Qingxiong personal page - To The Moon

Qingxiong

No personal profile

4Follow

0Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-07-01

Good

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-25

$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$Buy more

2021-06-25

$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$Buy

2021-06-24

Good

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-24

$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$Good

2021-06-24

$UiPath(PATH)$No move

2021-06-23

$UiPath(PATH)$To the moon!

2021-06-23

$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$Buy more

2021-06-22

To the floor!

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-22

$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$To the moon!

2021-06-22

Why

Tesla Still Leads America's EV Dominance but for How Much Longer?

2021-06-22

Gogo

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-22

Good

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-22

Huat

Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next

2021-06-22

Huat

Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next

2021-06-22

Huat

Sorry, the original content has been removed

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3581573593594204","uuid":"3581573593594204","gmtCreate":1618807872630,"gmtModify":1618807872630,"name":"Qingxiong","pinyin":"qingxiong","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":4,"tweetSize":16,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":2,"name":"无畏虎","nameTw":"無畏虎","represent":"初生牛犊","factor":"发布3条非转发主帖,1条获得他人回复或点赞","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.09.17","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":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":151509962,"gmtCreate":1625097015856,"gmtModify":1703735947792,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/151509962","repostId":"2148584318","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2965,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126240184,"gmtCreate":1624576958248,"gmtModify":1703840579503,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy more","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy more","text":"$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$Buy more","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/126240184","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1548,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126257861,"gmtCreate":1624576935553,"gmtModify":1703840577713,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy","text":"$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$Buy","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/126257861","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1858,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121760966,"gmtCreate":1624492738555,"gmtModify":1703838125471,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121760966","repostId":"2145156570","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1715,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121799577,"gmtCreate":1624491678299,"gmtModify":1703838072125,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Good","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Good","text":"$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121799577","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1774,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121790525,"gmtCreate":1624491650067,"gmtModify":1703838070829,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>No move","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>No move","text":"$UiPath(PATH)$No move","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121790525","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2083,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121331137,"gmtCreate":1624453141329,"gmtModify":1703837110590,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>To the moon!","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>To the moon!","text":"$UiPath(PATH)$To the moon!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121331137","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1657,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123051933,"gmtCreate":1624404482322,"gmtModify":1703835477301,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Buy more","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Buy more","text":"$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$Buy more","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/123051933","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2338,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129680913,"gmtCreate":1624370878332,"gmtModify":1703834726598,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the floor!","listText":"To the floor!","text":"To the floor!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129680913","repostId":"1133339567","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1826,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129604055,"gmtCreate":1624370164477,"gmtModify":1703834680745,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>To the moon!","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>To the moon!","text":"$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$To the moon!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129604055","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1994,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129879296,"gmtCreate":1624369828215,"gmtModify":1703834657998,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Why","listText":"Why","text":"Why","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129879296","repostId":"1162790761","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1162790761","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624368177,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1162790761?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 21:22","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla Still Leads America's EV Dominance but for How Much Longer?