+Follow
老八公
No personal profile
488
Follow
18
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
老八公
2025-12-23
$苹果(AAPL)$
老八公
2025-08-05
$苹果(AAPL)$
老八公
2024-07-04
Nice and so glad to know the activity
老八公
2024-07-03
Good activity and very helpful
老八公
2024-01-10
good luck to you guys and your family today too much
老八公
2024-01-09
good morning my friend and the family
老八公
2024-01-08
Good morning my friend how is everything going
老八公
2024-01-07
Good luck to you and your family and your friends
老八公
2024-01-07
Good morning my love how are you doing
老八公
2024-01-06
Good game and good game to play with friends
老八公
2024-01-05
$苹果(AAPL)$
老八公
2024-01-05
game play with your team and your friends on this
老八公
2024-01-04
play with your friends and family at home
老八公
2024-01-04
good luck to you all today
老八公
2024-01-03
Good game play with you
老八公
2024-01-02
Good game to play a lot
老八公
2023-12-31
good game to play let us go go
老八公
2023-12-25
Nice xclassrooM to join
老八公
2023-12-24
Happy game to play let us go
老八公
2023-12-22
Oggoogogog Okay this game
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"4087300025751020","uuid":"4087300025751020","gmtCreate":1624198059011,"gmtModify":1639159150315,"name":"老八公","pinyin":"lbglaobagong","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":18,"headSize":488,"tweetSize":688,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":3,"name":"书生虎","nameTw":"書生虎","represent":"努力向上","factor":"发布10条非转发主帖,其中5条获得他人回复或点赞","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":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":"2025.07.30","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"82ffa69a97264fba9002044f4f5f535b-1","templateUuid":"82ffa69a97264fba9002044f4f5f535b","name":"Tiger Think Tank","description":"Tiger Think Tank","bigImgUrl":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/193f8255673f42bdc610097b2074ec3e","smallImgUrl":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/06af124f59f026a383d35b268362424f","grayImgUrl":null,"redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.09.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":4001},{"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":3,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":11,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":513733621551448,"gmtCreate":1766453548006,"gmtModify":1766453550130,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$苹果(AAPL)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$苹果(AAPL)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","text":"$苹果(AAPL)$","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/a07116f6c81b7981c755c8fdc7c52960","width":"972","height":"1631"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/513733621551448","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":296,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":464171445576448,"gmtCreate":1754348442457,"gmtModify":1754348445857,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$苹果(AAPL)$ </a> ","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$苹果(AAPL)$ </a> ","text":"$苹果(AAPL)$","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/54d34061eb20af135d3c8507ad3de306","width":"972","height":"1631"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/464171445576448","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1103,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":323842533036160,"gmtCreate":1720069420909,"gmtModify":1720069424766,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice and so glad to know the activity","listText":"Nice and so glad to know the activity","text":"Nice and so glad to know the activity","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/323842533036160","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2071,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":323471451009096,"gmtCreate":1719986314589,"gmtModify":1719986319116,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good activity and very helpful","listText":"Good activity and very helpful","text":"Good activity and very helpful","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/323471451009096","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2216,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":261697586331880,"gmtCreate":1704901500275,"gmtModify":1704901504566,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"good luck to you guys and your family today too much","listText":"good luck to you guys and your family today too much","text":"good luck to you guys and your family today too much","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/261697586331880","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2834,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":261141306896432,"gmtCreate":1704765674707,"gmtModify":1704765677589,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"good morning my friend and the family","listText":"good morning my friend and the family","text":"good morning my friend and the family","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/261141306896432","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2512,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":260791298887864,"gmtCreate":1704680234035,"gmtModify":1704680238127,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good morning my friend how is everything going ","listText":"Good morning my friend how is everything going ","text":"Good morning my friend how is everything going","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/260791298887864","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2852,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":260603441127720,"gmtCreate":1704634251424,"gmtModify":1704634255702,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good luck to you and your family and your friends ","listText":"Good luck to you and your family and your friends ","text":"Good luck to you and your family and your friends","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/260603441127720","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3040,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":260602579493112,"gmtCreate":1704634192264,"gmtModify":1704635625709,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good morning my love how are you doing ","listText":"Good morning my love how are you doing ","text":"Good morning my love how are you doing","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/260602579493112","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3025,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":260202328121520,"gmtCreate":1704536320020,"gmtModify":1704536324109,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good game and good game to play with friends ","listText":"Good game and good game to play with friends ","text":"Good game and good game to play with friends","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/260202328121520","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3501,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":259735783891016,"gmtCreate":1704422519584,"gmtModify":1704422521999,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$苹果(AAPL)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$苹果(AAPL)$ </a><v-v data-views=\"1\"></v-v> ","text":"$苹果(AAPL)$","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/9dd3c8e2bd21b0222d9870b8e4e8bbf9","width":"1170","height":"1959"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/259735783891016","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3122,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":259735122641056,"gmtCreate":1704422352367,"gmtModify":1704422356741,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"game play with your team and your friends on this","listText":"game play with your team and your friends on this","text":"game play with your team and your friends on this","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/259735122641056","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2202,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":259481827778728,"gmtCreate":1704360594677,"gmtModify":1704360599943,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"play with your friends and family at home","listText":"play with your friends and family at home","text":"play with your friends and family at home","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/259481827778728","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1342,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":259482302959896,"gmtCreate":1704360535785,"gmtModify":1704360539907,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"good luck to you all today","listText":"good luck to you all today","text":"good luck to you all today","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/259482302959896","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1272,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":259129052258368,"gmtCreate":1704276592338,"gmtModify":1704276597328,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good game play with you","listText":"Good game play with you","text":"Good game play with you","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/259129052258368","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":924,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":258771755278592,"gmtCreate":1704210746337,"gmtModify":1704210750050,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good game to play a lot","listText":"Good game to play a lot","text":"Good game to play a lot","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/258771755278592","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1114,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":257719184466136,"gmtCreate":1703953620494,"gmtModify":1703953624522,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"good game to play let us go go","listText":"good game to play let us go go","text":"good game to play let us go go","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/257719184466136","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1090,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":255712803795208,"gmtCreate":1703443390197,"gmtModify":1703443394875,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice xclassrooM to join","listText":"Nice xclassrooM to join","text":"Nice xclassrooM to join","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/255712803795208","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1010,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":255324944933112,"gmtCreate":1703348865920,"gmtModify":1703348869845,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Happy game to play let us go","listText":"Happy game to play let us go","text":"Happy game to play let us go","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/255324944933112","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":908,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":254948237525264,"gmtCreate":1703256896769,"gmtModify":1703256900808,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oggoogogog Okay this game","listText":"Oggoogogog Okay this game","text":"Oggoogogog Okay this game","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/254948237525264","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":963,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":9956866334,"gmtCreate":1673966582229,"gmtModify":1676538909661,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Lailailaialailai hooood","listText":"Lailailaialailai hooood","text":"Lailailaialailai hooood","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":22,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9956866334","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":857,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9072129096,"gmtCreate":1657986915415,"gmtModify":1676536090958,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow","listText":"wow","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9072129096","repostId":"2251745455","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2251745455","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1657935455,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2251745455?