the inflation expectations implied by TIPS were actually stable, or even slightly lower.</p><p>We reviewed the history of US Treasury yields as an anchor for global asset pricing. Whether it was the petrodollar in the 1970s, Japan's increased holdings in the 1980s, or the foreign exchange reserves of emerging markets after the Southeast Asian financial crisis in the 1990s, most of them were held in US Treasury bonds because they have low transaction costs, high liquidity, and high security.</p><p><b>Chinese investors need not worry excessively about fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>Many investors now take it for granted that US Treasury yields are the anchor for pricing global asset allocations, and that any movement can cause a major upheaval.</p><p>However, I think this anchor is actually weakening.</p><p>One point of weakening was the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. After 2008, the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds peaked and declined. Now, the US Treasury Bond market has undergone qualitative changes, and the proportion of overseas investors holding US Treasury bonds has returned to the level of 2002.</p><p><b>Today I want to convey an important idea to everyone: Chinese investors do not need to worry excessively about the fluctuations in US Treasury yields.</b></p><p>The current US Treasury bonds are the new US Treasury bonds after the US implemented MMT (Modern Monetary Theory). They better reflect the US fiscal situation and return to their roots—textbooks say that the Treasury Bond market serves changes in domestic fiscal policy.</p><p>The reason why long-term US Treasury yields could previously serve as an anchor for international asset allocation was because various sovereign states and major investment institutions held high levels of US Treasury bonds, which affected all aspects of financial operations. However, now, the main buyer in the US Treasury market is the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Of the $4.68 trillion in Treasury Bond net issued by the U.S. government last year, more than 52% were purchased by the Federal Reserve.</p><p>Gradually, the nature of US Treasury bonds began to shift from being an anchor for international allocation to serving the internal fiscal and financial interests of major powers.</p><p><b>Post-pandemic era</b></p><p><b>Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Extending this further, we say that in a new era of MMT theory, investors' knowledge system needs to be updated and break free from the framework of the 1980s and 90s;</p><p>That framework tells us to pay attention to fiscal discipline and the debt ceiling. Perhaps you still remember the Maastricht Treaty in Europe.</p><p>Under the guidance of MMT theory, hard currency countries have broken through the debt ceiling, and the system of debt expansion, economic growth, and exchange rate correlation in hard currency countries has been reconstructed and is logically consistent.</p><p>For example, in Europe after the European debt crisis, the debt ratio tended to rise; U.S. debt has been rising steadily, now standing at 303% of the total debt ratio, far higher than China's 270%.</p><p>In countries with hard currencies, as long as the international monetary system dominated by the US dollar does not collapse, the implementation period of the MMT new monetary theory will exceed expectations.</p><p>Perhaps some people find it hard to understand why the US virtual economy is so prosperous while the real economy isn't doing so well, and why continuous borrowing hasn't led to the Minsky moment.<b>Why didn't the United States experience a debt crisis?</b></p><p>If this were an emerging market or a country with a soft currency, there is no doubt that its debt would already be very high. When it issues bonds and provides further stimulus, it often experiences inflation domestically and devaluation externally, leading to capital flight and ultimately leading to a debt crisis.</p><p>But now, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has played all her cards to us, saying that as long as fiscal stimulus can drive GDP improvement, it can continue.</p><p>Government debt can be converted into perpetual debt without having to worry about when it will be repaid.</p><p>So essentially, in the internet age where populism is rampant, compared to the various reforms and social changes we are undertaking, Europe and the United States are more willing to spend money and time to solve problems through technological innovation and development over a period of time.</p><p><b>Therefore, we believe that in the post-pandemic era, Treasury Bond yields in the United States have rebounded, but it is difficult to reverse.</b></p><p>Historically, every time a financial crisis occurred, the yield on US Treasury bonds would reach 3% or 5%. Now, let alone 3% or 5%, it is difficult to even stabilize at 2%.</p><p>I do not rule out the possibility that in May this year, the core PCE of the US inflation data may exceed expectations due to the base effect and a new round of fiscal stimulus, which may cause the US Treasury market to panic and the US Treasury yield to surge towards 2%. This is a possibility.</p><p>However, this is unsustainable, which is why we say that if US Treasury yields rebound, it will be difficult to reverse.</p><p><b>The current type of stagflation is different from stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p><b>The current normal is a new type of stagflation, unlike stagflation in the 1970s.</b></p><p>Everyone can understand \"stagnation,\" but \"inflation\" is different. In stagflation in the 1970s, during the baby boom era, demand was fine, but supply was problematic. There were two oil crises in 1973 and 1978.</p><p>What is the current problem with stagflation? Current demand problems, such as an aging population and a widening gap between the rich and the poor, are suppressing effective demand.</p><p>The current \"inflation\" is more reflected in asset bubbles, such as houses in core locations that are still preserving and increasing their value, as well as core assets in various fields that we are talking about—which are China's most competitive and long-term growth momentum, whether it is cyclical value stocks with steady growth or consumer pharmaceutical technology stocks with better-than-expected growth, etc. These high-quality assets are scarce globally.</p><p>In Europe and the United States, which have implemented MMT, especially the United States, the wheels of economic recovery are still turning, but it is difficult to bring the United States into a new round of comprehensive prosperity.</p><p>Its social problem is deep-seated stagnation. Racial conflicts and the widening gap between the rich and the poor will suppress effective demand. In addition, the United States cannot continue to subsidize lazy people by dropping money on helicopters, because this is not in line with the Protestant spirit of the United States.