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1162790761","media":"The Street","summary":"Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming","content":"<blockquote>\n Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming years, and all three face formidable competition from international rivals.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Tesla&nbsp;(<b>TSLA</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;shares have fallen by close to a third since the clean-energy carmaker hit a January peak of $900, but it remains the world's most valuable automotive company even as its grip on the electric vehicle (EV) market, as well as the zeitgeist, looks increasingly fragile.</p>\n<p>Spurred by governments pledging an end to gas-powered cars in major markets around the world, U.S. automakers are readying to invest more than $250 billion over the next five years&nbsp;to close the gap on Tesla's electric vehicle dominance and gradually wean themselves from a reliance on combustion-engine cars and light trucks.</p>\n<p>Last month, Ford Motor Fpledged to invest at least $30 billionin EVs by 2025, while&nbsp; General Motors&nbsp;(<b>GM</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;isreportedly ready to trump&nbsp;that investmentby $5 billion. Both U.S. carmakers are aiming to expand battery production and EV model rollouts over the next five years as they chase Tesla's leadership at home and in China, the world's biggest car market.</p>\n<p>And the pair have a lot of chasing to do: although electric cars comprise a tiny total of the 14.5 million vehicles sold in the U.S. last year, most were made by Elon Musk's company. Tesla sold just over 200,000 electric cars in the U.S. in 2020,&nbsp;nearly ten times more than GM's best (at least to date) EV option, the Chevy Bolt.</p>\n<p>U.S. EV makers also facing increasing pressure from global giants such as Volkswagen&nbsp;(<b>VLKAY</b>), which wants to sell&nbsp;one million electric and hybrid cars this year, while spending&nbsp;€35 billion ($42.4 billion) by 2025&nbsp;to expand battery production and fleet offerings in a bid to dominate the European market.</p>\n<p>Toyota&nbsp;(<b>TM</b>) -Get Report, the world's biggest carmaker and the&nbsp;first company to sell electric cars in volume,&nbsp;plans to have 70 EV&nbsp;models on the market by 2025 and use its legacy foothold in China -- where the Corolla is a perennial favorite -- to boost overall sales.</p>\n<p>So where does that leave U.S. automakers in their drive to capture the lion's share of the industry's next century?</p>\n<p>Much will depend on President Joe Biden's ambitions of investing around $175 billion in clean-energy car infrastructure, including charging stations and tax incentives, in order to spark a change in perception for the American car buyer, who has yet to find electric vehicles nearly as exciting as the media.</p>\n<p>Tax incentives might help, and Senate lawmakers are moving a bill that could boost the current maximum credit for buyers of an EV from $7,500 to $12,500, but lifetime limits for manufacturers of 200,000 eligible vehicles is a laughably absurd figure (GM passed it three years ago) that is holding back EV adoption.</p>\n<p>Battery costs, too, must come down if carmakers are going to build profit margins that justify the billions they've invested in developing EVs&nbsp;(that also limit shareholder friendly initiatives such as buybacks and dividends).</p>\n<p>Ford hopes to cut its battery costs to $80 per kilowatt hour by 2030 from $155 currently, a figure GM hopes to reach by 2025, but Tesla wants to get that number down to $55, and if successful, would extend its lead over domestic rivals.</p>\n<p>That might explain Tesla's near $600 billion market value -- some seven times more than GM, which sold 13.6 times more cars than Tesla last year -- and the assumption that it will continue its EV market dominance.</p>\n<p>But that leadership is based on Tesla's strength in China, where&nbsp;the country's passenger car association said it had an 11.6% market share of EV sales last year, where it remains vulnerable to government edicts and favored domestic rivals, and the sale of carbon credits that flatter its bottom line and account for more profits than the sale of four-wheel products.</p>\n<p>Ford and GM, meanwhile, face deep-pocketed rivals in the form of VW and Toyota that also have the added advantage of footholds in markets that the U.S. pair have either abandoned (Europe) or in which they are merely nascent (China).</p>\n<p>Furthermore, tax breaks that create union jobs -- a stated ambition of the Biden EV infrastructure plans -- are unlikely to find favor in a bill that has little support among Republican lawmakers, and should Congress flip in 2022 to GOP control, you wouldn't bet on deeper support from a government saddled with record budget deficits and $21 trillion in debt.</p>\n<p>Ford's coming electrified F-150, a revamp of the world's most popular vehicle, could change American buyer perception, but a decade of false starts, from the Volt to Focus and others, have yet to be fully overcome.</p>\n<p>We won't be driving combustion-engine cars in 25 years, that's for sure -- in fact, we may not be driving much at all if autonomous technology reaches the lofty goals its creators have set -- but we simply can't say for sure whether Tesla, or any American company, will be making the ones that we do.</p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","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>Tesla Still Leads America's EV Dominance but for How Much Longer?</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\">\nTesla Still Leads America's EV Dominance but for How Much Longer?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 21:22 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.thestreet.com/investing/tesla-still-leads-americas-ev-dominance-but-for-how-long><strong>The Street</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming years, and all three face formidable competition from international rivals.\n\nTesla (TSLA) -Get ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/tesla-still-leads-americas-ev-dominance-but-for-how-long\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/tesla-still-leads-americas-ev-dominance-but-for-how-long","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1162790761","content_text":"Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming years, and all three face formidable competition from international rivals.