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-07-16 09:37","market":"hk","language":"zh","title":"The bullwhip effect is reversing! Amazon Prime Day Spending Bash Is Just a Discount Bash","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2251745455","media":"华尔街见闻","summary":"亚马逊为期两日的Prime Day成为2022年迄今为止美国最大的网络购物日,鉴于其消费提振基于其巨大折扣,分析认为牛鞭效应正在反转。","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>A two-day (July 12 to July 13) \"Double Eleven\" belonging to the American people<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMZN\">Amazon</a>Prime Day came to an end this week, and \"explosive\" consumption seems to have overturned the previous market concerns about the \"collapse\" of American consumer confidence.</p><p>Global e-commerce giant Amazon said on Thursday that its members at this year's Prime Day event<b>More than 300 million purchases, totaling $11.9 billion, made it the largest Prime Day event in the company's history</b>。 During the event, sales growth among Amazon store sales partners outpaced the company's retail business, with customers purchasing more than 100 million small business items and spending more than $3 billion in sweepstakes contests.</p><p>According to<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ADBE\">Adobe</a>Adobe Digital Economy Index, Amazon's Prime Day first-day sales reached $6 billion, up 7.8% from last year, making it the largest online shopping day in the United States so far in 2022. The next day's sales reached $5.9 billion,<b>Two-day sales increased 8.5% year-on-year</b>。</p><p>However,<b>Selling more does not mean selling well, nor can it be directly linked to the revival of consumer confidence</b>。 According to the statistics of Numerator, a market research company, based on the first day, most of the goods sold this time are consumer goods, and the best-selling products include diapers, beauty products, etc. 57% of consumers buy goods for less than $20, and only 5% of consumers buy goods for more than $100.</p><p>Citibank analysis believes that,<b>This consumer buying frenzy is mainly due to unprecedented discounts on Amazon's platform</b>。 For example, the Amazon Fire TV 50-inch 4K TV is as low as 2.1% off this time, and the accommodation campus daily necessities for the September school season are also greatly discounted. As the bullwhip effect reverses, Outlets, which has a heavy discount, will also take a hit.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f321b1cabbe22304e2447577e3f63877\" tg-width=\"1024\" tg-height=\"800\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>The so-called \"bullwhip effect\" refers to a phenomenon of demand variation amplification in the supply chain, which makes it impossible to effectively share information when the information flow is transmitted from the final client to the original supplier, which makes the information distorted and amplified step by step, resulting in increasing fluctuations in demand information. The amplification effect of this information distortion is graphically like a thrown bullwhip, so it is vividly called bullwhip effect.</p><p>Previously, when American consumers were immersed in the \"unprecedented\" discount season, when those tight goods during the period of supply chain chaos were arbitrarily selected, correspondingly, American retailers were facing the worst \"inventory crisis\" since the bursting of the Internet bubble.</p><p>An earlier article on Wall Street mentioned that the \"bullwhip effect\" in the U.S. retail industry is coming to an end, and excess inventory forces U.S. importers to reduce overseas orders, thus lowering shipping costs, which may eventually lead to a recession in the freight industry. Retail giants Target and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WMT\">Walmart</a>It is pointed out that the total import of consumer goods in the United States fell by about $1.5 billion in May, indicating that the demand for overseas products is declining and consumer spending on durable goods has decreased significantly.</p><p>According to Michael Burry, the \"big short prototype\", the previous oversupply in the retail industry formed a \"bullwhip effect\", and as demand slows down, the \"bullwhip effect\" comes to an end and will trigger deflation later this year, prompting the Federal Reserve to reverse the path of tightening and even restart easing.</p><p>Furthermore,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BAC\">Bank of America</a>Economist Aditya Bhave previously analyzed Independence Day holiday spending data in early July. As measured by credit and debit cards aggregated by BAC, there was only a small \"holiday shock\" in spending in the two weeks to July 9. A year-on-year increase of 3.5%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da5f7fd821414fc025fcffe186e98d87\" tg-width=\"929\" tg-height=\"498\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>Considering that the inflation rate in the United States is as high as 9.1%, this year's \"holiday shock\" of spending is smaller than in the previous three years.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b334062cdb2173db97c80ea8d64c280\" tg-width=\"941\" tg-height=\"385\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>Bank of America's previous view was that actual economic activity is slowing down, and the United States will start a mild recession in the second half of 2022, lowering the target point of the S&P 500 index at the end of the year from the previous 4,500 points to 3,600 points, and also predicting that the Fed's QT will end faster than expected.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"wallstreetcn_api","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The bullwhip effect is reversing! Amazon Prime Day Spending Bash Is Just a Discount Bash</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe bullwhip effect is reversing! Amazon Prime Day Spending Bash Is Just a Discount Bash\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">华尔街见闻</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-07-16 09:37</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>A two-day (July 12 to July 13) \"Double Eleven\" belonging to the American people<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMZN\">Amazon</a>Prime Day came to an end this week, and \"explosive\" consumption seems to have overturned the previous market concerns about the \"collapse\" of American consumer confidence.</p><p>Global e-commerce giant Amazon said on Thursday that its members at this year's Prime Day event<b>More than 300 million purchases, totaling $11.9 billion, made it the largest Prime Day event in the company's history</b>。 During the event, sales growth among Amazon store sales partners outpaced the company's retail business, with customers purchasing more than 100 million small business items and spending more than $3 billion in sweepstakes contests.</p><p>According to<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ADBE\">Adobe</a>Adobe Digital Economy Index, Amazon's Prime Day first-day sales reached $6 billion, up 7.8% from last year, making it the largest online shopping day in the United States so far in 2022. The next day's sales reached $5.9 billion,<b>Two-day sales increased 8.5% year-on-year</b>。</p><p>However,<b>Selling more does not mean selling well, nor can it be directly linked to the revival of consumer confidence</b>。 According to the statistics of Numerator, a market research company, based on the first day, most of the goods sold this time are consumer goods, and the best-selling products include diapers, beauty products, etc. 57% of consumers buy goods for less than $20, and only 5% of consumers buy goods for more than $100.</p><p>Citibank analysis believes that,<b>This consumer buying frenzy is mainly due to unprecedented discounts on Amazon's platform</b>。 For example, the Amazon Fire TV 50-inch 4K TV is as low as 2.1% off this time, and the accommodation campus daily necessities for the September school season are also greatly discounted. As the bullwhip effect reverses, Outlets, which has a heavy discount, will also take a hit.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f321b1cabbe22304e2447577e3f63877\" tg-width=\"1024\" tg-height=\"800\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>The so-called \"bullwhip effect\" refers to a phenomenon of demand variation amplification in the supply chain, which makes it impossible to effectively share information when the information flow is transmitted from the final client to the original supplier, which makes the information distorted and amplified step by step, resulting in increasing fluctuations in demand information. The amplification effect of this information distortion is graphically like a thrown bullwhip, so it is vividly called bullwhip effect.</p><p>Previously, when American consumers were immersed in the \"unprecedented\" discount season, when those tight goods during the period of supply chain chaos were arbitrarily selected, correspondingly, American retailers were facing the worst \"inventory crisis\" since the bursting of the Internet bubble.</p><p>An earlier article on Wall Street mentioned that the \"bullwhip effect\" in the U.S. retail industry is coming to an end, and excess inventory forces U.S. importers to reduce overseas orders, thus lowering shipping costs, which may eventually lead to a recession in the freight industry. Retail giants Target and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WMT\">Walmart</a>It is pointed out that the total import of consumer goods in the United States fell by about $1.5 billion in May, indicating that the demand for overseas products is declining and consumer spending on durable goods has decreased significantly.</p><p>According to Michael Burry, the \"big short prototype\", the previous oversupply in the retail industry formed a \"bullwhip effect\", and as demand slows down, the \"bullwhip effect\" comes to an end and will trigger deflation later this year, prompting the Federal Reserve to reverse the path of tightening and even restart easing.</p><p>Furthermore,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BAC\">Bank of America</a>Economist Aditya Bhave previously analyzed Independence Day holiday spending data in early July. As measured by credit and debit cards aggregated by BAC, there was only a small \"holiday shock\" in spending in the two weeks to July 9. A year-on-year increase of 3.5%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da5f7fd821414fc025fcffe186e98d87\" tg-width=\"929\" tg-height=\"498\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>Considering that the inflation rate in the United States is as high as 9.1%, this year's \"holiday shock\" of spending is smaller than in the previous three years.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b334062cdb2173db97c80ea8d64c280\" tg-width=\"941\" tg-height=\"385\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>Bank of America's previous view was that actual economic activity is slowing down, and the United States will start a mild recession in the second half of 2022, lowering the target point of the S&P 500 index at the end of the year from the previous 4,500 points to 3,600 points, and also predicting that the Fed's QT will end faster than expected.