</p><p><b>Against this backdrop, inflation is not a problem now, and rising US long-term bond yields are not a major issue either.</b></p><p><b>The US strategy is to buy time with money.</b></p><p><b>To enhance competitiveness</b></p><p>Some A-share investors are worried, saying, \"The United States is very powerful, the United States is going to harvest us, and the United States is going to wage a financial war.\"</p><p>I advise people not to overestimate the United States.<b>Great power rivalry is a protracted war.</b>The United States currently lacks the willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis, because its current state is essentially buying time with money and slowly enduring us with rules.</p><p>The current domestic political situation in the United States can actually be referenced by the United States in the early 1970s. At that time, it lost the Vietnam War, and this time it failed to fight the epidemic. The domestic politics in the United States were very torn and turbulent.</p><p>In addition, the external situation at the time was that the Soviet Union and Japan were under strong competitive pressure from the United States in political and economic terms. This time, China was actually under greater pressure to catch up with the US economy than Japan did in the 1970s. The United States was also fabricating the \"China threat theory\" in political, diplomatic and military terms.</p><p>Therefore, at this point, I believe the United States does not actually have enough willingness and confidence to provoke a financial crisis. If the United States had confidence, it would not have unplugged the internet cable some time ago.</p><p><b>In the medium to long term, the great power rivalry between China and the United States is a protracted war. What is the more likely strategy for the United States?</b></p><p><b>It's about buying time with money to enhance competitiveness. They are trying to suppress China's competitiveness. Domestically, they are using money to buy time to restore America's competitiveness, while externally, they are using rules and alliances to suppress China's competitiveness.</b></p><p><b>In the future, the United States will compete with us in advanced manufacturing, technology, and domestic demand. These three aspects will ultimately be the three focal points of the economic power struggle between China and the United States.</b></p><p>Extending this from here, why are we so actively promoting carbon neutrality?</p><p><b>Carbon neutrality is definitely not just a short-term hype.</b>This leads to the situation where steel prices rise, which is carbon neutrality, while clean energy and new energy vehicle prices fall, which is not carbon neutrality; this is just speculation.</p><p><b>We should correctly understand carbon neutrality from the perspective of great power competition.</b></p><p>On the one hand, we plan ahead and know that the United States will restrict us in terms of environmental protection, clean energy, and sustainable development, so we can take the initiative and adjust ourselves more quickly.</p><p>Moreover, by implementing a carbon neutrality strategy, we can build a broader alliance of interests with Europe, which has far-reaching significance.</p><p><b>In summary, the rise in US long-term Treasury yields is unsustainable. It is more of a technical issue and a temporary one. We should be desensitized to US Treasury yields and not be too sensitive.</b></p><p>Because the influence of US Treasury bonds is different now than it was 30 years ago. This is not a harbinger of a crisis. 2021 will definitely not be 2008 or 2018. People's anxiety about this is getting a bit extreme now.</p><p><b>This is a minor correction in the structural bull market.</b></p><p><b>The catalyst is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>II.<b>Opinions on style switching</b></p><p><b>From a medium- to long-term perspective, this is not the beginning of systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but a small correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b></p><p>Looking ahead to the market, on the one hand, the short-term group buying and selling has experienced great joy, sorrow, and ups and downs. Now, emotions are still unstable and it takes time to restore confidence.</p><p>On the other hand, for core assets, only by basing ourselves on fundamental logic can we achieve steady and long-term success. Truly good companies are not afraid of declines. This is what I told everyone at the beginning of 2016: when the market is volatile, it is actually a good time to select stocks.</p><p><b>Regarding the market outlook, there are several questions that the market is concerned about:</b></p><p><b>The first question is the definition of adjustment—this adjustment is not the beginning of a systemic crisis, but rather a phased consolidation. The catalyst for this consolidation is the US recovery driving a style shift in global stock markets.</b></p><p>American investors believe that rising US Treasury yields are a normal part of the recovery, and Americans think this is normal. Recently, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has significantly outperformed the Nasdaq Industrial Average. In terms of industry attributes, energy, finance, and industrial equipment have outperformed information technology, but the dynamic P/E in the information technology sector has also declined relatively quickly.</p><p>In the coming months, the European and American economies should enter a stronger recovery phase, because the widespread availability of vaccines, coupled with the implementation of a new round of stimulus of $1.9 trillion, will bring about a retaliatory rebound in consumption. Coupled with the low base, both the economic recovery and inflation data in the United States in the second quarter will be relatively strong.</p><p><b>Therefore, a style shift in 2021 is an inevitable choice for value investing.</b></p><p><b>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks.</b></p><p>We believe<b>US stocks are already leading the global return to value, which means a rebalancing of styles, a reconsideration of cost-effectiveness, and a rebuilding of the valuation system.</b></p><p>In fact, the relative returns of cyclical value in A-shares and Hong Kong stocks over the past month or so are quite obvious. For example, the top-ranked companies in the Hang Seng Index since the beginning of the year are the three major oil companies, financial institutions, and the three major telecom operators, all of which are considered cyclical value.</p><p>This correction may be an overcorrection for growth stocks;</p><p>After valuations fall, some people begin to worry that performance may fall short of expectations or that fund redemptions may trigger a sell-off a vicious circle. In this situation, many people are worried about the potential and timing of this market correction.