\n\nTesla (TSLA) -Get Report shares have fallen by close to a third since the clean-energy carmaker hit a January peak of $900, but it remains the world's most valuable automotive company even as its grip on the electric vehicle (EV) market, as well as the zeitgeist, looks increasingly fragile.\nSpurred by governments pledging an end to gas-powered cars in major markets around the world, U.S. automakers are readying to invest more than $250 billion over the next five years to close the gap on Tesla's electric vehicle dominance and gradually wean themselves from a reliance on combustion-engine cars and light trucks.\nLast month, Ford Motor Fpledged to invest at least $30 billionin EVs by 2025, while  General Motors (GM) -Get Report isreportedly ready to trump that investmentby $5 billion. Both U.S. carmakers are aiming to expand battery production and EV model rollouts over the next five years as they chase Tesla's leadership at home and in China, the world's biggest car market.\nAnd the pair have a lot of chasing to do: although electric cars comprise a tiny total of the 14.5 million vehicles sold in the U.S. last year, most were made by Elon Musk's company. Tesla sold just over 200,000 electric cars in the U.S. in 2020, nearly ten times more than GM's best (at least to date) EV option, the Chevy Bolt.\nU.S. EV makers also facing increasing pressure from global giants such as Volkswagen (VLKAY), which wants to sell one million electric and hybrid cars this year, while spending €35 billion ($42.4 billion) by 2025 to expand battery production and fleet offerings in a bid to dominate the European market.\nToyota (TM) -Get Report, the world's biggest carmaker and the first company to sell electric cars in volume, plans to have 70 EV models on the market by 2025 and use its legacy foothold in China -- where the Corolla is a perennial favorite -- to boost overall sales.\nSo where does that leave U.S. automakers in their drive to capture the lion's share of the industry's next century?\nMuch will depend on President Joe Biden's ambitions of investing around $175 billion in clean-energy car infrastructure, including charging stations and tax incentives, in order to spark a change in perception for the American car buyer, who has yet to find electric vehicles nearly as exciting as the media.\nTax incentives might help, and Senate lawmakers are moving a bill that could boost the current maximum credit for buyers of an EV from $7,500 to $12,500, but lifetime limits for manufacturers of 200,000 eligible vehicles is a laughably absurd figure (GM passed it three years ago) that is holding back EV adoption.\nBattery costs, too, must come down if carmakers are going to build profit margins that justify the billions they've invested in developing EVs (that also limit shareholder friendly initiatives such as buybacks and dividends).\nFord hopes to cut its battery costs to $80 per kilowatt hour by 2030 from $155 currently, a figure GM hopes to reach by 2025, but Tesla wants to get that number down to $55, and if successful, would extend its lead over domestic rivals.\nThat might explain Tesla's near $600 billion market value -- some seven times more than GM, which sold 13.6 times more cars than Tesla last year -- and the assumption that it will continue its EV market dominance.\nBut that leadership is based on Tesla's strength in China, where the country's passenger car association said it had an 11.6% market share of EV sales last year, where it remains vulnerable to government edicts and favored domestic rivals, and the sale of carbon credits that flatter its bottom line and account for more profits than the sale of four-wheel products.\nFord and GM, meanwhile, face deep-pocketed rivals in the form of VW and Toyota that also have the added advantage of footholds in markets that the U.S. pair have either abandoned (Europe) or in which they are merely nascent (China).\nFurthermore, tax breaks that create union jobs -- a stated ambition of the Biden EV infrastructure plans -- are unlikely to find favor in a bill that has little support among Republican lawmakers, and should Congress flip in 2022 to GOP control, you wouldn't bet on deeper support from a government saddled with record budget deficits and $21 trillion in debt.\nFord's coming electrified F-150, a revamp of the world's most popular vehicle, could change American buyer perception, but a decade of false starts, from the Volt to Focus and others, have yet to be fully overcome.\nWe won't be driving combustion-engine cars in 25 years, that's for sure -- in fact, we may not be driving much at all if autonomous technology reaches the lofty goals its creators have set -- but we simply can't say for sure whether Tesla, or any American company, will be making the ones that we do.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":628,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129841865,"gmtCreate":1624369641757,"gmtModify":1703834646771,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Gogo","listText":"Gogo","text":"Gogo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129841865","repostId":"2145056554","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":728,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129855193,"gmtCreate":1624369545512,"gmtModify":1703834638646,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129855193","repostId":"2145056554","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":594,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129851834,"gmtCreate":1624369465928,"gmtModify":1703834632343,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Huat","listText":"Huat","text":"Huat","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129851834","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do 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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":913,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129851061,"gmtCreate":1624369454853,"gmtModify":1703834632021,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Huat","listText":"Huat","text":"Huat","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129851061","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do 