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3664944\">华尔街见闻</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/09dcab47335b8ae75b1a72cadf884fc8","relate_stocks":{"BK4554":"元宇宙及AR概念","BK4524":"宅经济概念","BK4581":"高盛持仓","BK4532":"文艺复兴科技持仓","BK4527":"明星科技股","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BK4503":"景林资产持仓","BK4122":"互联网与直销零售","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4566":"资本集团","BK4535":"淡马锡持仓","AMZN":"亚马逊","BK4559":"巴菲特持仓","BK4538":"云计算","BK4579":"人工智能","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4507":"流媒体概念","BK4548":"巴美列捷福持仓","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","BK4561":"索罗斯持仓"},"source_url":"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3664944","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2251745455","content_text":"为期两日(7月12日至7月13日)、属于美国人民的“双十一”亚马逊Prime Day本周落下帷幕,“爆炸式”消费似乎推翻了此前市场担忧的美国消费者信心“崩塌”。全球电商巨头亚马逊周四表示,在今年的Prime Day活动中其会员购买了超过3亿件商品,共计119亿美元的战绩使其成为该公司历史上最大的Prime Day活动。活动期间,亚马逊商店销售合作伙伴的销售额增长超过了该公司的零售业务,顾客在抽奖比赛中购买了超过1亿件小企业商品,花费超过30亿美元。据Adobe数字经济指数(Adobe Digital Economy Index),亚马逊Prime Day首日销售额达60亿美元,较去年增长7.8%,成为2022年迄今为止美国最大的网络购物日。次日销售额达59亿美元,两日销售额同比增长8.5%。不过,卖的多并不意味着卖的好,也不能直接与消费信心重振所挂钩。市场研究公司Numerator的基于首日的统计数据也显示,此次卖出商品类别以日用消费品居多,最畅销的产品包括尿布、美容产品等等,有57%的消费者购买的商品售价低于20美元,只有5%的消费者购买的售价超过100美元。花旗银行分析认为,此次消费者购买狂潮主要得益于亚马逊平台前所未有的折扣。比如亚马逊Fire TV 50英寸4K电视此次低至2.1折,而针对9月开学季的住宿校园生活用品也大打折扣。随着牛鞭效应的逆转,折扣较大的奥特莱斯也会受到冲击。所谓“牛鞭效应”,指供应链上的一种需求变异放大现象,使信息流从最终客户端向原始供应商端传递时,无法有效地实现信息共享,使得信息扭曲而逐级放大,导致了需求信息出现越来越大的波动,此信息扭曲的放大作用在图形上很像一个甩起的牛鞭,因此被形象地称为牛鞭效应。此前,当美国消费者沉浸在“前所未有”的折扣季中时,当那些供应链混乱时期的紧俏商品被任意挑选时,相对应的,是美国零售商正在面临自互联网泡沫破灭以来最严重的“库存危机”。华尔街见闻稍早前文章提及,美国零售业“牛鞭效应”正接近尾声,库存过剩迫使美国进口商减少海外订单,从而压低海运费用,最终可能导致货运业衰退。零售巨头Target和沃尔玛指出,5月美国消费品进口总额下降了约15亿美元,表明海外产品的需求正在下降,消费者耐用品方面支出大幅减少。按照“大空头原型”Michael Burry的说法,零售业此前的供给过剩形成了“牛鞭效应”,而随着需求放缓,“牛鞭效应”迎来终结,并将在今年晚些时候引发通货紧缩,促使美联储逆转紧缩之路,甚至重启宽松。此外,美国银行经济学家Aditya Bhave此前对7月初独立日假日消费数据进行了分析,按照BAC汇总的信用卡和借记卡衡量,在截至7月9日的两周内,支出只有一个小幅的\"节日冲击\",同比增长3.5%。考虑到美国目前已经高达9.1%的通胀率,今年支出的\"节日冲击\"比前三年都要小。美银此前的观点是,实际的经济活动正在放缓,美国将于2022年下半年启动温和衰退,将年末标普500指数目标点位从之前的4500点下调至3600点,同时还预测美联储的QT将比预期更快结束。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMZN":1}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":804,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9051249423,"gmtCreate":1654703421362,"gmtModify":1676535495496,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9051249423","repostId":"1135397463","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":666,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9936475251,"gmtCreate":1662818479973,"gmtModify":1676537145733,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9936475251","repostId":"1131057403","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1131057403","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1662764868,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1131057403?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-09-10 07:07","market":"hk","language":"zh","title":"Buffett continues to sweep Occidental Petroleum, and his shareholding ratio has exceeded a quarter","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131057403","media":"华尔街见闻","summary":"据9月9日周五公布的一份监管文件显示,巴菲特的伯克希尔哈撒韦公司购买了更多西方石油公司的股票,将其持有的已发行股票比例增至26.8%。据9月9日周五公布的一份监管文件显示,巴菲特的伯克希尔哈撒韦公司购","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>According to a regulatory filing released on Friday, September 9, Buffett's<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BRK.A\">Berkshire</a>Hathaway Bought More<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>The company's shares, increasing its holdings of outstanding shares to 26.8%. Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway bought more shares of Occidental Petroleum, increasing its holdings of outstanding shares to 26.8%, according to a regulatory filing released on Friday, Sept. 9.</p><p>Last month, Berkshire held a 20.2% stake in Occidental.</p><p>Although oil prices have fallen recently, they once hit a 14-year high. As of Friday's close, Occidental Petroleum's share price has risen by more than 110% this year. Occidental Petroleum's shares closed up 1.58% at $65.61 on Friday.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6fe8fbc1c7ec08f303ce37ef52afec92\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>Buffett's increasing stake in Occidental Petroleum has sparked speculation that Buffett may consider bidding for the entire company. Some media reported last month, citing people familiar with the matter, that Buffett would not bid even after receiving regulatory approval to buy a 50% stake in the oil company.</p><p>Why does Buffett favor Occidental Petroleum?</p><p>First, inflation appeared to be the megatrend in the first half of the 2020s, and crude oil is one of the best natural hedges against inflation right now. Geopolitical conflicts and a lack of investment in new oil fields over the past five years have hit crude oil supplies, causing oil production conditions for everything from OPEC to U.S. shale oil to stagnate. Meanwhile, market demand for fossil fuels has been strong due to factors such as the pandemic, despite governments' push to shift to clean energy. Therefore, while with the transition from utilities to<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/000591\">Solar energy</a>And other investments in the energy sector, Buffett claims to be a realist in the debate around fossil fuels.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"wallstreetcn_api","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>Buffett continues to sweep Occidental Petroleum, and his shareholding ratio has exceeded a quarter</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBuffett continues to sweep Occidental Petroleum, and his shareholding ratio has exceeded a quarter\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">华尔街见闻</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-09-10 07:07</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>According to a regulatory filing released on Friday, September 9, Buffett's<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BRK.A\">Berkshire</a>Hathaway Bought More<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>The company's shares, increasing its holdings of outstanding shares to 26.8%. Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway bought more shares of Occidental Petroleum, increasing its holdings of outstanding shares to 26.8%, according to a regulatory filing released on Friday, Sept. 9.</p><p>Last month, Berkshire held a 20.2% stake in Occidental.</p><p>Although oil prices have fallen recently, they once hit a 14-year high. As of Friday's close, Occidental Petroleum's share price has risen by more than 110% this year. Occidental Petroleum's shares closed up 1.58% at $65.61 on Friday.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6fe8fbc1c7ec08f303ce37ef52afec92\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>Buffett's increasing stake in Occidental Petroleum has sparked speculation that Buffett may consider bidding for the entire company. Some media reported last month, citing people familiar with the matter, that Buffett would not bid even after receiving regulatory approval to buy a 50% stake in the oil company.</p><p>Why does Buffett favor Occidental Petroleum?</p><p>First, inflation appeared to be the megatrend in the first half of the 2020s, and crude oil is one of the best natural hedges against inflation right now. Geopolitical conflicts and a lack of investment in new oil fields over the past five years have hit crude oil supplies, causing oil production conditions for everything from OPEC to U.S. shale oil to stagnate. Meanwhile, market demand for fossil fuels has been strong due to factors such as the pandemic, despite governments' push to shift to clean energy. Therefore, while with the transition from utilities to<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/000591\">Solar energy</a>And other investments in the energy sector, Buffett claims to be a realist in the debate around fossil fuels.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3670025\">华尔街见闻</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1e152604a758586cf70e9ccdd654d17d","relate_stocks":{"BK4581":"高盛持仓","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","OXY":"西方石油","BK4176":"多领域控股","BK4201":"综合性石油与天然气企业","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3670025","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131057403","content_text":"据9月9日周五公布的一份监管文件显示,巴菲特的伯克希尔哈撒韦公司购买了更多西方石油公司的股票,将其持有的已发行股票比例增至26.8%。据9月9日周五公布的一份监管文件显示,巴菲特的伯克希尔哈撒韦公司购买了更多西方石油公司的股票,将其持有的已发行股票比例增至26.8%。上个月,伯克希尔哈撒韦持有西方石油20.2%的股份。尽管最近油价有所回落,但此前一度触及十四年高位,截至周五收盘,今年以来西方石油股价已经累计上涨了超过110%。西方石油的股价周五收涨1.58%,报65.61美元。巴菲特对西方石油的股权不断增加,引发外界猜测巴菲特可能会考虑竞购整个公司。 有媒体上个月援引知情人士的话报道称,即使在获得监管机构批准购买该石油公司50%的股份后,巴菲特也不会出价。为什么巴菲特青睐西方石油公司呢?首先,在2020年代的上半部分,通货膨胀似乎是大趋势,而原油是目前最好的天然对冲通胀的工具之一。由于地缘冲突以及过去五年缺乏对新油田的投资已经打击了原油的供应,导致从OPEC到美国页岩油的所有石油生产状况都停滞不前。与此同时,尽管各国政府推动转向清洁能源,但由于疫情等因素,市场对化石燃料的需求一直很强劲。因此,虽然随着从公用事业到太阳能等能源领域的投资,巴菲特声称自己是围绕化石燃料辩论的现实主义者。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BRK.B":0.9,"BRK.A":0.9,"OXY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":597,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9059366330,"gmtCreate":1654304677120,"gmtModify":1676535427690,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9059366330","repostId":"1154917667","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":354,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9013243084,"gmtCreate":1648738627869,"gmtModify":1676534389099,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"👌","listText":"👌","text":"👌","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9013243084","repostId":"1109157751","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1109157751","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1648692694,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1109157751?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-03-31 10:11","market":"fut","language":"zh","title":"Oil gods, stock gods and wolf kings under soaring oil prices","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1109157751","media":"远川投资评论","summary":"石油还是同样的石油,只是一千个基金经理眼中有一千种投资价值判断。","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>Another round of oil price adjustment is coming on March 31.</p><p>Previously, domestic oil prices have risen for five consecutive days due to the surge in crude oil. At the beginning of March, it was only four consecutive rises. \"92-octane gasoline is filled, and the debt is full; 95-octane gasoline is filled, and everything is lost; 98-octane gasoline is filled, and three generations of repayment!\" Before I could finish my fate of swiping the screen in the circle of friends, 95-octane gasoline officially entered the \"9 yuan era\" in the fifth round of rise.</p><p>At the moment, electric vehicle owners may be glad to buy early and enjoy it early, but if they don't buy it, they have to refuel. But the real bargain is the hedge funds that bet on rising oil prices.</p><p>U.S. foreign exchange hedge fund CFM's fund, which tracks the market signal index, has risen 15% this year, betting that rising energy prices have contributed most of its gains; The Diversified fund owned by London hedge fund Aspect Capital has risen 9% this year, mainly due to the rise in long oil and related commodity prices.</p><p>Among them, the most excited one is Pierre Andurand, the \"God of Crude Oil Trading\". According to the Financial Times, the Andurand Commodities Discretionary Enhanced Fund he manages has earned 109% in just two months. Also betting on soaring oil prices are \"Stock God\" Buffett and \"Wall Street Wolf King\"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/IKAN\">Icahn</a>。 This pair of sworn enemies who always meet on the narrow road, one is still against each other<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>The latter had already earned 1 billion and sold off the market.</p><p>Two years ago, the price of WTI crude oil futures in May fell to a minimum of-US $37.63/barrel. The panic caused by negative oil prices is still fresh in my memory. The backhand oil price has broken through the high of eight years ago, exceeding US $100/barrel.</p><p>So, in this epic diamond bottom rebound, who is the sharpest one?</p><p><b>01. Oil God Anduran: The war is in full swing</b></p><p>This time, Anduran was right again.