</p><p><b>I believe there is little room for further adjustment. The main decline has ended, and there will be divergence later.</b></p><p>In our report we wrote in February, \"A Newborn Calf Meets a Tiger, Changing Style After the Cold Spring,\" we suggested that the market should have entered a rebound phase in mid-March.</p><p>In fact, since March 12, both A-shares and Hong Kong stocks have been fluctuating upwards, although the momentum has not been strong. We cannot rule out another global setback in May, and we believe that there will not be much downside potential at that time.</p><p>Both the A-share and Hong Kong stock indices are not expensive at all, and are even very cheap compared to overseas markets.<b>At that time, there was little room for A-shares to fall below 3400 points and Hong Kong stocks below 28400 points.</b></p><p><b>Why may the \"late spring cold snap\" come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p><b>US Treasury yields may still have some momentum to rise in the second quarter.</b></p><p>From a time perspective, there may still be two minor risks that have not been fully resolved, which may cause some market disruption.</p><p><b>One risk is that the overall upward trend in US Treasury yields may still have some momentum in the second quarter;</b></p><p>Although we have seen that the upward slope of US Treasury yields has slowed recently, the slowdown in the slope actually tells everyone that this is not a systemic risk, and we can downplay the factor of rising US Treasury yields and start researching and selecting stocks based on fundamentals.</p><p><b>Why do we say that the \"late spring cold snap\" may come to an end or even end in mid-March?</b></p><p>This is a historical pattern. Every time the US Treasury volatility index rises to around one standard deviation, it usually enters a period of convergence, which means that the second-order derivative has begun to slow down.</p><p>In April and May, US Treasury yields are likely to surge in the short term, but this is the end of their strength and will peak this year.</p><p>A-share investors are concerned that the $1.9 trillion fiscal bailout plan would normally increase the federal government's debt pressure, but in reality, the U.S. Treasury still has about $1.4 trillion in total account deposits (TGA).</p><p>According to the latest statement from the U.S. Treasury Department, subsequent post-pandemic stimulus will prioritize the use of TGA balances over newly issued debt. The U.S. Treasury Department expects the funding gap and financing plans to decline significantly in the first half of 2021. This is a case where all the bad news has been exhausted.</p><p><b>A-share investors are overly anxious about inflation</b></p><p>Another negative factor,<b>The question is whether the US-style recovery will trigger a run-out and surge in commodity CPI and PPI.</b></p><p>Currently, both foreign investors and the Federal Reserve regard the US recovery as a normal expectation, but many A-share investors seem to be pessimistic. What are they worried about?</p><p>If there are concerns about a strong US economic recovery, global inflation may accelerate, and China will face imported inflation, which could trigger further policy tightening. This concern about inflation is excessive anxiety.</p><p>When excessive concerns about rising inflation will be disproven will have to wait until the latter part of the second quarter of this year, that is, in early May, to see the inflation data for April, and in early June to see the inflation data for May.</p><p>If the inflation data for April is released as early as early May, then the market will also react. If it doesn't react, it will be a premature reaction. When all the negative factors are exhausted, it will become numb.</p><p>It cannot be ruled out that the US core PCE will rise above 3% in April. In the past 10 years, the US core inflation has not risen above 3%. This exceeding expectations is partly due to the very low base caused by the US lockdown policies in April and May last year.</p><p>Secondly, the implementation of the 1.9 trillion yuan fiscal rescue plan in late March, coupled with the rapid rollout of vaccines, and April being the big day of Easter, resulted in a significant rebound in consumption.</p><p>The April inflation data is an anomaly, but capital markets tend to extrapolate linearly, so there may be some disturbances at that time. Even if there are some disturbances, it can actually be seen that all the negative factors have been exhausted, which is precisely a golden opportunity.</p><p>Therefore, I believe that even if inflation exceeds expectations in the later stages, the Federal Reserve will have sufficient tools and power to lower long-term bond yields. After all, the Federal Reserve has many weapons in its arsenal, and there are still methods such as YCC that have not been implemented.</p><p><b>From the Federal Reserve's perspective, when to take action still depends on real interest rates;</b></p><p>Although the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds has risen to 1.6%, the real interest rate for the entire 10-year term is still -0.6%. Apart from the 30-year US Treasury Bond real interest rate turning positive, the others have not yet turned positive.</p><p><b>The timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side; there's no need to panic too much.</b></p><p>III.<b>Market outlook and timing of adjustments</b></p><p>The third thing I want to report and discuss with you is the market outlook and the timing of adjustments.</p><p><b>We believe the timing of the adjustment depends on how long the negative impact of the group-buying game lasts.</b></p><p>Recently, this has mainly been reflected in a group-buying game among growth stocks, which has recently moved from a virtuous cycle to an a vicious circle.</p><p>After a recent rapid adjustment, based on industry analysts' long-term assessments of the company, we believe that the valuation of core growth assets has entered a reasonable medium- to long-term position. Therefore, foreign investors have been buying more and more recently. There isn't much downside potential at this location.</p><p>Concerns about whether the negative impact of group speculation will worsen will continue to suppress market risk appetite.</p><p>Currently, fund managers have reported that redemptions are not obvious, and fund investors' sentiment is relatively stable, which is incomparable to the stampede of 2015. However, it may take time to digest the situation.</p><p><b>Now that the price has adjusted to this level, people are confident in the long run, but the static TTM valuation is not particularly attractive.</b></p><p><b>Perhaps in the latter part of the second quarter, the negative overseas factors mentioned earlier, coupled with the softening of domestic policies, will cause domestic economic figures to begin to decline. At that time, the market will show another upward trend, which might be a better timing.