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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":794,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129853388,"gmtCreate":1624369436244,"gmtModify":1703834630889,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581573593594204","idStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Huat","listText":"Huat","text":"Huat","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129853388","repostId":"2145056554","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":973,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":129855193,"gmtCreate":1624369545512,"gmtModify":1703834638646,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129855193","repostId":"2145056554","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":594,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121760966,"gmtCreate":1624492738555,"gmtModify":1703838125471,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121760966","repostId":"2145156570","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1715,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129851061,"gmtCreate":1624369454853,"gmtModify":1703834632021,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Huat","listText":"Huat","text":"Huat","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129851061","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do 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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":794,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121331137,"gmtCreate":1624453141329,"gmtModify":1703837110590,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>To the moon!","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>To the moon!","text":"$UiPath(PATH)$To the moon!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121331137","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1657,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129851834,"gmtCreate":1624369465928,"gmtModify":1703834632343,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Huat","listText":"Huat","text":"Huat","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129851834","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do 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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":913,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129841865,"gmtCreate":1624369641757,"gmtModify":1703834646771,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Gogo","listText":"Gogo","text":"Gogo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129841865","repostId":"2145056554","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":728,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":151509962,"gmtCreate":1625097015856,"gmtModify":1703735947792,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/151509962","repostId":"2148584318","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2965,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129853388,"gmtCreate":1624369436244,"gmtModify":1703834630889,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Huat","listText":"Huat","text":"Huat","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129853388","repostId":"2145056554","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":973,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126240184,"gmtCreate":1624576958248,"gmtModify":1703840579503,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy more","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy more","text":"$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$Buy more","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/126240184","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1548,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126257861,"gmtCreate":1624576935553,"gmtModify":1703840577713,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/P15.SI\">$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$</a>Buy","text":"$PACIFIC CENTURY REGIONAL DEVTS(P15.SI)$Buy","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/126257861","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1858,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121799577,"gmtCreate":1624491678299,"gmtModify":1703838072125,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Good","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Good","text":"$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121799577","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1774,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121790525,"gmtCreate":1624491650067,"gmtModify":1703838070829,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>No move","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PATH\">$UiPath(PATH)$</a>No move","text":"$UiPath(PATH)$No move","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121790525","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2083,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123051933,"gmtCreate":1624404482322,"gmtModify":1703835477301,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Buy more","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>Buy more","text":"$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$Buy more","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/123051933","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2338,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129680913,"gmtCreate":1624370878332,"gmtModify":1703834726598,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the floor!","listText":"To the floor!","text":"To the floor!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129680913","repostId":"1133339567","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1826,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129604055,"gmtCreate":1624370164477,"gmtModify":1703834680745,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>To the moon!","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEAM\">$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$</a>To the moon!","text":"$Atlassian Corporation PLC(TEAM)$To the moon!