</p><p>Just over two months have passed in 2022, and the Commodity Free Trading Enhancement Fund managed by Pierre Andurand, the \"God of Crude Oil Trading\", has risen 109% due to a bet on soaring oil prices. In an interview with Bloomberg on March 24, Anduran was still bullish on oil prices, believing that it would even hit $200 by the end of this year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5f68e42d61df008e14b35612c7ca1d42\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"810\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Anduran believes crude oil rising to $200 a barrel is just around the corner, Bloomberg</p><p>Before 2020, Anduran had already shown his talents. He made a huge profit of nearly $300 million by shorting \"negative oil prices\". In February, when Anduran was aggressively bearish on oil prices, people at that time might not have believed that the oil price of $55 would become negative, but Anduran, who spent ten hours a day studying virus data, firmly believed that once the epidemic broke out, a large number of blockade areas would appear all over the world, which would lead to a sharp drop in demand for crude oil and a sharp drop in oil prices [3]. Sure enough, two months later, the oil price fell to-$40, and Anduran's prediction was verified.</p><p>Speaking of it, the person who won such a big victory last time he lifted oil alone was still Anduran.</p><p>The head of Andurand Capital Management, the world's largest crude oil hedge fund, became famous as early as the 2008 financial crisis for accurately predicting the plunge in oil prices. At that time, he earned 210% of the returns.</p><p>However, at that time, the hedge fund founded by Anduran was still called Blue Glod, and before he was truly named the \"Oil God\", there was still a detour to go.</p><p>In 2007, at the age of 30, Anduran left Vitol, the world's largest oil trader, and set up his own hedge fund company. When he was in Vitol Group, he was called \"one of the most profitable traders\". However, Anduran, who was unruly and loves freedom by nature, left Vitol and became his own boss.</p><p>Anduran began to become famous in the second year after founding the company, but the start was too smooth, which may not be a good thing. After Anduran's entrepreneurial journey became a blockbuster in 2008, it began to show a decline of \"opening high and going low\". In the next three years or so, the funds he managed fell all the way, and the income turned from positive to negative until April 2012, Blue Glod, which had no improvement, had to close its doors to thank customers.</p><p>Failure didn't depress Anduran. After only eight months, he chose to gamble his name again. In February 2013, he surfaced into the hedge fund world and founded Andurand Capital Management. He unabashedly named directly after his own name, showing greater determination than the last time.</p><p>And Anduran didn't disappoint investors who believed in him again. In 2014, Anduran gained a 38% yield by betting on the plunge in oil prices. In 2016, he gained a 22% yield by betting on the rebound in oil prices, wiping out the fluctuations of oil.</p><p>Anduran, who is extremely talented in crude oil trading, often makes a lot of money in the violent fluctuations of oil prices. Because of this, many people only regard him as a \"lucky man of the times\", a \"bold maniac\" who can succeed in oil and lose oil. After all, who can always predict things like God?</p><p>Anduran, however, thinks otherwise. He said that he was not a \"trade addict\" and never blindly made heavy bets. Every \"big move\" has undergone in-depth research and rigorous analysis. And Anduran's \"grasping the big and letting go of the small\", going deep into the contradiction between supply and demand of a variety of crude oil and the conversion between long and short, has indeed earned rich returns for his investors-since 2008, the cumulative income of funds managed by Anduran has increased nearly tenfold.</p><p>And this time, the heavy bet on the soaring oil price is just a reappearance of Anduran's \"betting\" trading style. He just did what he has always been best at in the circle of competence.</p><p><b>02. Warren Buffett: Comeback</b></p><p>Compared with Anduran's easy acquisition, Buffett's investment in oil is a little bumpy.</p><p>According to the data, Buffett began to re-build his position in Occidental Petroleum on March 1 this year, and increased his position twice in a row on March 4 and March 11, buying Occidental Petroleum as his ninth largest holding. The purchase cost ranged from $46.76 to $56.60 per share. As of March 21, Occidental Petroleum's share price had risen to $60.96, up 30% from Buffett's first purchase.</p><p>The reason why he said to re-open the position is mainly because he had fallen before. Judging from Buffett's historical holdings in Occidental Petroleum, his previous operations on this stock can be described as \"sold before dawn and bought after the price increase.\" So far, it is difficult for Buffett to say that he has made a lot of money in Occidental Petroleum.</p><p>As early as 2019, Occidental Petroleum wanted to acquire<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/APC\">Anadarko Oil</a>The company (Anadarko Petroleum) raised funds from Buffett in the form of preferred shares. In addition to paying an annual Dividend of 8%, it also came with a call option on common stocks, and the strike price was $62.5. In other words, in addition to paying dividends to Buffett, Occidental Petroleum will also repay part of his common stock. It can be seen from the changes in Buffett's positions in 2019 that he did increase his holdings of Occidental Petroleum.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6bbbc39c687e488620cf82d09e84d818\" tg-width=\"789\" tg-height=\"659\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>However, what Buffett, who is full of confidence, is waiting for is the black swan of the epidemic, which caused oil prices to plummet in 2020. At that time, Occidental Petroleum was in a financial crisis due to the acquisition of Anadarko Petroleum, and its stock price fell from more than 40 US dollars at the beginning of the year to 8.8 US dollars at the end of the first quarter. Faced with such a situation, Buffett had no choice but to sell Occidental Petroleum's shares. By the second quarter of 2020, Occidental Petroleum was no longer in Buffett's holdings.</p><p>Regarding this failed investment, Buffett said in an interview that he did misjudge the trend of oil prices.</p><p>Slightly surprisingly, more than a year later, Buffett rebought Occidental Petroleum, which was originally sold for about $15, at a price of about $50, and quickly admitted his mistake.</p><p>Buffett, who has always been known for his value investing and is committed to finding good business, does not prefer the energy industry with strong cycles and high beta. As a typical cyclical stock, why does Occidental Petroleum appear in Buffett's holdings many times?</p><p>According to his past investment experience, the consumption-like logic of stable value-added may be the main reason why Buffett invests in cyclical stocks [5]. Specifically, Occidental Petroleum has a stable competitive landscape and high Dividend payments.</p><p>As the fourth largest oil and gas company in the United States, Occidental Petroleum has experienced large-scale mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. shale oil industry, and the industry competition landscape has stabilized. At the same time, Occidental Petroleum has maintained stable Dividend payments even during the financial crisis and shale revolution. Currently, with the rise in oil prices, Occidental Petroleum's financial situation has also been repaired, which can provide stable financial support for Dividend payments.</p><p>In fact, Buffett has long \"taken a fancy\" to Occidental Petroleum, and the purchase of preferred shares in 2019 is the best proof. It's just that the drastic changes in the external environment in 2020 have caused Buffett to do some operations that seem unwise now, and to stop excessive losses. But what he lost in 2020 was only the money from the decline of common stocks, and Buffett still enjoyed preferred shares's dividends.</p><p>Now that oil prices are rising, Buffett once again sees the opportunity to buy Occidental Petroleum. Even if he pays a higher cost than before, the \"stock god\" is still willing to make a comeback.</p><p><b>03. Icahn, the Wolf King: Take it as soon as you see it</b></p><p>Just as Buffett, the \"stock god\", increased his position in Occidental Petroleum, on the other hand, Icahn, the \"Wolf King of Wall Street\", had sold all the remaining shares of Occidental Petroleum and earned $1 billion.</p><p>Born in 1936 in Queens, New York, Icahn was called \"the most successful speculator on the planet\" by Fortune. After dropping out of new york University, this Jew joined the military camp, where he was a well-known poker master. After retiring from the army, Icahn became a stockbroker and began his investment career as the \"Wolf of Wall Street\".</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168b96e5d53577b54ee92ffaca60d1a8\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"608\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Close-up of Icahn, Image Credit : Icahn: The Restless Billionaire, HBO</p><p>Since he first entered the stock exchange in 1961, Icahn has led numerous \"hostile takeovers\". He often bought a large number of stocks of optimistic companies, became a strategic shareholder of the company and interfered with the company's management decisions, prompting the stock price to rise rapidly in a short period of time.</p><p>To some extent, Icahn is Buffett's \"enemy\" from the root of his investment philosophy. Icahn doesn't care about the development of enterprises. Instead of accompanying the growth of enterprises as Buffett said, he only wants to make profits by buying and selling stocks.</p><p>In 1985, Icahn, who was optimistic about the oil industry, was ready to buy Philip Oil Company. At this time, another consortium offered a higher purchase price to \"cut off\" Philip, and Icahn, who was bound to win, also increased his horsepower to raise the price, but the other party still refused to give up, and even further raised the price, pressing Icahn step by step. After many times, Icahn suddenly sold all his shares and made hundreds of millions of dollars in this round of \"pushing up\".</p><p>And his investment in the stock of Occidental Petroleum also showed his true qualities as a \"wolf king\".</p><p>Back in 2019, Icahn and Buffett both held shares of Occidental Petroleum at the same time, but when Occidental Petroleum wanted to buy Anadarko Petroleum, the two disagreed.</p><p>Because the acquisition requires a large and expensive sum of capital ($10 billion), it has to be financed by debt, which Icahn objected to. Vicki Hollub, CEO of Occidental Petroleum, insisted on the deal, eventually raising money from Buffett in the way of preferred shares, promising an 8% annual Dividend with equity call options.</p><p>Icahn was very dissatisfied with Holub's approach. He believed that this move not only \"cheaper\" Buffett, but also completely unbeneficial to Occidental Petroleum.</p><p>Not long after, in March 2020, Occidental Petroleum, which was heavily indebted, was affected by the plunge in oil prices, and its stock price fell all the way. Buffett liquidated Occidental Petroleum. This situation made Icahn furious and turned out old scores again-if Holub hadn't insisted on going his own way and Buffett had \"helped the others\", why would Occidental Petroleum have fallen to this point?</p><p>It's useless to be angry. In order to remove Holub, this \"wolf king\" has been increasing his voice in Occidental Petroleum. In just a few months, he increased his shareholding ratio from 2.5% to 10% [14]. Although his recall plan ended in a settlement agreement, objectively Icahn also successfully bought a lot of chips at the low stock price.