</b></p><p><b>Now you can choose stocks to trade on the left side, so there's no need to panic too much. If you're trading on the right side, you can wait a little longer.</b></p><p>Overall, the group-buying game is not an objective result, but rather a self-reinforcing and self-circulating process centered around the requirements of the fund's relative return ranking.</p><p>Previously, they were chasing rallies, but recently they've been selling off prices. This is subjective speculation.</p><p>Therefore, every time the market rally of assets that were heavily invested in in the past ended, it was not due to external shocks. At most, external shocks only triggered a major quarterly correction.</p><p>The key to the true end is whether the medium- to long-term fundamental trend of the related assets has undergone an unexpected reversal. Whether these assets can take off again depends on their performance.</p><p>What we should do now is not worry about whether to participate in a short-term rebound, but rather to focus on the long term and the short term. We should first conduct research to confirm the companies we previously heavily invested in and ensure their fundamentals.</p><p>If you can't find out it's a scam while the price is falling, then you're doomed. For example, LeEco in 2015 either delisted or its fundamental logic was disproven.</p><p>This time, it's more like the core assets of the United States over the past decade or so. These assets also adjust when they fall. For example, Amazon and Google also experienced sharp declines in February 2018. However, the decline of these companies can only improve their cost-effectiveness, not disprove the logic of fundamentals.</p><p>Instead of worrying about the macroeconomic trend now, it's better to focus on stock selection, because the macroeconomic trend has already been reflected in the previous adjustments.</p><p>We have noticed that since February 18, northbound capital has generally seen a net inflow, especially since March, when the inflow has been quite significant.</p><p>It's just that its style is more balanced, from being consumer-oriented to now focusing on performance, including some banks, chemicals, and even steel and real estate.</p><p>Of course, some people wonder if this is speculative capital behavior. The investors we are dealing with, whether they are clients from Europe and America or clients from Singapore, who are relatively far from China, actually have confidence in China because the cost-effectiveness is better, and good assets are scarce in the world.</p><p><b>The subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>IV.<b>Investment Strategy</b></p><p>Finally, here are my investment strategy suggestions for everyone.<b>I believe the label-based style shift has come to an end, and the subsequent style will shift towards profit-driven development.</b></p><p>In the next stage, whether a black cat or a white cat catches a mouse is a good cat. The industry may not be clearly defined, nor will it be a game where steel prices rise while new energy prices fall.</p><p>The most comfortable period for a sectoral rebound in cyclical stocks has passed, and the opportunity for valuation recovery has come to an end.<b>Next, we need to find α within β.</b>This time, China's style shift will not be as strong as that of the United States.</p><p>Recently, the U.S. energy and financial sectors have generally risen due to expanding demand in the U.S.</p><p>China's recovery this time is different from last year. The growth rate of investment in infrastructure or real estate is slowing down marginally, unlike the 4 trillion yuan investment after 2008, or the rise in cyclical stocks in the 2000s due to the surge in demand.</p><p><b>The first step in the style shift is almost complete.</b>。</p><p>China's economic growth rate gradually slowed down in the following quarters, so commodities such as copper or crude oil cannot be expected to rise much further.</p><p><b>My assessment is that copper and even oil prices have reached a high level.</b>Because although Europe and the United States are recovering, this recovery is more driven by consumption than by infrastructure.</p><p>At the same time, China needs to take the opportunity to resolve the risks of existing debt and reduce the government leverage ratio, which is relatively negative for infrastructure and commodity demand. Therefore, in terms of bulk raw materials, the situation in China and Europe and the United States may be offset by a fluctuation.</p><p><b>Therefore, upstream bulk raw materials may have already entered a period of high-level fluctuations and begun to diverge.</b></p><p>Why haven't cyclical stocks plummeted across the board immediately? Previous experience has shown that stocks peak before commodity prices peak.</p><p>This time, it's because of carbon neutrality. Cyclical commodities that benefit from carbon neutrality can continue to rise, which is the logic of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>The second quarter is a boon for the manufacturing industry.</b></p><p><b>The left-hand entry point for growth sectors has arrived.</b></p><p>For midstream manufacturing, opportunities are beginning to become clearly established:</p><p><b>In the second quarter, both overseas and domestically, upstream inflation is likely to reach its peak, which means it's good news for the manufacturing industry.</b>This will alleviate manufacturing costs in various aspects; Meanwhile, the recovery in Europe and the United States is actually more inertial because it is consumption-driven.</p><p>Therefore, for leading manufacturing companies that can secure overseas orders and have global pricing power, it is essentially alpha, for example, now whether...<b>Wanhua for chemicals, or Sany for machinery?</b>In fact, they are all relatively independent entities. They are not completely subject to the fluctuations of cyclical industries, but are beginning to develop an attribute that can transcend cycles.</p><p>Cyclical industries should pay attention to the impact of carbon neutrality in the next stage, especially since some leading manufacturing companies will benefit from carbon neutrality on the one hand, and will also be able to share in the positive effects of the economic recovery in Europe and the United States on the other. Therefore, in the next stage, it is time to start investing in high-quality manufacturing companies.</p><p><b>For growth sectors, whether consumer or pharmaceutical, from a long-term perspective, the left-side investment opportunity has actually arrived, and those wavering individuals who followed the trend have now begun to be eliminated.</b></p><p>The so-called left-side positioning is because previously favored sectors may rebound after falling sharply, but whether this can be sustained depends on profitability. If the profit elasticity is not strong and only the stock has strong long-term stability, then the current dynamic P/E and static P/E cannot allow everyone to buy the dip without any doubts.