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129604055","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1994,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129879296,"gmtCreate":1624369828215,"gmtModify":1703834657998,"author":{"id":"3581573593594204","authorId":"3581573593594204","name":"Qingxiong","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581573593594204","authorIdStr":"3581573593594204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Why","listText":"Why","text":"Why","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129879296","repostId":"1162790761","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1162790761","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624368177,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1162790761?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 21:22","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla Still Leads America's EV Dominance but for How Much Longer?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1162790761","media":"The Street","summary":"Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming","content":"<blockquote>\n Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming years, and all three face formidable competition from international rivals.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Tesla&nbsp;(<b>TSLA</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;shares have fallen by close to a third since the clean-energy carmaker hit a January peak of $900, but it remains the world's most valuable automotive company even as its grip on the electric vehicle (EV) market, as well as the zeitgeist, looks increasingly fragile.</p>\n<p>Spurred by governments pledging an end to gas-powered cars in major markets around the world, U.S. automakers are readying to invest more than $250 billion over the next five years&nbsp;to close the gap on Tesla's electric vehicle dominance and gradually wean themselves from a reliance on combustion-engine cars and light trucks.</p>\n<p>Last month, Ford Motor Fpledged to invest at least $30 billionin EVs by 2025, while&nbsp; General Motors&nbsp;(<b>GM</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;isreportedly ready to trump&nbsp;that investmentby $5 billion. Both U.S. carmakers are aiming to expand battery production and EV model rollouts over the next five years as they chase Tesla's leadership at home and in China, the world's biggest car market.</p>\n<p>And the pair have a lot of chasing to do: although electric cars comprise a tiny total of the 14.5 million vehicles sold in the U.S. last year, most were made by Elon Musk's company. Tesla sold just over 200,000 electric cars in the U.S. in 2020,&nbsp;nearly ten times more than GM's best (at least to date) EV option, the Chevy Bolt.</p>\n<p>U.S. EV makers also facing increasing pressure from global giants such as Volkswagen&nbsp;(<b>VLKAY</b>), which wants to sell&nbsp;one million electric and hybrid cars this year, while spending&nbsp;€35 billion ($42.4 billion) by 2025&nbsp;to expand battery production and fleet offerings in a bid to dominate the European market.</p>\n<p>Toyota&nbsp;(<b>TM</b>) -Get Report, the world's biggest carmaker and the&nbsp;first company to sell electric cars in volume,&nbsp;plans to have 70 EV&nbsp;models on the market by 2025 and use its legacy foothold in China -- where the Corolla is a perennial favorite -- to boost overall sales.</p>\n<p>So where does that leave U.S. automakers in their drive to capture the lion's share of the industry's next century?</p>\n<p>Much will depend on President Joe Biden's ambitions of investing around $175 billion in clean-energy car infrastructure, including charging stations and tax incentives, in order to spark a change in perception for the American car buyer, who has yet to find electric vehicles nearly as exciting as the media.</p>\n<p>Tax incentives might help, and Senate lawmakers are moving a bill that could boost the current maximum credit for buyers of an EV from $7,500 to $12,500, but lifetime limits for manufacturers of 200,000 eligible vehicles is a laughably absurd figure (GM passed it three years ago) that is holding back EV adoption.</p>\n<p>Battery costs, too, must come down if carmakers are going to build profit margins that justify the billions they've invested in developing EVs&nbsp;(that also limit shareholder friendly initiatives such as buybacks and dividends).</p>\n<p>Ford hopes to cut its battery costs to $80 per kilowatt hour by 2030 from $155 currently, a figure GM hopes to reach by 2025, but Tesla wants to get that number down to $55, and if successful, would extend its lead over domestic rivals.</p>\n<p>That might explain Tesla's near $600 billion market value -- some seven times more than GM, which sold 13.6 times more cars than Tesla last year -- and the assumption that it will continue its EV market dominance.</p>\n<p>But that leadership is based on Tesla's strength in China, where&nbsp;the country's passenger car association said it had an 11.6% market share of EV sales last year, where it remains vulnerable to government edicts and favored domestic rivals, and the sale of carbon credits that flatter its bottom line and account for more profits than the sale of four-wheel products.</p>\n<p>Ford and GM, meanwhile, face deep-pocketed rivals in the form of VW and Toyota that also have the added advantage of footholds in markets that the U.S. pair have either abandoned (Europe) or in which they are merely nascent (China).</p>\n<p>Furthermore, tax breaks that create union jobs -- a stated ambition of the Biden EV infrastructure plans -- are unlikely to find favor in a bill that has little support among Republican lawmakers, and should Congress flip in 2022 to GOP control, you wouldn't bet on deeper support from a government saddled with record budget deficits and $21 trillion in debt.</p>\n<p>Ford's coming electrified F-150, a revamp of the world's most popular vehicle, could change American buyer perception, but a decade of false starts, from the Volt to Focus and others, have yet to be fully overcome.