</p><p>Now, Occidental Petroleum has finally ushered in a soaring stock price. This speculator who \"doesn't care about the development of the enterprise, but only wants to make a profit by buying and selling stocks\" has also taken advantage of the trend to liquidate this stock recently and cash in on the gains.</p><p>Icahn's arbitrage departure at this time is not so much bearish on oil prices as finally retaliating against Occidental Petroleum for failing him.</p><p>Icahn after clearance, just like those who block you and still notify you<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WB\">Weibo</a>Like netizens, I stated in a letter to the board of directors of Occidental Petroleum on March 6 that I have cleared my position, and the two representatives assigned to the board of directors due to the settlement agreement in 2020 will also resign and leave.</p><p>Anyway, for Icahn, there are many ways to express his views on oil prices. According to the Wall Street Journal, Icahn still holds about $500 million worth of Occidental Petroleum warrants. Besides, he also holds shares in other energy companies, such as Cheniere Energy (LNG), the largest producer of liquefied natural gas, and oil refiners<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVI\">CVR Energy</a>Corporation (CVI).</p><p>In short, Icahn, who wanted to interfere with the company's strategic decision-making by holding shares in Occidental Petroleum two years ago, didn't get what he wanted. Now, when the stock price rose, Buffett, who was \"not seeking each other\", ran into the market again. Icahn, who made a profit of 1 billion, decided to say goodbye to each other \"with the fruits of victory\", which is reasonable.</p><p>It can be said that if you don't leave at this time, when will you wait?</p><p><b>04. Epilogue</b></p><p>Oil is still the same oil, but there are a thousand investment value judgments in the eyes of a thousand fund managers.</p><p>In the first half of the game, \"Oil God\" Anduran was in full swing, \"Wolf King\" Icahn achieved fruitful results, and \"Stock God\" Buffett returned to the battlefield. One of them is a crude oil trading master who has won many battles, and the other pair is an old rival who has accumulated deep grievances against Western Petroleum. Betting, trading, holding, which one is higher and which one is lower, I'm afraid I have to extend my eyes to the second half.</p><p>After all, who can have the last laugh and not be eaten by beta in the end is the ultimate test of cyclical products for all investors.</p><p>Will oil prices continue to rise? No one knows the definitive answer. However, compared with oil, people in a relatively static closed loop may want to know more how much will the price of vegetables rise?</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"lsy1583835599575","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>Oil gods, stock gods and wolf kings under soaring oil prices</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nOil gods, stock gods and wolf kings under soaring oil prices\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">远川投资评论</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-03-31 10:11</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>Another round of oil price adjustment is coming on March 31.</p><p>Previously, domestic oil prices have risen for five consecutive days due to the surge in crude oil. At the beginning of March, it was only four consecutive rises. \"92-octane gasoline is filled, and the debt is full; 95-octane gasoline is filled, and everything is lost; 98-octane gasoline is filled, and three generations of repayment!\" Before I could finish my fate of swiping the screen in the circle of friends, 95-octane gasoline officially entered the \"9 yuan era\" in the fifth round of rise.</p><p>At the moment, electric vehicle owners may be glad to buy early and enjoy it early, but if they don't buy it, they have to refuel. But the real bargain is the hedge funds that bet on rising oil prices.</p><p>U.S. foreign exchange hedge fund CFM's fund, which tracks the market signal index, has risen 15% this year, betting that rising energy prices have contributed most of its gains; The Diversified fund owned by London hedge fund Aspect Capital has risen 9% this year, mainly due to the rise in long oil and related commodity prices.</p><p>Among them, the most excited one is Pierre Andurand, the \"God of Crude Oil Trading\". According to the Financial Times, the Andurand Commodities Discretionary Enhanced Fund he manages has earned 109% in just two months. Also betting on soaring oil prices are \"Stock God\" Buffett and \"Wall Street Wolf King\"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/IKAN\">Icahn</a>。 This pair of sworn enemies who always meet on the narrow road, one is still against each other<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>The latter had already earned 1 billion and sold off the market.</p><p>Two years ago, the price of WTI crude oil futures in May fell to a minimum of-US $37.63/barrel. The panic caused by negative oil prices is still fresh in my memory. The backhand oil price has broken through the high of eight years ago, exceeding US $100/barrel.</p><p>So, in this epic diamond bottom rebound, who is the sharpest one?</p><p><b>01. Oil God Anduran: The war is in full swing</b></p><p>This time, Anduran was right again.</p><p>Just over two months have passed in 2022, and the Commodity Free Trading Enhancement Fund managed by Pierre Andurand, the \"God of Crude Oil Trading\", has risen 109% due to a bet on soaring oil prices. In an interview with Bloomberg on March 24, Anduran was still bullish on oil prices, believing that it would even hit $200 by the end of this year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5f68e42d61df008e14b35612c7ca1d42\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"810\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Anduran believes crude oil rising to $200 a barrel is just around the corner, Bloomberg</p><p>Before 2020, Anduran had already shown his talents. He made a huge profit of nearly $300 million by shorting \"negative oil prices\". In February, when Anduran was aggressively bearish on oil prices, people at that time might not have believed that the oil price of $55 would become negative, but Anduran, who spent ten hours a day studying virus data, firmly believed that once the epidemic broke out, a large number of blockade areas would appear all over the world, which would lead to a sharp drop in demand for crude oil and a sharp drop in oil prices [3]. Sure enough, two months later, the oil price fell to-$40, and Anduran's prediction was verified.</p><p>Speaking of it, the person who won such a big victory last time he lifted oil alone was still Anduran.</p><p>The head of Andurand Capital Management, the world's largest crude oil hedge fund, became famous as early as the 2008 financial crisis for accurately predicting the plunge in oil prices. At that time, he earned 210% of the returns.</p><p>However, at that time, the hedge fund founded by Anduran was still called Blue Glod, and before he was truly named the \"Oil God\", there was still a detour to go.</p><p>In 2007, at the age of 30, Anduran left Vitol, the world's largest oil trader, and set up his own hedge fund company. When he was in Vitol Group, he was called \"one of the most profitable traders\". However, Anduran, who was unruly and loves freedom by nature, left Vitol and became his own boss.</p><p>Anduran began to become famous in the second year after founding the company, but the start was too smooth, which may not be a good thing. After Anduran's entrepreneurial journey became a blockbuster in 2008, it began to show a decline of \"opening high and going low\". In the next three years or so, the funds he managed fell all the way, and the income turned from positive to negative until April 2012, Blue Glod, which had no improvement, had to close its doors to thank customers.</p><p>Failure didn't depress Anduran. After only eight months, he chose to gamble his name again. In February 2013, he surfaced into the hedge fund world and founded Andurand Capital Management. He unabashedly named directly after his own name, showing greater determination than the last time.</p><p>And Anduran didn't disappoint investors who believed in him again. In 2014, Anduran gained a 38% yield by betting on the plunge in oil prices. In 2016, he gained a 22% yield by betting on the rebound in oil prices, wiping out the fluctuations of oil.</p><p>Anduran, who is extremely talented in crude oil trading, often makes a lot of money in the violent fluctuations of oil prices. Because of this, many people only regard him as a \"lucky man of the times\", a \"bold maniac\" who can succeed in oil and lose oil. After all, who can always predict things like God?</p><p>Anduran, however, thinks otherwise. He said that he was not a \"trade addict\" and never blindly made heavy bets. Every \"big move\" has undergone in-depth research and rigorous analysis. And Anduran's \"grasping the big and letting go of the small\", going deep into the contradiction between supply and demand of a variety of crude oil and the conversion between long and short, has indeed earned rich returns for his investors-since 2008, the cumulative income of funds managed by Anduran has increased nearly tenfold.</p><p>And this time, the heavy bet on the soaring oil price is just a reappearance of Anduran's \"betting\" trading style. He just did what he has always been best at in the circle of competence.</p><p><b>02. Warren Buffett: Comeback</b></p><p>Compared with Anduran's easy acquisition, Buffett's investment in oil is a little bumpy.</p><p>According to the data, Buffett began to re-build his position in Occidental Petroleum on March 1 this year, and increased his position twice in a row on March 4 and March 11, buying Occidental Petroleum as his ninth largest holding. The purchase cost ranged from $46.76 to $56.60 per share. As of March 21, Occidental Petroleum's share price had risen to $60.96, up 30% from Buffett's first purchase.</p><p>The reason why he said to re-open the position is mainly because he had fallen before. Judging from Buffett's historical holdings in Occidental Petroleum, his previous operations on this stock can be described as \"sold before dawn and bought after the price increase.\" So far, it is difficult for Buffett to say that he has made a lot of money in Occidental Petroleum.</p><p>As early as 2019, Occidental Petroleum wanted to acquire<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/APC\">Anadarko Oil</a>The company (Anadarko Petroleum) raised funds from Buffett in the form of preferred shares. In addition to paying an annual Dividend of 8%, it also came with a call option on common stocks, and the strike price was $62.5. In other words, in addition to paying dividends to Buffett, Occidental Petroleum will also repay part of his common stock. It can be seen from the changes in Buffett's positions in 2019 that he did increase his holdings of Occidental Petroleum.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6bbbc39c687e488620cf82d09e84d818\" tg-width=\"789\" tg-height=\"659\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>However, what Buffett, who is full of confidence, is waiting for is the black swan of the epidemic, which caused oil prices to plummet in 2020. At that time, Occidental Petroleum was in a financial crisis due to the acquisition of Anadarko Petroleum, and its stock price fell from more than 40 US dollars at the beginning of the year to 8.8 US dollars at the end of the first quarter. Faced with such a situation, Buffett had no choice but to sell Occidental Petroleum's shares. By the second quarter of 2020, Occidental Petroleum was no longer in Buffett's holdings.</p><p>Regarding this failed investment, Buffett said in an interview that he did misjudge the trend of oil prices.