</p><p>From a short-term perspective, these sectors are in a somewhat awkward position. As soon as a rebound occurs, people will flee. Therefore, these types of assets will subsequently recover, fluctuate, and consolidate their range.</p><p>We believe that,<b>A better time for growth-oriented core assets may be in the mid-to-late second quarter.</b></p><p><b>The long-term cost-effectiveness of core assets like the internet is beginning to become apparent.</b></p><p><b>Corresponding to Hong Kong stocks</b>，<b>First, value stocks such as the financial sector or the three major telecom operators are now being used as a defensive counterattack.</b>I think it's still worth buying if you're not looking for exorbitant profits; it can be considered a relatively good convertible bond.</p><p><b>Secondly, cyclical stocks will diverge; the more stocks that can make alpha, the better.</b>The benefits of inflation are already implicit in stock prices. When inflation truly peaks, stock prices may have already begun to fall because the stock market is more sensitive than the real economy.</p><p>We believe that commodity prices have entered their highest point for the year, even if they haven't reached their peak yet.<b>However, the strongest phase of the upward trend in commodities may have passed;</b></p><p>Commodities are now entering a period of high-level fluctuations and the formation of a top area. Under these circumstances, the impact of demand on cyclical commodities is weakening, and there is an opportunity for carbon neutrality around the 2.0 version of supply-side reform.</p><p><b>Third, China's growth sectors, especially core assets like the internet, are expected to recover in the first half of the year but face no major systemic risks, and their long-term cost-effectiveness has begun to become apparent.</b>。</p><p>This type of asset and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOG\">Google</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">Microsoft</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">Apple</a>Let's benchmark against our leading internet companies; they have stronger growth potential and greater profit elasticity, such as...<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent</a>and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>The valuation is actually very attractive.</p><p>The market's sentiment towards growth-oriented core assets is more of a gradual easing, at least there is no systemic risk. Tencent and Alibaba can stabilize, and Meituan's fluctuations are not a big problem. The market has differing opinions on Xiaomi, and there are so-called problems with military-related companies. However, after falling by 25% since the beginning of the year, the negative factors have begun to be fully exhausted.</p><p>That's why I have the confidence to say that there's little room for Hong Kong stocks to fall below 28,400 points. Once the leading growth stocks in Hong Kong stocks stabilize, other growth stocks can recover. For example, sectors such as property management, education, auto parts, consumer goods, and pharmaceuticals can now look for alpha.</p><p><b>sum up</b></p><p>To summarize in three sentences:</p><p>(a) This<b>This is not a systemic risk, nor the beginning of a bear market, but rather a correction in a long-term structural bull market.</b>。</p><p>(II)<b>There is not much room for further downward adjustment.</b>There has been a short-term market rebound, but sentiment is still affected by the negative impact of group buying and speculation. Therefore, the correction may extend into the mid-to-late second quarter, which is a period for right-side positioning.</p><p>(iii) Style switching should not be done blindly. Do not label stocks according to industry attributes. We are now entering the era of stock selection with a left-side layout.</p><p>The relative returns of growth stocks (consumer technology and pharmaceuticals) and cyclical value stocks have converged rapidly over the past two months, and both have now entered the stage of stock selection.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ebb146d9df27844cb787ad545c50986d","relate_stocks":{"399001":"深证成指","399006":"创业板指","000001.SH":"上证指数"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199276124","content_text":"“这次不是系统性风险。为什么不是系统性风险？这一次美债收益率超预期上行的根本原因还是美债供求关系的一个失衡，而更核心的原因是美债持有结构的一个质的变化。”\n“我今天在这里想传递给大家的一个重要理念，就是中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率的波动。”\n“后疫情时代，美国的国债收益率有反弹，但难反转。历史上看每次出现金融危机，都是美债收益率直接干到3或者干到5，现在别说干到3或5了，能够稳住在2都很难。”\n“中长期而言，中美大国博弈是持久战，美国更可能的策略是什么？是用钱买时间来增强竞争力。来去压制中国的竞争力。对内用钱买时间来去恢复美国的竞争力，对外利用规则联合盟友来压制我们中国的竞争力。\n未来，美国要跟我们竞赛，在先进制造业、科技和内需方面竞赛，这三方面最终将是中美大国博弈在经济层面的三个聚焦点。”\n“从中长期的角度来看，现在不是系统性风险的开始，也不是一个熊市的开始，而是结构性长牛一次小小的修正。”\n“这一次的调整对于成长股来说可能会矫枉过正，估值杀下来以后有人会开始担心业绩不达预期或者赎回基金引发多杀多恶性循环，这种情况下，很多人担心这次行情调整的空间和时间。\n我认为后续调整空间不大，主要的下跌已经结束，后面会有分化。”\n“调整时间我们觉得是取决于抱团博弈的负面冲击延续多久。近期主要是体现在成长股的一个抱团博弈，最近是从良性循环走向恶性循环。经过了近期的快速调整以后，基于行业分析师对于公司长期判断，我们认为成长型的核心资产的估值已经进入到中长期合理的位置。所以外国投资者最近也在不断的开始买。这个位置下行空间不大。”\n“也许到了二季度后期，刚刚讲的海外的利空叠加国内政策的软化，国内的经济数值开始回落，那时，行情再出现趋势性的上涨，可能时间节点更好。现在可以选股做左侧，不用太恐慌了，如果是做右侧，可以再稍稍的等一等。”\n“二季度无论海外还是国内，上游‘胀’的力量可能都会到高点，这意味着对于制造业是个福音，制造业的成本各方面能够有所缓解；而同时欧美的复苏因为是消费驱动的，惯性其实更强一些。”\n“对于成长型的板块，无论是消费还是医药，立足长期而言，左侧布局点其实也已经来临了，那些跟风的不坚定分子现在已经开始出局。”\n“中国的成长领域标的特别是互联网这种核心资产，上半年后续是休养生息但没有大的系统性风险，长期的性价比已经开始凸显了。”\n以上，是兴业证券首席全球策略分析师张忆东，3月17日在一场小范围的交流中，分享的最新精彩观点。\n最近美债收益率收益率上行，国内市场连续回调，而在张忆东看来，国内投资者对于美债收益率上行的这个事过度关注了。\n张忆东详细分析了这次美债收益率上行背后的核心原因，认为现在的美债已经跟10年前的美债不是同一个影响力了，中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率的波动。从中长期的角度来看，这是结构性长牛一次小小的修正，后面会有分化。\n同时，他还重点谈到了这次调整可能带来的机会，哪些资产现在已经可以开始布局。\n以下是此次交流全文，聪明投资者经忆东总授权，分享给大家。\n\n很高兴今天晚上跟大家一起分享，汇报关于美债收益率、通胀和风格切换的问题，以及关于市场后期走向的问题。\n国内投资者有三种悲观情绪\n真是属于脑洞大开\n一、对于美债收益率和通胀的看法\n总体来说，我们觉得回到核心资产的价值真谛，这才是重要的。对于美债以及抱团博弈，这都是浮云。\n交流下来，我感觉国内的投资者对于美债收益率上行的这个事过度关注了。\n现在国内投资者有三种悲观的情绪：\n第一种情绪，觉得美国要完，像是2008年次贷的那种预期，觉得美国长债收益率上行会引发美国的债务风险，进而导致全球的无风险收益率的上行，最终美国债股双杀引发全球危机，中国也好不了；\n第二种情绪，相反，觉得美国很厉害，觉得美国经济复苏很强，美国要搞超限金融战了，美元可能要反转了，要割全世界韭菜了，就像是东南亚金融危机，，这一种情绪是对美国过度高估，投降主义；\n第三种情绪是，对于美债收益率上行——不明觉厉，先卧倒为敬，以防范海外的风险。\n这三种情绪真是属于脑洞大开。\n这一次美债收益率上行，我们要深入的聊一聊，知其然更要知其所以然。\n从2月中旬到现在，全球市场并不是全都在跌，法国、德国等欧元区股市其实是在创历史新高，道琼斯也不断地创历史新高，纳斯达克确实调整了但也还是很克制的，反而，中国内地和中国香港股市从2月中旬到现在调得七荤八素的。\n美债收益率上行不是系统性风险\n更核心的原因是美债持有结构质的变化\n我们有必要在这个时候梳理一下美债收益率上行的核心原因，从而来预判这究竟是不是一个系统性风险？\n从2月初开始，美债收益率从1.15%快速攀升到现在的1.6%，升得这么快确实超出预期。升得快的背后是不是基本面的因素？\n比如说通胀失控、经济过热，如果是这些因素，会带来系统性的风险。\n但是，如果美联储或者美国财政部能够控制到的话，那就是技术性的风险。\n很显然我们认为这次不是系统性风险。为什么不是系统性风险？\n这一次美债收益率超预期上行的根本原因还是美债供求关系的一个失衡，而更核心的原因是美债持有结构的一个质的变化。\n2008年美国之外的外国投资者持有美债的比重是54%，然后到了2015年是47%，之后下降的飞快，现在是34%。\n一方面中国2015年以后汇率改革了，而中东的产油国也没钱了，日本持有的美国国债规模在2015年之后出现了明显的下滑，日本从1985年开始井喷式购买的美债（期限最长的为30年）进入偿还期了。\n外国投资者持有美债的需求明显的减弱。\n另一方面，新冠疫情之后美债的发行较过去20年有大幅提升，2020年比2009年增加了一倍多，所以这种情况下短期就会使得美债利率上行超预期。\n可以看到前段时间7年期美债的拍卖的竞拍倍数是差不多20年的低位，投资者兴趣索然，这种情况推动了阶段性的供需关系的一个失衡，进而推动了美国长债利率超预期的上行。\n现在的美债跟10年前的美债不是同一个影响力\n美债投资者结构从量变到质变，外国投资者的占比出现了趋势性的下行，这个影响可能是比较深远的。\n首先，过去的格林斯潘之谜不再谜了，美债长端利率反映的是国内财政政策的正常节奏，而作为全球资产定价之锚的作用在弱化。