+Follow
Freeman99
No personal profile
6
Follow
1
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
Freeman99
2021-03-23
Hmmm...
Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake
Freeman99
2021-03-23
?
Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake
Freeman99
2021-03-19
Clueless???
Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next
Freeman99
2021-03-24
Market adjustment...
Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3577158388817239","uuid":"3577158388817239","gmtCreate":1614493688292,"gmtModify":1616203130114,"name":"Freeman99","pinyin":"freeman99","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":6,"tweetSize":4,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.12.12","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"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,"redirectLink":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}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":351209057,"gmtCreate":1616595592079,"gmtModify":1704796197373,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Market adjustment...","listText":"Market adjustment...","text":"Market adjustment...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/351209057","repostId":"1197372595","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1197372595","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616507295,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1197372595?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 21:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1197372595","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Moto","content":"<p>EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p></p><p></p><p></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>Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday</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\">\nWhy EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-23 21:48</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"XPEV":"小鹏汽车","LI":"理想汽车","NIO":"蔚来","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1197372595","content_text":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":127,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353431611,"gmtCreate":1616511292733,"gmtModify":1704795150902,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hmmm...","listText":"Hmmm...","text":"Hmmm...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/353431611","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129536243?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p>\n<p>The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p>\n<p>Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p>\n<p>Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).</p>\n<p>Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p>\n<p>Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p>\n<p>Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p>\n<p>In February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p>\n<p>He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p>\n<p>Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-23 22:31 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\n...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","WFC":"富国银行","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.A":"伯克希尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":231,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353431062,"gmtCreate":1616511257356,"gmtModify":1704795151546,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/353431062","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129536243?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p>\n<p>The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p>\n<p>Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p>\n<p>Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).</p>\n<p>Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p>\n<p>Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p>\n<p>Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p>\n<p>In February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p>\n<p>He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p>\n<p>Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-23 22:31 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\n...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","WFC":"富国银行","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.A":"伯克希尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":130,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350124209,"gmtCreate":1616168208801,"gmtModify":1704791862226,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Clueless???","listText":"Clueless???","text":"Clueless???","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350124209","repostId":"1199154789","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199154789","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616164372,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199154789?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-19 22:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199154789","media":"zerohedge","summary":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on ","content":"<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><blockquote>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.</blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><blockquote>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.</blockquote><p>The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><blockquote>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b></blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><blockquote>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b></blockquote><p>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><blockquote><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b></blockquote><p>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><blockquote>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...</blockquote><p>While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p>* * *</p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</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>Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next</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\">\nFed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-19 22:32 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199154789","content_text":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption.\"Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...Bond yields spiked...... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")....... slumped.In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).So what happens next?Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market:The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates 4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever Impact on BanksRatesFront-End RatesGoing back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.\"More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.* * *Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" asthe SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing.“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":383,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":353431611,"gmtCreate":1616511292733,"gmtModify":1704795150902,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hmmm...","listText":"Hmmm...","text":"Hmmm...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/353431611","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129536243?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p>\n<p>The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p>\n<p>Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p>\n<p>Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).</p>\n<p>Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p>\n<p>Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p>\n<p>Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p>\n<p>In February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p>\n<p>He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p>\n<p>Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-23 22:31 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\n...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","WFC":"富国银行","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.A":"伯克希尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":231,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353431062,"gmtCreate":1616511257356,"gmtModify":1704795151546,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/353431062","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129536243?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p>\n<p>The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p>\n<p>Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p>\n<p>During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p>\n<p>Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).</p>\n<p>Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p>\n<p>Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p>\n<p>The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p>\n<p>Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p>\n<p>In February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p>\n<p>He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p>\n<p>Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-23 22:31 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\n...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","WFC":"富国银行","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.A":"伯克希尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":130,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350124209,"gmtCreate":1616168208801,"gmtModify":1704791862226,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Clueless???","listText":"Clueless???","text":"Clueless???","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350124209","repostId":"1199154789","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199154789","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616164372,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199154789?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-19 22:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199154789","media":"zerohedge","summary":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on ","content":"<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><blockquote>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.</blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><blockquote>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.</blockquote><p>The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><blockquote>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b></blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><blockquote>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b></blockquote><p>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><blockquote><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b></blockquote><p>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><blockquote>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...</blockquote><p>While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p>* * *</p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</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>Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next</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\">\nFed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-19 22:32 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199154789","content_text":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption.\"Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...Bond yields spiked...... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")....... slumped.In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).So what happens next?Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market:The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates 4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever Impact on BanksRatesFront-End RatesGoing back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.\"More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.* * *Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" asthe SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing.“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":383,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":351209057,"gmtCreate":1616595592079,"gmtModify":1704796197373,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Market adjustment...","listText":"Market adjustment...","text":"Market adjustment...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/351209057","repostId":"1197372595","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1197372595","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616507295,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1197372595?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-23 21:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1197372595","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Moto","content":"<p>EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p></p><p></p><p></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>Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday</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\">\nWhy EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-23 21:48</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"XPEV":"小鹏汽车","LI":"理想汽车","NIO":"蔚来","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1197372595","content_text":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":127,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}