</p><p>Slightly surprisingly, more than a year later, Buffett rebought Occidental Petroleum, which was originally sold for about $15, at a price of about $50, and quickly admitted his mistake.</p><p>Buffett, who has always been known for his value investing and is committed to finding good business, does not prefer the energy industry with strong cycles and high beta. As a typical cyclical stock, why does Occidental Petroleum appear in Buffett's holdings many times?</p><p>According to his past investment experience, the consumption-like logic of stable value-added may be the main reason why Buffett invests in cyclical stocks [5]. Specifically, Occidental Petroleum has a stable competitive landscape and high Dividend payments.</p><p>As the fourth largest oil and gas company in the United States, Occidental Petroleum has experienced large-scale mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. shale oil industry, and the industry competition landscape has stabilized. At the same time, Occidental Petroleum has maintained stable Dividend payments even during the financial crisis and shale revolution. Currently, with the rise in oil prices, Occidental Petroleum's financial situation has also been repaired, which can provide stable financial support for Dividend payments.</p><p>In fact, Buffett has long \"taken a fancy\" to Occidental Petroleum, and the purchase of preferred shares in 2019 is the best proof. It's just that the drastic changes in the external environment in 2020 have caused Buffett to do some operations that seem unwise now, and to stop excessive losses. But what he lost in 2020 was only the money from the decline of common stocks, and Buffett still enjoyed preferred shares's dividends.</p><p>Now that oil prices are rising, Buffett once again sees the opportunity to buy Occidental Petroleum. Even if he pays a higher cost than before, the \"stock god\" is still willing to make a comeback.</p><p><b>03. Icahn, the Wolf King: Take it as soon as you see it</b></p><p>Just as Buffett, the \"stock god\", increased his position in Occidental Petroleum, on the other hand, Icahn, the \"Wolf King of Wall Street\", had sold all the remaining shares of Occidental Petroleum and earned $1 billion.</p><p>Born in 1936 in Queens, New York, Icahn was called \"the most successful speculator on the planet\" by Fortune. After dropping out of new york University, this Jew joined the military camp, where he was a well-known poker master. After retiring from the army, Icahn became a stockbroker and began his investment career as the \"Wolf of Wall Street\".</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168b96e5d53577b54ee92ffaca60d1a8\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"608\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Close-up of Icahn, Image Credit : Icahn: The Restless Billionaire, HBO</p><p>Since he first entered the stock exchange in 1961, Icahn has led numerous \"hostile takeovers\". He often bought a large number of stocks of optimistic companies, became a strategic shareholder of the company and interfered with the company's management decisions, prompting the stock price to rise rapidly in a short period of time.</p><p>To some extent, Icahn is Buffett's \"enemy\" from the root of his investment philosophy. Icahn doesn't care about the development of enterprises. Instead of accompanying the growth of enterprises as Buffett said, he only wants to make profits by buying and selling stocks.</p><p>In 1985, Icahn, who was optimistic about the oil industry, was ready to buy Philip Oil Company. At this time, another consortium offered a higher purchase price to \"cut off\" Philip, and Icahn, who was bound to win, also increased his horsepower to raise the price, but the other party still refused to give up, and even further raised the price, pressing Icahn step by step. After many times, Icahn suddenly sold all his shares and made hundreds of millions of dollars in this round of \"pushing up\".</p><p>And his investment in the stock of Occidental Petroleum also showed his true qualities as a \"wolf king\".</p><p>Back in 2019, Icahn and Buffett both held shares of Occidental Petroleum at the same time, but when Occidental Petroleum wanted to buy Anadarko Petroleum, the two disagreed.</p><p>Because the acquisition requires a large and expensive sum of capital ($10 billion), it has to be financed by debt, which Icahn objected to. Vicki Hollub, CEO of Occidental Petroleum, insisted on the deal, eventually raising money from Buffett in the way of preferred shares, promising an 8% annual Dividend with equity call options.</p><p>Icahn was very dissatisfied with Holub's approach. He believed that this move not only \"cheaper\" Buffett, but also completely unbeneficial to Occidental Petroleum.</p><p>Not long after, in March 2020, Occidental Petroleum, which was heavily indebted, was affected by the plunge in oil prices, and its stock price fell all the way. Buffett liquidated Occidental Petroleum. This situation made Icahn furious and turned out old scores again-if Holub hadn't insisted on going his own way and Buffett had \"helped the others\", why would Occidental Petroleum have fallen to this point?</p><p>It's useless to be angry. In order to remove Holub, this \"wolf king\" has been increasing his voice in Occidental Petroleum. In just a few months, he increased his shareholding ratio from 2.5% to 10% [14]. Although his recall plan ended in a settlement agreement, objectively Icahn also successfully bought a lot of chips at the low stock price.</p><p>Now, Occidental Petroleum has finally ushered in a soaring stock price. This speculator who \"doesn't care about the development of the enterprise, but only wants to make a profit by buying and selling stocks\" has also taken advantage of the trend to liquidate this stock recently and cash in on the gains.</p><p>Icahn's arbitrage departure at this time is not so much bearish on oil prices as finally retaliating against Occidental Petroleum for failing him.</p><p>Icahn after clearance, just like those who block you and still notify you<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WB\">Weibo</a>Like netizens, I stated in a letter to the board of directors of Occidental Petroleum on March 6 that I have cleared my position, and the two representatives assigned to the board of directors due to the settlement agreement in 2020 will also resign and leave.</p><p>Anyway, for Icahn, there are many ways to express his views on oil prices. According to the Wall Street Journal, Icahn still holds about $500 million worth of Occidental Petroleum warrants. Besides, he also holds shares in other energy companies, such as Cheniere Energy (LNG), the largest producer of liquefied natural gas, and oil refiners<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVI\">CVR Energy</a>Corporation (CVI).</p><p>In short, Icahn, who wanted to interfere with the company's strategic decision-making by holding shares in Occidental Petroleum two years ago, didn't get what he wanted. Now, when the stock price rose, Buffett, who was \"not seeking each other\", ran into the market again. Icahn, who made a profit of 1 billion, decided to say goodbye to each other \"with the fruits of victory\", which is reasonable.</p><p>It can be said that if you don't leave at this time, when will you wait?</p><p><b>04. Epilogue</b></p><p>Oil is still the same oil, but there are a thousand investment value judgments in the eyes of a thousand fund managers.</p><p>In the first half of the game, \"Oil God\" Anduran was in full swing, \"Wolf King\" Icahn achieved fruitful results, and \"Stock God\" Buffett returned to the battlefield. One of them is a crude oil trading master who has won many battles, and the other pair is an old rival who has accumulated deep grievances against Western Petroleum. Betting, trading, holding, which one is higher and which one is lower, I'm afraid I have to extend my eyes to the second half.</p><p>After all, who can have the last laugh and not be eaten by beta in the end is the ultimate test of cyclical products for all investors.</p><p>Will oil prices continue to rise? No one knows the definitive answer. However, compared with oil, people in a relatively static closed loop may want to know more how much will the price of vegetables rise?</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/AI50006ms1hQjSTCoXTd6w\">远川投资评论</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ef375710aa7a4298de56c8827d8139df","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/AI50006ms1hQjSTCoXTd6w","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1109157751","content_text":"3月31日又一轮油价调整就要来了。此前由于原油飙升,国内油价已经五连涨。3月初还只是四连涨的时候,“92号汽油加满,负债满满;95号汽油加满,倾家荡产;98号汽油加满,三代还款!”的段子,还没来得及完成自己在朋友圈刷屏的命运,95号汽油就又在第五轮的上涨里,正式进入了“9元时代”。此刻电动车车主们,或许在庆幸早买早享受、不买要加油。但真正赚到了大便宜的,还是押注了油价上涨的对冲基金们。美国外汇对冲基金CFM旗下追踪市场信号指数的基金今年以来上涨了15%,押注能源价格上涨为其贡献了收益大头;而伦敦对冲基金 Aspect Capital 旗下的多元投资基金(Diversified fund)今年以来上涨了9%,主要原因也无外乎做多石油及其相关商品价格的上涨。这其中,最兴奋不已的莫过于“原油交易之神”皮埃尔·安杜兰(Pierre Andurand)。据《金融时报》透露,他管理的商品自由交易增强基金(Andurand Commodities Discretionary Enhanced Fund)在短短两个月时间里已经赚取了109%的收益。同样押注油价飙升的,还有“股神”巴菲特和“华尔街狼王”伊坎。这对狭路总相逢的死对头,一个还在对西方石油的疯狂加仓,后者已经狂赚10亿后抛售离场。两年前,WTI5月原油期货价格跌到最低-37.63美元/桶,负油价带来的恐慌还记忆犹新,油价反手已经突破了8年前的高点,超过100美元/桶。那么,在这波史诗级的钻石底大反弹里,谁是最敏锐的那一个呢?01、「油神」安杜兰:大战正酣这一次,安杜兰又押对了。2022年才过去两个多月,“原油交易之神” 皮埃尔·安杜兰(Pierre Andurand)管理的商品自由交易增强基金便因押中油价飙升而上涨了109%。在彭博3月24日的采访中,安杜兰依然看多油价,认为到今年年底甚至会触及200美元。安杜兰认为原油涨到200美元一桶已经近在眼前,Bloomberg此前的2020年,安杜兰已经大显身手。他因为做空“负油价”大赚近3亿美元。在安杜兰大举看空油价的2月份,当时的人们也许怎么样都不会相信55美元的油价会变成负数,但每天花十小时研究病毒资料的安杜兰则坚定地认为,一旦疫情爆发,世界各地将会出现大量封锁区,而这会导致原油的需求量骤减,油价一定会暴跌[3]。果不其然,两个月后,油价跌到了-40美元,安杜兰的预言得以验证。说起来,上一次这么单吊石油还大获全胜的人,依然还是安杜兰。这位全球最大原油对冲基金 Andurand Capital Management 的掌门人,早在2008年的金融危机中,便因精准预测油价暴跌而“一战成名”,那一次,他赚取了210%的收益。只不过,那个时候,安杜兰创办的对冲基金还叫 Blue Glod ,而在他真正被封为“油神”之前,也还有一段弯路要走。2007年,30岁的安杜兰离开了全球最大石油交易商——维多集团(Vitol),创立了属于自己的对冲基金公司。在维多集团时,他被称为是“最能赚钱的交易员之一”,不过,生性不羁爱自由的安杜兰还是离开了维多,自己给自己当老板。创立公司后的第二年安杜兰便开始名声大噪,但开局太顺利,或许不是什么好事。安杜兰的创业之路在2008年一鸣惊人后,开始呈现“高开低走”的颓势,接下来三年多的时间里,他管理的基金一路下跌,收益由正转负,直到2012年4月,毫无起色的 Blue Glod 只好关门谢客。失败没有让安杜兰消沉,仅仅过了八个月,他就选择「赌上自己的名字」再来一次。2013年2月,他浮出对冲基金界,创办了 Andurand Capital Management。他毫不掩饰地直接用自己的名字来命名,显示出比上一次更大的决心。而安杜兰也没有让再信他一次的投资者失望。2014年,安杜兰押中油价暴跌获得了38%的收益率,2016年,他又因押中油价反弹获得了22%的收益率,把石油这一个品种的波动吃干抹净。在原油交易上极具天赋的安杜兰,常常能在油价的剧烈波动中赚得盆满钵满,正因如此,不少人只把他当成一个“时代幸运儿”,一个成也石油、还会败也石油的“大胆狂徒”。毕竟,谁能永远料事如神呢?然而安杜兰却不这么认为。他说自己并不是“交易瘾君子”,也从不盲目下重注,每一次“大手笔”都经过了深入的研究和严密的分析。而安杜兰的“抓大放小”,深入原油一个品种的供需矛盾、多空转换,也的确为他的投资者们赚取了丰厚的回报——2008年至今,安杜兰管理的基金累计收益翻了近十倍。而这一次对油价飙升的重押,也不过是安杜兰“下赌注式”交易风格的再现,他只是在能力圈里又做了一直以来最擅长的事。02、「股神」巴菲特:卷土重来比起安杜兰的信手拈来,巴菲特在石油上的投资就稍显坎坷了。资料显示,巴菲特今年3月1日开始重新建仓西方石油,并在3月4日、3月11日连续两次加仓,将西方石油买成了自己的第九大重仓股,买入成本从每股46.76美元到56.60美元不等。截至3月21日,西方石油的股价已经涨到了60.96美元,距巴菲特第一次买入时上涨了30%。之所以说「重新建仓」,主要是因为他之前曾经摔过一跤。从巴菲特对西方石油的历史持仓来看,他此前在这只股票上的操作可谓是“卖在了黎明前,买在了涨价后”,到目前为止,巴菲特在西方石油上很难说赚到了大钱。早在2019年,西方石油要收购阿纳达科石油公司(Anadarko Petroleum),便以优先股的形式向巴菲特募资,除了支付8%的年股息,还附带有普通股的认购期权,执行价格为62.5美元。也就是说,西方石油除了要对巴菲特分红派息外还会偿还他一部分的普通股。而从巴菲特2019年的持仓变化中可以看出,他的确对西方石油进行了增持。然而,信心十足的巴菲特等来的却是疫情这只黑天鹅,让油价在2020年遭遇了暴跌。彼时的西方石油又因收购阿纳达科石油而陷入财务危机,股价从年初的40多美元一路跌到了一季度末的8.8美元。面对如此状况,巴菲特只好卖掉了西方石油的股票,到2020年二季度,巴菲特的持仓中便已不见西方石油的身影。对于这笔失败的投资,巴菲特在接受采访时表示,自己的确是误判了油价走势。稍显意外的是,一年多后,巴菲特却又以50美元左右的价格重新买入了当初15美元左右卖出的西方石油,迅速认错。向来以价值投资著称、致力于寻找好生意的巴菲特,按理说并不偏好强周期、高beta的能源行业,而西方石油作为典型的周期股,为什么屡次出现在巴菲特的持仓中呢?根据其过往的投资经历推断,稳定增值的类消费逻辑或许是巴菲特投资周期股的主要原因[5]。具体放在西方石油身上,是它拥有稳定的竞争格局和较高的股息支付。西方石油作为美国第四大石油和天然气公司,在经历了美页岩油行业大规模并购重组后,行业竞争格局趋于稳定,同时,西方石油即使在金融危机和页岩革命期间也维持了稳定的股息支付,而当前,伴随着油价上涨,西方石油的财务状况也得以修复,更能为股息支付提供稳定的资金支持。其实,巴菲特早就“看中了”西方石油,2019年买入优先股便是最好的证明。只是2020年外部环境的剧烈变化让巴菲特做了一些现在看来并不明智的操作,还止过损。但是2020年亏的只是普通股下跌的钱,而巴菲特仍享受了优先股的分红派息。如今油价上涨,巴菲特再次看到了西方石油的买入时机,就算付出比之前更高的成本,“股神”依然愿意卷土重来。03、「狼王」伊坎:见好就收就在“股神”巴菲特加仓西方石油之际,另一边,“华尔街狼王”伊坎已全部抛售西方石油剩余股票,赚取了10亿美元。1936年出生于纽约皇后区的伊坎,被《财富》称为“这个星球上最成功的投机者”。这位犹太人从纽约大学辍学后便加入了军营,在那里,他是小有名气的扑克牌高手。退伍后,伊坎便成为了一名股票经纪人,开始了他“华尔街之狼”的投资生涯。伊坎的特写,图片来源:Icahn: The Restless Billionaire,HBO从1961年第一次走进证券交易所至今,伊坎主导了无数次“恶意收购”事件,他经常大量买入看好企业的股票,成为该公司的战略股东并干涉公司的管理决策,促使股价在短期内快速上涨。某种程度上,伊坎从投资理念的根源上,就是巴菲特的“敌人”。伊坎并不关心企业发展,与其像巴菲特说的那样陪伴企业成长,他只想通过买卖股票获利。