\n从1969年一直到2015年，外国投资者帮助美联储压低了长债利率，甚至使得美国的长端利率和短端利率产生了脱节，这就是所谓的格林斯潘之迷。\n格林斯潘想要去在短端加息，但是根本无法传导影响长端利率。\n此一时彼一时，现在的美债已经跟10年前的美债不是同一个影响力了。\n现在美债市场投资者结构的变化，使得美债收益率对于短期的供给更加敏感，美债短期供求关系的紧平衡，这才是近期美债长端利率超预期上行的主要原因。\n耶伦可以发债缓一下，或者说美联储购债力度大一点，这都很正常，更不用说还有OT、YCC等工具。所以这不是一个系统性风险或者趋势性风险。\n部分国内投资者担心的美国通胀预期和美国经济，无法解释美债收益率上行，最多只是次要因素。\n因为美国经济只是刚刚复苏，远不是过热；另外，通胀预期2月18号之后，事实上TIPS所隐含的通胀预期是平稳的，甚至略有下降。\n我们把美债收益率作为全球资产定价之锚的历史做了一个回顾，无论是70年代石油美元还是80年代的日本增持，还是说到90年代东南亚金融危机后新兴市场的外汇储备大部分放在了美债，因为美债是低交易成本高流动性高安全性的。\n中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率波动\n现在不少投资者理所当然地认为，美债收益率就是全球大类资产配置定价的锚，一旦动了就地动山摇。\n但是，我认为这个锚其实在发生弱化。\n弱化的一个节点是在2008年次贷危机，2008年以后海外投资者持有美债的比重就见顶回落了，如今美国国债市场已经产生了质的变化，海外投资者持有美债的比重回到了2002年的水平。\n我今天在这里想传递给大家的一个重要理念，就是中国投资者不必过度担心美债收益率的波动。\n现在的美债是美国践行MMT（现代货币理论）之后的新美债，它更加反映美国财政状况，回归了本源——教科书上讲国债市场是服务于国内财政政策的变化。\n之所以此前美债长端利率能够作为国际大类资产配置的锚，是因为各个主权国家和主要的投资机构都高度持有美债从而影响到方方面面的金融运行，但是现在，美债市场里边的主要购买者是美联储。\n去年美国政府净发行的4.68万亿美金的国债，其中52%以上是美联储买的。\n慢慢地，美债的属性从一个国际配置的锚的属性开始转向作为一个为大国内部财政金融服务的属性。\n后疫情时代\n美国的国债收益率有反弹，但难反转\n再延伸一点，我们说在一个MMT理论的新时代，投资者的知识体系要更新，摆脱八九十年代的框架；\n那个框架告诉我们要注意财政的纪律、要注意债务上限，也许大家还记得当初欧洲的马斯特里赫特条约。\nMMT理论的指导下，硬货币国家已经突破了债务上限，硬货币国家的债务扩展-经济增长-汇率相关作用的体系已经重构并且逻辑自洽。\n比如说欧债危机以后的欧洲，债务率有趋势性的上移；美国债务一路向上走，现在是303%的总债务率，远高于中国的270%。\n在硬货币的国家，只要美元主导的国际货币体系不崩盘，MMT新货币理论实施的期限就会超预期。\n也许大家感觉很不能理解，美国虚拟经济太繁荣、而实体经济并不太好，为啥不断借债就是没有导致明斯基时刻，为啥美国没有发生债务危机？\n如果这是一个新兴市场、一个软货币的国家，毫无疑问，债务已经很高了，然后再发债、再进行刺激的时候，它往往对内是通胀，对外是贬值，资本外逃，最终会导致债务危机。\n但是现在，美国财政部长耶伦已经把牌都打给我们看了，她的意思是说：只要财政刺激能够推动GDP的改善，这就可以持续下去。\n政府债务可以变为永续债，根本不用考虑什么时候要还。\n所以本质上来说，在民粹主义盛行的互联网时代，相比起我们在做的各种改革和社会的变革，欧洲和美国更愿意花钱买时间，通过科技创新、经过一段时间的发展去解决。\n所以，我们认为，后疫情时代，美国的国债收益率有反弹，但难反转。\n历史上看每次出现金融危机，都是美债收益率直接干到3或者干到5，现在别说干到3或5了，能够稳住在2都很难。\n我不排除今年5月份，有可能美国通胀数据核心PCE在基数效应以及新一轮的财政刺激下超预期，导致美债市场可能慌一慌，美债收益率向2冲一冲，有这个可能性；\n但是，难以持续，所以我们说美债收益率有反弹难反转。\n现在的新型滞胀不同于70年代的滞涨\n现在的常态是新型滞胀，不同于70年代的滞涨。\n“滞”，大家都能理解，但是“胀”是不一样的，因为在70年代的滞涨，那是婴儿潮的时代，需求没问题，但是供给有问题，1973年和1978年两次石油危机。\n现在的滞胀的问题是什么？现在需求有问题，人口老龄化，贫富差距拉大等等压制有效需求；\n现在的“胀”更多的体现在资产泡沫，比如说核心地段的房子还是保值增值的，以及我们讲的各个领域的核心资产——就是中国最具有核心竞争力、长期成长动能的，无论是增长稳健的周期价值股，还是成长超预期的消费医药科技等等，这些优质资产都是全球稀缺的。\n实施MMT的欧美，特别是美国，目前的经济复苏的轮子还是转的，但是很难带来美国进入新的一轮全面繁荣；\n它的社会问题是深层次的“滞”，种族矛盾、贫富差距拉大等问题都会抑制有效需求，另外，美国不可能一直靠直升机撒钱去补贴懒人，因为这不符合美国的新教精神。\n在这种背景下，现在的通胀不是问题，美国长债利率上行也不是大问题。\n美国的策略是用钱买时间\n来增强竞争力\n有些A股投资者担心说“美国很厉害，美国要收割我们，美国要搞金融战了”。\n我劝大家不必太高估美国，大国博弈是持久战，美国现在没有足够的意愿和信心来挑起金融危机，因为他现在的状态其实是用钱来买时间，用规则慢慢熬我们。\n美国当前的国内政治形势可以借鉴的其实是上世纪70年代初的美国，当时是打输了越战，这一次是抗击疫情失利，美国国内的政治非常撕裂动荡；\n另外，当时的外部形势是，苏联和日本分别在政治经济对美国有了很强的竞争压力，而这一次中国其实比70年代的日本对美国经济的赶超压力更大，在政治外交军事上美国也在编造“中国威胁论”。\n所以，这个时候我认为美国其实没有足够的意愿和信心去挑起金融危机，如果美国有信心的话，它也不会前段时间拔网线了。\n中长期而言，中美大国博弈是持久战，美国更可能的策略是什么？\n是用钱买时间来增强竞争力。来去压制中国的竞争力。对内用钱买时间来去恢复美国的竞争力，对外利用规则联合盟友来压制我们中国的竞争力。\n未来，美国要跟我们竞赛，在先进制造业、科技和内需方面竞赛，这三方面最终将是中美大国博弈在经济层面的三个聚焦点。\n从这里引申一下，为什么我们很积极的推动碳中和？\n碳中和绝对不是单纯的短期题材炒作，从而出现钢铁涨了就是碳中和，清洁能源和新能源车下跌的就不是碳中和，这是炒作而已。\n从大国博弈的高度来正确认知碳中和，\n一方面是我们提前未雨绸缪，知道美国要从环保、清洁能源、可持续发展等方面来限制我们，那我们自己主动、更快地调整自己；\n而且，我们通过实施碳中和战略可以和欧洲建立一个更广泛的利益同盟，这一方面的意义更加深远。\n总结一下，美国的长债利率上行是不可持续的，它更多是一个技术性问题，是一个阶段性问题，要对美债利率脱敏，不要太敏感。\n因为现在的美债影响力已经跟过去的30年不一样了。这一次不是危机的前兆，2021年肯定不是2008年也不是2018年，现在大家对此的焦虑情绪有点极端了。\n现在是结构性长牛一次小小的修正\n催化剂是美国复苏带动全球股市风格切换\n二、对于风格切换的看法\n从中长期的角度来看，现在不是系统性风险的开始，也不是一个熊市的开始，而是结构性长牛一次小小的修正。\n我们展望市场行情，一方面，短期抱团博弈经历了大喜大悲大起大伏，现在情绪还不稳定，需要时间来修复信心。\n但另一方面，对于核心资产，立足基本面逻辑才能行稳致远，真正的好公司不怕跌、跌不怕，这是我2016年初就跟大家讲的，市场震荡的时候其实是选股的好时机。\n关于行情的展望，有几个市场关注的问题：\n第一个问题，是调整的界定——这次调整不是系统性危机的开始，其实就是阶段性的休整，休整的催化剂是美国复苏带动全球股市风格切换。\n美国投资者觉得美债收益率上行是正常的复苏伴生物，美国人觉得这很正常，最近美国道琼斯指数明显跑赢纳斯达克指数，从行业属性上看，能源、金融、工业设备跑赢了信息技术，但是信息技术领域的动态市盈率下降的也比较快。\n未来几个月欧美经济应该进入到更加强劲的复苏阶段，因为疫苗普及，加之1.9万亿美元新一轮的刺激落地，都会带来消费的报复性反弹，再加上低基数，所以美国二季度无论是经济复苏的数据还是通胀的数据，都会比较强劲。\n所以，2021年风格切换是价值投资的必然选择。\n这次调整对于成长股来说可能会矫枉过正\n我们认为美股其实已经在引领着全球的价值回归，就是风格的再平衡、性价比的重新考量和估值体系的再建。\n事实上A股和港股最近一个多月周期价值的相对收益很明显，比如恒指年初以来排名靠前的是三桶油、金融和三大运营商，这些都属于周期价值之类的。\n这一次的调整对于成长股来说可能会矫枉过正；\n估值杀下来以后有人会开始担心业绩不达预期或者赎回基金引发多杀多恶性循环，这种情况下，很多人担心这次行情调整的空间和时间。\n我认为后续调整空间不大，主要的下跌已经结束，后面会有分化。\n在我们2月写的报告《初生牛犊遇到虎，倒春寒后换风格》里提出，行情在三月中应该进入了一个反弹阶段。\n事实上从3月12日到现在，无论A股还是港股基本上还是震荡上行的，虽然力度不强。不排除5月份全球又会有一个波折，我们判断那个时候向下跌的空间也是不大的；\n无论是A股和港股大指数一点都不贵，跟海外市场相比甚至是很便宜，那时A股3400点以下、港股的28400点以下没啥空间。\n为什么3月中旬“倒春寒”可能告一段落甚至结束\n美债收益率上行在二季度可能还有一定的惯性\n从时间的维度来看，现在可能还有两个小风险没有完全的释放干净，可能会引发市场的一些干扰。\n一个风险是整体美债收益率上行在二季度可能还有一定的惯性；\n虽然我们也看到从近期美债收益率上行的斜率已经放缓了，其实斜率放缓就是告诉大家这不是一个系统性风险，可以淡化美债收益率上行的因素，开始围绕基本面去调研选股。\n为什么我们说3月中旬“倒春寒”可能告一段落甚至结束？\n这是一种历史规律，美债波动率指数每次升到一倍标准差附近，大多数的时候会进入震荡收敛了，也就是说会预示到二阶导数已经开始斜率放缓。\n到了四五月份，很可能美债收益率收益率会短期冲一下，但这是强弩之末了，年内见顶。\nA股投资者担心1.9万亿美元财政救助计划正常来说会加重联邦政府的债务压力，但事实上因为当前美国财政部总账户存款（TGA）中仍有约1.4万亿元。\n根据美国财政部最新表态，后续疫后刺激将优先使用TGA余额而非新发行债务。美国财政部预期2021上半年资金缺口、融资计划都将明显下降。这是一个利空出尽。\nA股投资者对通胀的担心过度焦虑了\n另外一个利空，就是究竟美国式的复苏会不会引发大宗商品CPI、PPI的失控和飙升。\n现在来看，无论是外国投资者还是美联储，都是把美国的复苏的当做一种正常预期，但是不少A股投资者好像比较悲观，他们担心的是什么？\n担心美国经济强复苏的话，全球的通胀可能会加速，中国就会面临着输入型的通胀，从而会不会引发政策进一步收紧。这种对通胀的担心是太过度焦虑了。\n什么时候对于通胀上行的过度担忧能够被证伪，这就要等今年的二季度后期，也就是5月上旬看4月份的通胀数据，6月上旬看5月份的通胀数据。\n快则5月上旬是4月份通胀数据公布出来，那么该反应的市场也会反应了，不反应也就属于提前反应了，利空出尽的时候反而就麻木了。\n不排除美国4月的核心PCE会上升到3%以上，近10年美国的核心通胀都没有上到3%以上，超预期一是因为去年4月~5月份美国lock down政策导致基数非常低，\n二是因为，3月下旬1.9万亿的财政救助计划实施再叠加了疫苗的普及也比较快，4月份又是复活节的大日子，所以，消费的报复性反弹还是比较明显的。\n4月份的通胀数据是一个异常值，但是资本市场往往会线性外推，所以可能那个时候会有一些扰动。即便有些扰动，其实可以看做是利空出尽，这恰恰是一个黄金坑。\n所以我认为即使后期通胀超预期，美联储也是有足够的工具和力量去压低长债利率的。毕竟美联储武器库里面的武器很多，还有YCC等手段没实施。\n从美联储的角度看什么时候要动手，还是要看实际利率；\n现在虽然十年期美债收益率上升到1.6%了，但是整个十年期实际利率还是在-0.6%，除了30年美国国债实际利率转正以外，其他的都还没转正。\n调整时间取决于抱团博弈的负面冲击延续多久\n现在可以选股做左侧，不用太恐慌了\n三、对市场的展望和调整的时间\n第三个要跟大家汇报交流的是对市场的展望和调整的时间。\n调整时间我们觉得是取决于抱团博弈的负面冲击延续多久。\n近期主要是体现在成长股的一个抱团博弈，最近是从良性循环走向恶性循环。\n经过了近期的快速调整以后，基于行业分析师对于公司长期判断，我们认为成长型的核心资产的估值已经进入到中长期合理的位置。所以外国投资者最近也在不断的开始买。这个位置下行空间不大。\n对抱团博弈的负面冲击会不会恶化的担忧，仍将压制市场风险偏好。\n目前基金经理反馈说赎回不明显，基金投资者的心态还是比较的稳定，跟2015年的那种多杀多的踩踏是不可同日而语的，但是，后面可能还需要时间去消化。\n现在调整到这个位置，长期来看大家是有信心的，但是静态TTM估值还不算特别有吸引力；\n也许到了二季度后期，刚刚讲的海外的利空叠加国内政策的软化，国内的经济数值开始回落，那时，行情再出现趋势性的上涨，可能时间节点更好。\n现在可以选股做左侧，不用太恐慌了，如果是做右侧，可以再稍稍的等一等。\n总体来说，抱团博弈其实不是一种客观结果，而是来围绕着基金的相对收益排名的要求，形成了自我强化和自我循环。\n之前是追涨，最近一段时间就是杀跌，它这种是主观投机。\n所以过去每一次抱团资产的行情终结，都不是因为外部冲击，外部冲击最多只是引发季度性的大调整，\n真正终结的关键、还是相关资产的中长期的基本面趋势是否发生了超预期的反转。后续这些资产能不能再出发，关键还是在于业绩。\n现在该做的不是去操心要不要参与短期反弹，而是要以长打短，先去调研来确认一下此前我们重仓的这些公司，要保证它的基本面。\n不能跌着跌着发现是骗子，那就完了，比如2015年乐视之类的，要么退市，要么基本面逻辑被证伪了。\n这一次更像是过去十几年美国的那些美国核心资产，这些资产跌的时候也会调整，比如Amazon和Google在2018年的2月份也有大跌过。但是这些公司跌了以后只能是使得它的性价比更好了，而不是基本面的逻辑证伪了。\n现在与其操心宏观大势，不如来做选股，因为宏观大势已经在前面的调整中反应出来了。\n我们关注到从2月18日以来，北向资金总体来说是净流入，特别是3月份以来，流入其实是比较明显的；\n只是说它的风格更加平衡一些，从此前的偏消费，到现在业绩为王，一些银行、化工，甚至钢铁和地产都有。\n当然有人疑惑这是不是游资行为，我们在接触的、无论是欧美的客户还是新加坡的客户，这些离中国比较远一点的投资者对中国其实是有信心的，因为性价比更好了，好资产在全球是稀缺的。\n后续风格会转向盈利驱动\n四、投资策略\n最后是我给大家的投资策略建议。我认为标签式的风格转换已经告一段落了，后续的风格会转向盈利驱动。\n下阶段，黑猫白猫抓住老鼠就是好猫，行业上未必是说泾渭分明，不是钢铁涨而新能源就要跌的博弈。\n周期股板块性反弹最舒服的阶段已经过去了，估值修复的机会告一段落，后面要在β里面找α，这一次中国风格切换不会像美国那么强。\n最近美国的能源和金融板块普涨，这是因为美国存在需求的扩张。\n中国这次复苏跟去年已经不一样了，基建或者房地产的投资增速在边际放缓，不像2008年之后的4万亿，或者说像00年代加入WTO、城镇化工业化，那个时候周期股上涨都是因为需求的大爆发。\n现在风格切换的第一步已经差不多了。\n中国经济增速后几个季度是逐步回落的，所以不能指望铜或者原油这一类的大宗商品还能够涨多少。\n我的判断是铜价甚至油价到了一个高位区域了，因为虽然欧美在复苏，这种复苏更多是消费驱动，而不是基建驱动；\n与此同时，中国要趁机化解存量债务风险，降低政府杠杆率，对于基建、大宗商品需求相对是负面的，所以大宗原物料而言，中国和欧美的情况可能会有一个此消彼长的对冲。\n所以上游的大宗原物料可能已经进入高位震荡、开始分化了。\n为什么周期股还没有立刻全线的暴跌，以前的经验是大宗商品价格见顶之前，股票就先见顶了？\n这次是因为碳中和，大宗周期品受益于碳中和的还能继续涨，这是供给侧改革的逻辑。