</p>\n<p>We won't be driving combustion-engine cars in 25 years, that's for sure -- in fact, we may not be driving much at all if autonomous technology reaches the lofty goals its creators have set -- but we simply can't say for sure whether Tesla, or any American company, will be making the ones that we do.</p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","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>Tesla Still Leads America's EV Dominance but for How Much Longer?</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\">\nTesla Still Leads America's EV Dominance but for How Much Longer?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 21:22 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.thestreet.com/investing/tesla-still-leads-americas-ev-dominance-but-for-how-long><strong>The Street</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming years, and all three face formidable competition from international rivals.\n\nTesla (TSLA) -Get ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/tesla-still-leads-americas-ev-dominance-but-for-how-long\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/tesla-still-leads-americas-ev-dominance-but-for-how-long","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1162790761","content_text":"Tesla's domestic rivals such as Ford and GM have committed to spending billions on EVs in the coming years, and all three face formidable competition from international rivals.\n\nTesla (TSLA) -Get Report shares have fallen by close to a third since the clean-energy carmaker hit a January peak of $900, but it remains the world's most valuable automotive company even as its grip on the electric vehicle (EV) market, as well as the zeitgeist, looks increasingly fragile.\nSpurred by governments pledging an end to gas-powered cars in major markets around the world, U.S. automakers are readying to invest more than $250 billion over the next five years to close the gap on Tesla's electric vehicle dominance and gradually wean themselves from a reliance on combustion-engine cars and light trucks.\nLast month, Ford Motor Fpledged to invest at least $30 billionin EVs by 2025, while  General Motors (GM) -Get Report isreportedly ready to trump that investmentby $5 billion. Both U.S. carmakers are aiming to expand battery production and EV model rollouts over the next five years as they chase Tesla's leadership at home and in China, the world's biggest car market.\nAnd the pair have a lot of chasing to do: although electric cars comprise a tiny total of the 14.5 million vehicles sold in the U.S. last year, most were made by Elon Musk's company. Tesla sold just over 200,000 electric cars in the U.S. in 2020, nearly ten times more than GM's best (at least to date) EV option, the Chevy Bolt.\nU.S. EV makers also facing increasing pressure from global giants such as Volkswagen (VLKAY), which wants to sell one million electric and hybrid cars this year, while spending €35 billion ($42.4 billion) by 2025 to expand battery production and fleet offerings in a bid to dominate the European market.\nToyota (TM) -Get Report, the world's biggest carmaker and the first company to sell electric cars in volume, plans to have 70 EV models on the market by 2025 and use its legacy foothold in China -- where the Corolla is a perennial favorite -- to boost overall sales.\nSo where does that leave U.S. automakers in their drive to capture the lion's share of the industry's next century?\nMuch will depend on President Joe Biden's ambitions of investing around $175 billion in clean-energy car infrastructure, including charging stations and tax incentives, in order to spark a change in perception for the American car buyer, who has yet to find electric vehicles nearly as exciting as the media.\nTax incentives might help, and Senate lawmakers are moving a bill that could boost the current maximum credit for buyers of an EV from $7,500 to $12,500, but lifetime limits for manufacturers of 200,000 eligible vehicles is a laughably absurd figure (GM passed it three years ago) that is holding back EV adoption.\nBattery costs, too, must come down if carmakers are going to build profit margins that justify the billions they've invested in developing EVs (that also limit shareholder friendly initiatives such as buybacks and dividends).\nFord hopes to cut its battery costs to $80 per kilowatt hour by 2030 from $155 currently, a figure GM hopes to reach by 2025, but Tesla wants to get that number down to $55, and if successful, would extend its lead over domestic rivals.\nThat might explain Tesla's near $600 billion market value -- some seven times more than GM, which sold 13.6 times more cars than Tesla last year -- and the assumption that it will continue its EV market dominance.\nBut that leadership is based on Tesla's strength in China, where the country's passenger car association said it had an 11.6% market share of EV sales last year, where it remains vulnerable to government edicts and favored domestic rivals, and the sale of carbon credits that flatter its bottom line and account for more profits than the sale of four-wheel products.\nFord and GM, meanwhile, face deep-pocketed rivals in the form of VW and Toyota that also have the added advantage of footholds in markets that the U.S. pair have either abandoned (Europe) or in which they are merely nascent (China).\nFurthermore, tax breaks that create union jobs -- a stated ambition of the Biden EV infrastructure plans -- are unlikely to find favor in a bill that has little support among Republican lawmakers, and should Congress flip in 2022 to GOP control, you wouldn't bet on deeper support from a government saddled with record budget deficits and $21 trillion in debt.\nFord's coming electrified F-150, a revamp of the world's most popular vehicle, could change American buyer perception, but a decade of false starts, from the Volt to Focus and others, have yet to be fully overcome.\nWe won't be driving combustion-engine cars in 25 years, that's for sure -- in fact, we may not be driving much at all if autonomous technology reaches the lofty goals its creators have set -- but we simply can't say for sure whether Tesla, or any American company, will be making the ones that we do.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":628,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}