1985年,看好石油行业的伊坎准备收购菲力浦石油公司,此时,另一家财团开出了更高的收购价格想要“截胡”菲力浦,而势在必得的伊坎也加大马力进行提价,但对方依然不肯放弃,甚至又进一步抬高了价格,对伊坎步步紧逼,就在这样多次来回之后,伊坎猛然将手上的股票全部卖出,在这轮股价“推涨”中赚了上亿美元。而他在西方石油这只股票的投资上,也尽显“狼王”本色。早在2019年,伊坎和巴菲特罕见地同时都持有了西方石油的股票,但当西方石油想要收购阿纳达科石油公司(Anadarko Petroleum)时,两人却出现了分歧。由于收购需要一大笔昂贵的资金(100亿美元)就得进行债务融资,伊坎对此提出了反对意见。西方石油的首席执行官薇姬·霍鲁布(Vicki Hollub)执意要达成这笔交易,最终以优先股的方式向巴菲特募资,承诺8%的年股息并附带股权认购期权。对于霍鲁布的这个做法,伊坎十分不满,他认为此举不但“便宜了”巴菲特,对西方石油来说也完全没有好处。不久之后的2020年3月,负债累累的西方石油又受到油价暴跌的影响,股价一路下跌,巴菲特清仓了西方石油。此情此景让伊坎愤怒不已,再次翻出旧账——要不是霍鲁布一意孤行,巴菲特“助纣为虐”,西方石油何至于沦落至此?生气没用,为了能够罢免霍鲁布,这位“狼王”一路提高自己在西方石油上的话语权,在短短几个月里,就把持股比例从2.5%提升到了10%[14]。虽然他的罢免计划最后以和解协议告终,但客观上伊坎也成功地在股价低位抄底了一大堆筹码。如今,西方石油终于迎来股价飙涨,这位“不关心企业发展,只想通过买卖股票获利”的投机派也顺势在近期清仓了这只股票,兑现收益。伊坎此时的套利离场,与其说是看空油价,倒不如说是终于报复了西方石油曾经辜负了他。清仓后的伊坎,就像那些拉黑你还要通知你的微博网友一样,在3月6日致西方石油董事会的信中表示,我清仓了,而且2020年因为和解协议而安排到董事会里的两位代表,也会辞职离开。反正对于伊坎来说,表达他对油价看法的方式也很多。据《华尔街日报》的报道,伊坎目前仍持有约5亿美元价值的西方石油公司认股权证。除此之外,他还拿着其它能源公司的股票,比如液化天然气最大生产商Cheniere能源公司(LNG),以及炼油商CVR能源公司(CVI)。总之,两年前想通过持股西方石油干涉该公司战略决策的伊坎并没有如愿以偿,如今好不容易等到股价上涨,“不相为谋”的巴菲特又跑步进场,获利10亿的伊坎决定“揣着胜利的果实”互道一声拜拜,也就在情理之中了。正可谓,此时不走,更待何时?04、尾声石油还是同样的石油,只是一千个基金经理眼中有一千种投资价值判断。在游戏的上半场,“油神”安杜兰激战正酣,“狼王”伊坎硕果累累,“股神”巴菲特则重回战场。他们一个是屡战屡胜的原油交易大神,另一对则是在西方石油上「积怨已深」的老对手。押注、交易、持有,孰高孰低,恐怕还要再把眼光拉长到下半场。毕竟谁能笑到最后,最终不被贝塔反噬,是周期品对所有投资者的终极考验。油价还会继续上涨吗?没人知道确定的答案。不过,相比石油,处在相对静止闭环中的人或许更想知道的,菜价还会涨多少?","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CLmain":0.9,"BZmain":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":804,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9031894919,"gmtCreate":1646495742980,"gmtModify":1676534134887,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"👍","listText":"👍","text":"👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9031894919","repostId":"2217767460","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2217767460","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1646465600,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2217767460?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-03-05 15:33","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Berkshire Hathaway increases its position in Occidental Petroleum","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2217767460","media":"新浪财经","summary":"亿万富豪沃伦·巴菲特旗下的伯克希尔哈撒韦增加了对传统能源巨头西方石油的投资比例,公开文件显示该公司今年买入了近3,000万股西方石油。 当地时间周五公布的一份监管文件显示,这些股票是伯克希尔哈撒韦在今年买入,因此该公司持有的西方石油股票总数量达到1.137亿股,西方石油目前总股本在9.34亿股左右。统计数据显示,伯克希尔哈撒韦目前持有占比约11.2%西方石油普通股,这笔投资目前价值约为64亿美元。","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>Billionaire Warren Buffett's<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BRK.A\">Berkshire</a>Hathaway (BRK.A.US) Increases Stake in Traditional Energy Giants<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>(OXY.US) investment ratio, public documents show that the company has bought nearly 30 million shares of Occidental Petroleum this year. A regulatory filing released on Friday local time showed that these stocks were bought by Berkshire Hathaway this year, bringing the total number of Occidental Petroleum shares held by the company to 113.7 million shares. Occidental Petroleum's current total share capital is 934 million shares or so. Statistics show that Berkshire Hathaway currently holds approximately 11.2% of Occidental Petroleum's common stock, and this investment is currently worth approximately US $6.4 billion.</p><p>Buffett had invested $10 billion back in 2019, when he helped Occidental Petroleum acquire<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/APC\">Anadarko Oil</a>Company (<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AEUA\">Anadarko Petroleum Corp</a>.)。 It is reported that almost all of the more than 83 million Occidental Petroleum shares held by Berkshire are linked to the warrants obtained in the transaction, which have been generating payments.</p><p>It is understood that the news was announced after the U.S. stock market closed on Friday. Crude oil prices rose all the way yesterday evening, with an increase of more than 6%. Driven by this main positive factor, Occidental Petroleum rose by as much as 17.59% during the trading hours yesterday and nearly 2% after hours.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"sina_us","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>Berkshire Hathaway increases its position in Occidental Petroleum</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBerkshire Hathaway increases its position in Occidental Petroleum\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">新浪财经</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-03-05 15:33</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>Billionaire Warren Buffett's<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BRK.A\">Berkshire</a>Hathaway (BRK.A.US) Increases Stake in Traditional Energy Giants<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>(OXY.US) investment ratio, public documents show that the company has bought nearly 30 million shares of Occidental Petroleum this year. A regulatory filing released on Friday local time showed that these stocks were bought by Berkshire Hathaway this year, bringing the total number of Occidental Petroleum shares held by the company to 113.7 million shares. Occidental Petroleum's current total share capital is 934 million shares or so. Statistics show that Berkshire Hathaway currently holds approximately 11.2% of Occidental Petroleum's common stock, and this investment is currently worth approximately US $6.4 billion.</p><p>Buffett had invested $10 billion back in 2019, when he helped Occidental Petroleum acquire<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/APC\">Anadarko Oil</a>Company (<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AEUA\">Anadarko Petroleum Corp</a>.)。 It is reported that almost all of the more than 83 million Occidental Petroleum shares held by Berkshire are linked to the warrants obtained in the transaction, which have been generating payments.</p><p>It is understood that the news was announced after the U.S. stock market closed on Friday. Crude oil prices rose all the way yesterday evening, with an increase of more than 6%. Driven by this main positive factor, Occidental Petroleum rose by as much as 17.59% during the trading hours yesterday and nearly 2% after hours.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/hkstock/ggscyd/2022-03-05/doc-imcwipih6744786.shtml\">新浪财经</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c94afdb1600dc1c5d88c57e11919166c","relate_stocks":{"BK4581":"高盛持仓","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4176":"多领域控股","OXY":"西方石油","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BK4201":"综合性石油与天然气企业","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"https://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/hkstock/ggscyd/2022-03-05/doc-imcwipih6744786.shtml","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2217767460","content_text":"亿万富豪沃伦·巴菲特旗下的伯克希尔哈撒韦(BRK.A.US)增加了对传统能源巨头西方石油(OXY.US)的投资比例,公开文件显示该公司今年买入了近3,000万股西方石油。当地时间周五公布的一份监管文件显示,这些股票是伯克希尔哈撒韦在今年买入,因此该公司持有的西方石油股票总数量达到1.137亿股,西方石油目前总股本在9.34亿股左右。统计数据显示,伯克希尔哈撒韦目前持有占比约11.2%西方石油普通股,这笔投资目前价值约为64亿美元。巴菲特早在2019年就已投资100亿美元,当时他帮助西方石油公司收购了阿纳达科石油公司(Anadarko Petroleum Corp.)。据悉,伯克希尔所持有的超过8300万股西方石油股票,几乎全部与该项交易中获得的认股权证挂钩,这些认股权证一直在产生支付款项。据了解,该消息于周五美股盘后公布。原油价格昨日晚间一路上行,涨幅超过6%,在这一主要利好因素带动之下西方石油昨日在交易时间段涨幅高达17.59%,盘后涨幅接近2%。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BRK.A":0.6,"BRK.B":0.6,"OXY":0.6}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":501,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9914858397,"gmtCreate":1665242217219,"gmtModify":1676537577449,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9914858397","repostId":"1162298976","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":510,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063192673,"gmtCreate":1651420883427,"gmtModify":1676534904039,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"👍","listText":"👍","text":"👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063192673","repostId":"1190110506","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":786,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9011448972,"gmtCreate":1648914935709,"gmtModify":1676534421549,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9011448972","repostId":"1102580279","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":522,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9010906743,"gmtCreate":1648220397233,"gmtModify":1676534318880,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9010906743","repostId":"1194213757","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1194213757","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1648207867,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1194213757?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-03-25 19:31","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"One picture to understand | Fed officials' latest statement on May rate hike of 50 basis points","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1194213757","media":"同花顺","summary":"当前表态的5位官员全部对5月加息50个基点持开放态度。当前美国通胀仍处于近40年来高位,加上俄乌战争推高原油等大宗商品价格,使得美联储对抗通胀的任务愈发艰巨。而就是在这种背景下,鲍威尔周一在为华盛顿哥","content":"<p><html><head></head><body><b>All five officials who have expressed their position at present are open to the 50 basis point rate hike in May.</b>At present, inflation in the United States is still at a high level in nearly 40 years, and the Russia-Ukraine war has pushed up the prices of crude oil and other commodities, making the Fed's task of fighting inflation more and more arduous. It is against this background that Powell said in a speech prepared for an economic seminar in Washington, D.C. on Monday that the Fed will take necessary measures to ensure the restoration of price stability. If it is deemed necessary, the Fed will prepare a 50 basis point rate hike, which is only a week after the Fed's rate hike in March.</p><p>In Powell's speech on Monday, one small detail was particularly eye-catching: After he finished his formal speech, the host asked Powell under what circumstances the Fed would not rate hike by 50 basis points in May. Powell's answer was, \"What will stop us? No\". At the same time, just this week, a group of senior officials of the Federal Reserve expressed intensive statements. So far, five officials, including Powell, are open to the May rate hike.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9310f8ed234b1b57a54e320e495f6aec\" tg-width=\"750\" tg-height=\"658\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>In addition, according to the latest data from the Fed Watchtool tool, the market expects that the probability of the Fed's rate hike of 50 basis points in May has reached 70.5%, which is basically consistent with the statement of Fed officials.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9461e82e78cc8ef4ea624ae28dafbe8e\" tg-width=\"854\" tg-height=\"677\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>What is particularly noteworthy is that some officials believe it is necessary for the Federal Reserve to start shrinking its balance sheet at the next meeting. Powell also reiterated that action to cut the balance sheet \"may begin as early as the next May meeting, but we haven't made a decision yet.\"</p><p>This indicates that in the most extreme case, the next meeting of the Federal Reserve may simultaneously blow up a \"double hawkish storm\" of 50 basis points of rate hike plus the announcement of balance sheet reduction.</p><p>As the Federal Reserve is now focusing more and more on resisting high inflation, and even begins to choose a more aggressive tightening route at the expense of economic growth, the U.S. bond yield curve is now increasingly pointing to the possibility of a recession.</p><p>The yield spread between 10-year and two-year U.S. Treasuries has narrowed by about 60 basis points since the beginning of the year. If the two are inverted, it is usually regarded as a precursor to a six-to 24-month recession.