\n二季度对于制造业是个福音\n成长型板块左侧布局点已经来临\n对于中游制造业来看，机会正开始慢慢明显确立：\n二季度无论海外还是国内，上游“胀”的力量可能都会到高点，这意味着对于制造业是个福音，制造业的成本各方面能够有所缓解；而同时欧美的复苏因为是消费驱动的，惯性其实更强一些。\n所以，对于这种能够拿到海外订单以及在全球有定价权的制造业龙头，本质上是α，比如说现在无论是万华之于化工，还是三一之于机械，其实都是一个相对独立的存在，它并没有完全受制于周期行业的波动，而是开始走出来一个穿越周期的属性。\n周期行业下阶段要重视碳中和的影响，特别是有些制造业龙头一方面受益于碳中和，另一方面亦能够分享到欧美经济复苏带来的利好，所以，下个阶段可以动手布局制造业的优质公司了。\n对于成长型的板块，无论是消费还是医药，立足长期而言，左侧布局点其实也已经来临了，那些跟风的不坚定分子现在已经开始出局。\n所谓左侧布局，因为前期抱团板块可能会跌深反弹，但能否持续还是要看盈利，如果盈利弹性不强而只是长期稳定性强的股票，那现在的动态市盈率和静态市盈率还不能让大家毫无疑虑地抄底。\n从短期角度来看，这些板块的地位有点尴尬，一反弹就会有人出逃，因此这一类的资产后续休养生息、上上下下、夯实箱体的过程。\n我们认为，成长型的核心资产更好的时机可能是在二季度的中后期。\n互联网这种核心资产长期性价比开始凸显\n对应到港股里面，首先，金融或三大运营商这些价值股，现在作为防守反击，不求暴利的标的我觉得还是可以拿的，可以视为比较好的一个可转债。\n其次，周期股会分化，越是能做出α的越会好一些，而通胀带来的收益其实已经隐含在股价里了，通胀真正见峰值的时候，股价可能就已经开始跌了，因为股市比实体经济会更敏感一些。\n我们判断大宗商品价格已经进入年内的高点区域，就算还没有到大顶部，但大宗商品上行最强的阶段可能已经过去了；\n现在大宗商品进入到高位震荡、构筑顶部区域的时期，在这种情况下，需求对于周期品的影响在弱化，这个时候围绕着供给侧改革的2.0版的碳中和是有机会的。\n第三，中国的成长领域标的特别是互联网这种核心资产，上半年后续是休养生息但没有大的系统性风险，长期的性价比已经开始凸显了。\n把这一类资产跟谷歌、微软、苹果去对标一下，我们的互联网龙头有更强的增长性、更强的利润弹性，比如像腾讯和阿里巴巴的估值其实是非常有吸引力的。\n市场对于成长型的核心资产更多是一种情绪的慢慢疏解，至少没有系统性风险，腾讯阿里巴巴能稳住，美团上下波动也没大问题，市场对于小米的看法有分歧，有所谓涉军企业的问题，但从年初以来跌了25%以后开始有点利空出尽的状态。\n所以这些才让我有底气说港股28400点以下没啥空间的。港股的成长龙头稳住之后，其他的成长股就能回暖，比如物业、教育、汽车汽车零部件、消费和医药这些板块，现在都可以找找α。\n总结\n三句话简单概括一下：\n（一）这不是系统性风险，不是一个熊市的开始，而是结构性长牛的一次修正。\n（二）后续调整空间下行并不大，短期市场有反弹，但情绪依然受到抱团博弈负向冲击的影响，所以，调整时间有可能延续到二季度中后期，才是右侧布局的一个时期。\n（三）风格切换不能盲目，不要按照行业属性贴标签式选边站，现在开始进入到左侧布局的选股时代。\n成长股（消费科技医药）跟周期价值股过去两个月相对收益的快速收敛，现在双方都已经进入到个股精选的阶段。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"399001":0.9,"399006":0.9,"000001.SH":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4702,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":354512882,"gmtCreate":1617187410446,"gmtModify":1704696953959,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"pinglun","listText":"pinglun","text":"pinglun","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/354512882","repostId":"2123022939","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2123022939","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1617186660,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2123022939?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-31 18:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2123022939","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"MW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n\n\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their ","content":"<html><body><font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n</p>\n<p>\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their rating on Apple <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$(AAPL)$</a> to buy from neutral and lifted the price target to $142 from $115. \"While our analysis of iPhone procurement and mix drives our FY22 estimates higher and our 'Core' value to $128 (from $115), our analysis of the auto market and Apple's multi-year investment in the industry (self-driving car licenses and LiDAR patents) suggests to us Apple's auto optionality is worth at least an incremental $14/share,\" they said. UBS says an Apple-branded battery electric vehicle, or BEV, could achieve a 5% market share. Apple shares rose 1.8% in premarket trade, but have skidded 10% this year, hurt by the rise in Treasury yields that has pressured other technology giants. \n</p>\n<p>\n  -Steve Goldstein; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n  <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/END\">$(END)$</a> Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n  March 31, 2021 06:31 ET (10:31 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones &amp; Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font></body></html>","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>UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes</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: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\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\">\nUBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-31 18:31</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><body><font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n</p>\n<p>\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their rating on Apple <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$(AAPL)$</a> to buy from neutral and lifted the price target to $142 from $115. \"While our analysis of iPhone procurement and mix drives our FY22 estimates higher and our 'Core' value to $128 (from $115), our analysis of the auto market and Apple's multi-year investment in the industry (self-driving car licenses and LiDAR patents) suggests to us Apple's auto optionality is worth at least an incremental $14/share,\" they said. UBS says an Apple-branded battery electric vehicle, or BEV, could achieve a 5% market share. Apple shares rose 1.8% in premarket trade, but have skidded 10% this year, hurt by the rise in Treasury yields that has pressured other technology giants. \n</p>\n<p>\n  -Steve Goldstein; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n  <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/END\">$(END)$</a> Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n  March 31, 2021 06:31 ET (10:31 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones &amp; Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"USB":"美国合众银行","AAPL":"苹果","NIO":"蔚来","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"http://dowjonesnews.com/newdjn/logon.aspx?AL=N","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2123022939","content_text":"MW UBS upgrades Apple to buy on auto market hopes\n\n\n  UBS analysts led by David Vogt upgraded their rating on Apple $(AAPL)$ to buy from neutral and lifted the price target to $142 from $115. \"While our analysis of iPhone procurement and mix drives our FY22 estimates higher and our 'Core' value to $128 (from $115), our analysis of the auto market and Apple's multi-year investment in the industry (self-driving car licenses and LiDAR patents) suggests to us Apple's auto optionality is worth at least an incremental $14/share,\" they said. UBS says an Apple-branded battery electric vehicle, or BEV, could achieve a 5% market share. Apple shares rose 1.8% in premarket trade, but have skidded 10% this year, hurt by the rise in Treasury yields that has pressured other technology giants. \n\n\n  -Steve Goldstein; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n\n\n \n\n\n$(END)$ Dow Jones Newswires\n\n\n  March 31, 2021 06:31 ET (10:31 GMT)\n\n\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9,"TSLA":0.9,"NIO":0.9,"USB":1}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5053,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":132674308,"gmtCreate":1622088656504,"gmtModify":1704179246068,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"shshdhdhdhdhdjdjdjrjh","listText":"shshdhdhdhdhdjdjdjrjh","text":"shshdhdhdhdhdjdjdjrjh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/132674308","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5330,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":376457379,"gmtCreate":1619144369591,"gmtModify":1704720318372,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"ygvhhh","listText":"ygvhhh","text":"ygvhhh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/376457379","repostId":"2129086331","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4593,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":349891003,"gmtCreate":1617585622902,"gmtModify":1704700556290,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"fffff","listText":"fffff","text":"fffff","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/349891003","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5105,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350581235,"gmtCreate":1616230130627,"gmtModify":1704792355843,"author":{"id":"3576741308708587","authorId":"3576741308708587","name":"3600秒的守候","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a997b789b2b70bfa7e4a7a4d32a6d56","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3576741308708587","idStr":"3576741308708587"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"will will Rockyoy","listText":"will will Rockyoy","text":"will will Rockyoy","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350581235","repostId":"2120102081","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2120102081","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616222637,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2120102081?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-20 14:43","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"The profit and loss distribution chart has been revealed. How are those of you who are chasing Kun Kun and Song Song doing?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2120102081","media":"上海证券报 ","summary":"　　支付宝新开通了基金诊断功能，披露了最近1年持有用户盈亏分布情况。数据显示，近一年，绝大多数追逐“顶流”基金经理或者“网红”基金的基民都暂时陷入了亏损。例如，“公募一哥”张坤管理的易方达蓝筹精选近一年收益率超过118%，但近一年持有用户中，70%以上的投资者亏损幅度超过5%。　　根据支付宝对用户行为特征的分析，放弃定投和追涨杀跌仍然是投资者亏钱的主要原因。","content":"<p><div>How are you all chasing Lanlan, Kunkun, and Songsong? Alipay has launched a new fund diagnostic function, disclosing the profit and loss distribution of users holding funds over the past year. Data shows that in the past year, the vast majority of fund investors who chase \"top\" fund managers or \"internet celebrity\" funds have temporarily suffered losses. For example, the E Fund Blue Chip Selection fund managed by Zhang Kun, the \"top mutual fund manager,\" has achieved a return of over 118% in the past year, but among the users who held it in the past year, more than 70% of the investors suffered losses of more than 5%. According to Alipay's analysis of user behavior characteristics, abandoning dollar-cost averaging and chasing highs and selling lows remain the main reasons why investors lose money. Let's take a look at \"...</p><p><a href=\"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q\">Web page link</a></div></p>","source":"shzqb","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>The profit and loss distribution chart has been revealed. How are those of you who are chasing Kun Kun and Song Song doing?</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\">\nThe profit and loss distribution chart has been revealed. How are those of you who are chasing Kun Kun and Song Song doing?\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">上海证券报 </strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-20 14:43</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><div>How are you all chasing Lanlan, Kunkun, and Songsong? Alipay has launched a new fund diagnostic function, disclosing the profit and loss distribution of users holding funds over the past year. Data shows that in the past year, the vast majority of fund investors who chase \"top\" fund managers or \"internet celebrity\" funds have temporarily suffered losses. For example, the E Fund Blue Chip Selection fund managed by Zhang Kun, the \"top mutual fund manager,\" has achieved a return of over 118% in the past year, but among the users who held it in the past year, more than 70% of the investors suffered losses of more than 5%. According to Alipay's analysis of user behavior characteristics, abandoning dollar-cost averaging and chasing highs and selling lows remain the main reasons why investors lose money. Let's take a look at \"...</p><p><a href=\"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q\">Web page link</a></div></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q\">上海证券报 </a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f25970ebf4293eec7586423288711d3f","relate_stocks":{"399001":"深证成指","399006":"创业板指","09988":"阿里巴巴-W","QNETCN":"纳斯达克中美互联网老虎指数","BABA":"阿里巴巴","000001.SH":"上证指数"},"source_url":"http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/538_9J4d8B80Qx-Q2JnN3Q","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2120102081","content_text":"追逐兰兰、坤坤、嵩嵩的你们还好吗?支付宝新开通了基金诊断功能，披露了最近1年持有用户盈亏分布情况。数据显示，近一年，绝大多数追逐“顶流”基金经理或者“网红”基金的基民都暂时陷入了亏损。例如，“公募一哥”张坤管理的易方达蓝筹精选近一年收益率超过118%，但近一年持有用户中，70%以上的投资者亏损幅度超过5%。根据支付宝对用户行为特征的分析，放弃定投和追涨杀跌仍然是投资者亏钱的主要原因。我们先来看看“顶流”基金经理管理的基金情况。张坤是公募基金行业首位管理规模超过1000亿元的主动权益基金经理，今年以来频频登上热搜，甚至有了自己的粉丝后援会，可是近一年买入基金的大部分粉丝应该颇为伤心。以张坤管理的易方达蓝筹精选为例，从近一年持有用户盈亏情况来看，支付宝数据显示，逾八成投资者目前是亏损的，其中，亏损超过5%以上的基民占比高达71%。值得注意的是，截至3月18日，易方达蓝筹精选近一年收益率为118.6%，这意味着不少投资者是在高点冲进来的。支付宝也对亏5%以上用户的行为特征进行了分析，15.6%的投资者是由于定投放弃，14.3%的投资者是因为追涨杀跌，8.2%的投资者是因为持仓时间短，另有7.4%的投资者是因为频繁买卖。另一位明星基金经理葛兰管理的中欧医疗健康混合A的支付宝关注人数超过400万人，近一年绝大多数投资者也是亏损的。数据显示，从近一年持有用户盈亏分布来看，盈利的客户占比不到四成，52.5%的投资者亏损超过5%。但从基金本身收益来看，中欧医疗健康混合A近一年收益率超过75%。放弃定投和追涨杀跌仍然是投资者亏钱的主要原因。我们再来看看“网红”基金的情况。招商中证白酒指数基金堪称基金界的“网红”，去年以来霸屏支付宝基金热购榜，去年三季度末该基金规模突破200亿元。截至今年1月8日，规模已飙升至568.47亿元，持有人户数也高达830.76万户。从近一年持有用户盈亏情况来看，超半数投资者是亏损的，其中，30.8%的投资者亏损幅度超过10%，而招商中证白酒指数近一年涨幅超过120%。几乎满仓半导体的诺安成长同样是只“网红”基金，去年年底基金规模高达327亿元。从近一年持有用户盈亏情况来看，只有不到三成投资者实现盈利，55.8%的投资者亏损超过5%。不过，诺安成长近一年的表现并不如人意，截至3月18日，基金净值涨幅为13.23%。从支付宝对用户的行为分析来看，绝大多数亏损的投资者是因为追涨杀跌以及放弃定投。高点买入被套何时能回本？事实上，春节后市场颇为震荡，多只基金节后亏损幅度超过20%，不少刚入市的投资者买在阶段性高点导致被套，心里难免有点恐慌。很多人或许都想问基金到底什么时候才能回本，小编这里有一组数据。兴证全球基金用偏股基金指数对历史数据做了一组测算，回顾偏股基金指数自2008年之后10年的历史数据，计算投资者每一年高点入场后持有基金需要的回本时长。具体来看，如果在2008年的阶段性高点即上证指数5497.9点（也即近10年上证指数最高点位）买入，截至今年3月8日，不考虑申赎费管理费等费用，这笔投资回本需要86个月；2015年上证指数再次冲上5000点，如果在当年的5166.4点最高点买入，这笔投资回本时间大概需要61个月。数据显示，在单笔投资的情况下，在2008年-2018年的最高点买入，只要愿意长期持有最后总会回本，只是回本时间有长有短，平均回本时长为25个月。对于投资者而言，买入基金希望的是获取收益，如果在每年的高点买入，最终持有收益想超过20%，又需要多长时间？数据显示，从整体来看，在每年高点买入，单笔投资收益超过20%平均需要45个月。其中，在2018年5497.9点买入，单笔投资收益要想超过20%，需要87个月；在2015年的5166.4点买入，需要68个月的时间收益才能超过20%。在下跌中定投，则能够摊薄投资者买入成本，加快投资者回本以及获取收益的速度。数据显示，在每年高点投资1万元，从当月月末开始坚持每月月末定投2000元的情况下，平均回本时长则由25个月缩短到13个月，获取20%以上投资收益的平均时间也从45个月缩短到36个月。数据来源：Wind 截至2021/03/08兴证全球基金表示，没有人能准确地预测市场底部，而按部就班地实践定投计划或许是应对市场震荡的一个不错的选择。如果投资者进场后发现自己买在了相对高点，也不用后悔莫及。一方面，优秀的管理人有机会在中长期创造超额收益；另一方面，投资者也可以在市场下跌中坚持定投，摊薄前期高位买入的成本。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"399001":0.9,"399006":0.9,"QNETCN":0.9,"BABA":0.9,"000001.SH":0.9,"09988":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3391,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}