</p><p>As far as Powell is concerned, he is still optimistic that the economy can make a soft landing and reach a more sustainable growth level-that is, the inflation rate will drop from the current 7.9% to the target level slightly above 2%, and the economy will not shrink. Designing such a soft landing is still possible, Powell said, noting that the Fed has achieved soft landings three times in the past 60 years.</p><p>However, some analysts are currently saying that if interest rates change according to the path predicted by the Fed, the economy is expected to eventually tend to fall into recession-rather than the \"soft landing\" that Fed Chairman Jerome Powell hopes.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"THS","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>One picture to understand | Fed officials' latest statement on May rate hike of 50 basis points</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nOne picture to understand | Fed officials' latest statement on May rate hike of 50 basis points\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">同花顺</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-03-25 19:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body><b>All five officials who have expressed their position at present are open to the 50 basis point rate hike in May.</b>At present, inflation in the United States is still at a high level in nearly 40 years, and the Russia-Ukraine war has pushed up the prices of crude oil and other commodities, making the Fed's task of fighting inflation more and more arduous. It is against this background that Powell said in a speech prepared for an economic seminar in Washington, D.C. on Monday that the Fed will take necessary measures to ensure the restoration of price stability. If it is deemed necessary, the Fed will prepare a 50 basis point rate hike, which is only a week after the Fed's rate hike in March.</p><p>In Powell's speech on Monday, one small detail was particularly eye-catching: After he finished his formal speech, the host asked Powell under what circumstances the Fed would not rate hike by 50 basis points in May. Powell's answer was, \"What will stop us? No\". At the same time, just this week, a group of senior officials of the Federal Reserve expressed intensive statements. So far, five officials, including Powell, are open to the May rate hike.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9310f8ed234b1b57a54e320e495f6aec\" tg-width=\"750\" tg-height=\"658\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>In addition, according to the latest data from the Fed Watchtool tool, the market expects that the probability of the Fed's rate hike of 50 basis points in May has reached 70.5%, which is basically consistent with the statement of Fed officials.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9461e82e78cc8ef4ea624ae28dafbe8e\" tg-width=\"854\" tg-height=\"677\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>What is particularly noteworthy is that some officials believe it is necessary for the Federal Reserve to start shrinking its balance sheet at the next meeting. Powell also reiterated that action to cut the balance sheet \"may begin as early as the next May meeting, but we haven't made a decision yet.\"</p><p>This indicates that in the most extreme case, the next meeting of the Federal Reserve may simultaneously blow up a \"double hawkish storm\" of 50 basis points of rate hike plus the announcement of balance sheet reduction.</p><p>As the Federal Reserve is now focusing more and more on resisting high inflation, and even begins to choose a more aggressive tightening route at the expense of economic growth, the U.S. bond yield curve is now increasingly pointing to the possibility of a recession.</p><p>The yield spread between 10-year and two-year U.S. Treasuries has narrowed by about 60 basis points since the beginning of the year. If the two are inverted, it is usually regarded as a precursor to a six-to 24-month recession.</p><p>As far as Powell is concerned, he is still optimistic that the economy can make a soft landing and reach a more sustainable growth level-that is, the inflation rate will drop from the current 7.9% to the target level slightly above 2%, and the economy will not shrink. Designing such a soft landing is still possible, Powell said, noting that the Fed has achieved soft landings three times in the past 60 years.</p><p>However, some analysts are currently saying that if interest rates change according to the path predicted by the Fed, the economy is expected to eventually tend to fall into recession-rather than the \"soft landing\" that Fed Chairman Jerome Powell hopes.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://wzq.tenpay.com/mp/v2/index.html?stat_data=4003000011#/information/detail?id=SN202203251533577b834066&shareSource=fromApp&zxtype=1&appVersion=undefined\">同花顺</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e09a7b30204158feaaaf0f4efc19f31f","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://wzq.tenpay.com/mp/v2/index.html?stat_data=4003000011#/information/detail?id=SN202203251533577b834066&shareSource=fromApp&zxtype=1&appVersion=undefined","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1194213757","content_text":"当前表态的5位官员全部对5月加息50个基点持开放态度。当前美国通胀仍处于近40年来高位,加上俄乌战争推高原油等大宗商品价格,使得美联储对抗通胀的任务愈发艰巨。而就是在这种背景下,鲍威尔周一在为华盛顿哥伦比亚特区一场经济研讨会准备的演讲稿中表示,美联储将采取必要措施,确保恢复价格稳定。如果认为有必要,则该联储准备加息50个基点,这离3月美联储加息仅过去一周的时间。在周一鲍威尔的讲话中,一个小细节尤为引人瞩目:在他结束正式讲话后,主持人询问鲍威尔什么情况下会令美联储在5月份不加息50基点。鲍威尔的回答是,“什么会阻止我们?没有”。同时就在这周,美联储一众高官密集表态,截至目前,包括鲍威尔在内五名官员对5月加息均持开放态度。另外,根据Fed Watchtool工具最新数据显示,市场预期美联储5月加息50基点的概率已经达到70.5%,这与美联储官员表态基本一致。而尤为值得注意的是,部分官员认为在下一次会议上美联储有必要开始缩减资产负债表。鲍威尔也重申了削减资产负债表的行动“可能最早在下一次5月份会议上开始,但现在我们还没有做出决定。”这预示着在最为极端的情况下,美联储下次会议可能同时刮起加息50个基点外加宣布缩减资产负债表的“双重鹰派风暴”。而随着美联储如今将越来越多的重心投向了抵御高通胀之下,甚至不惜以牺牲经济增速为代价地开始选择更为激进的紧缩路线,美债收益率曲线如今也愈发指向了经济衰退的可能性。自今年年初以来,10年期和两年期美债之间的收益率差已经缩小了约60个基点。若两者出现倒挂,通常被视为经济进入六至24个月衰退的前兆。就鲍威尔而言,其仍然乐观认为经济可以软着陆,达到较为可持续的成长水平――即通胀率从目前的7.9%降到略高于2%的目标水平,同时经济也不会出现萎缩。鲍威尔说,设计这种软着陆仍视有可能的,他指出过去60年来美联储曾三次实现了软着陆。不过,一些分析师当前表示,如果利率按照美联储预测的路径变化,经济最终料将倾向于陷入衰退――而不是美联储主席鲍威尔希望的“软着陆”。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":656,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9032335827,"gmtCreate":1647275491898,"gmtModify":1676534211135,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9032335827","repostId":"1191557560","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":598,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":887348091,"gmtCreate":1631983660213,"gmtModify":1676530682195,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/887348091","repostId":"1109542809","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":531,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9960787465,"gmtCreate":1668262242057,"gmtModify":1676538035093,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9960787465","repostId":"2282301544","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2282301544","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1668231437,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2282301544?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-11-12 13:37","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"The complexity far exceeds that of Lehman, one picture can understand the collapsed FTX empire","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2282301544","media":"华尔街见闻","summary":"雷曼兄弟的报告整理花了整整18个月的时间,但其结构看起来要简单直白地多。相比之下,人们可能要等更长的时间,才能对FTX的整体架构有更为详细和精确的了解。11月11日周五美股盘前,FTX根据美国破产法第","content":"<p><html><head></head><body><b>Lehman Brothers' report took 18 months to compile, but its structure seems much simpler and straightforward. In contrast, people may have to wait longer to have a more detailed and precise understanding of the overall architecture of FTX.</b>Before the U.S. stock market opened on Friday, November 11, FTX filed for bankruptcy protection in the U.S. federal court under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.</p><p>Also filing for bankruptcy are the suspected initiator of the storm-cryptocurrency hedge fund Alameda Research, and the FTX.US American independent platform whose operations and liquidity claimed to be completely unaffected by the FTX.com crash. They, along with roughly 130 affiliates that filed for bankruptcy, are collectively referred to as the \"FTX Group.\"</p><p><b>In this regard, SBF's huge capital empire completely collapsed.</b></p><p>Many people compare FTX's crash to the \"Lehman moment\" in the currency circle. However, the complexity of its empire structure far exceeds that of Lehman Brothers.</p><p>On Friday, the media put together a chart that shows the complex structure of the entire FTX group as of March this year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faff3d1e797206ee63b2f266cbacbc05\" tg-width=\"5512\" tg-height=\"3148\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/71967588ad9260cb10c7f37073f62c85\" tg-width=\"1544\" tg-height=\"821\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>There are a few companies that need special attention:</p><p><ul><li>FTX Trading LTD is incorporated in Antigua and Barbuda and is the underlying company identified in FTX's legal disclaimer, and the FTX exchange is held by FTX Trading LTD;</li><li>West Realm Shires Inc is a U.S.-oriented subsidiary (i.e. FTX.us), and it is also protected by the state of Delaware;</li><li>FTX Ventures Ltd, a Bahamas-registered venture capital fund wholly owned by Paper Bird, an unknown holding company in Delaware, which in turn is wholly owned by SBF; Paper Bird also appears to have an 89% stake in FTX Trading LTD and owns Alameda's intra-company loans;</li><li>Located at the bottom left of the chart, is the U.S. and Cayman Islands-based LedgerPrime entity, stemming from FTX's acquisition of hedge fund Ledger Holdings last year; FTX rebranded LedgerPrime's crypto futures platform as FTX US Derivatives LLC and said the remaining business would be restructured into a family office dedicated to investing in Alameda;</li><li>Salameda Ltd (Hong Kong), which is 100% controlled by FTX's CFO Jen Chan, appears to be a peripheral institution docking with Alameda entities through a service agreement.</li></ul>The media said that because the publicly disclosed information is fragmented, the above chart may not be completely accurate, and the complete chart should appear in the review report of Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. What can be known in advance is that its complexity is far greater than that of Lehman Brothers.</p><p><b>Lehman Brothers' report took 18 months to compile, but its structure seems much simpler and straightforward. In contrast, people may have to wait longer to have a more detailed and precise understanding of the overall architecture of FTX.</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4a13e1970352d5d4149fb123fbf38dd3\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"411\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>The full list of \"FTX Group\" is as follows:</p><p>1. Alameda Aus Pty Ltd 2. Alameda Global Services Ltd. 3. Alameda Research (Bahamas) Ltd. 4. Alameda Research Holdings Inc.5. Alameda Research KK6. Alameda Research LLC7. Alameda Research Ltd. 8. Alameda Research Pte Ltd. 9. Alameda Research Yankari Ltd 10. Alameda TR Ltd11. Alameda TR Systems S. de R. L.12. Allston Way Ltd. 13. Altalix Ltd. 14. Analisya Pte Ltd. 15. Atlantis Technology Ltd. 21. Bancroft Way Ltd28. Bitvo, Inc.29. Blockfolio Holdings, Inc.30. Blockfolio, Inc.31. Blue Ridge Ltd. 37. BTLS Limited Tanzania38. Cardinal Ventures Ltd. 39. Cedar Bay Ltd. 40. Cedar Grove Technology Services, Ltd. 41. Clifton Bay Investments LLC42. Clifton Bay Investments Ltd. 43. CM-Equity AG44. Corner Stone Staffing45. Cottonwood Grove Ltd. 46. Cottonwood Technologies Ltd. 47. Crypto Bahamas LLC48. DAAG Trading, DMCC49. Deck Technologies Holdings LLC50. Deck Technologies Inc.51. Deep Creek Ltd52. Digital Custody Inc.53. Euclid Way Ltd 60. FTX (Gibraltar) Ltd. 61. FTX Canada Inc62. FTX Certificates GmbH63. FTX Crypto Services Ltd. 64. FTX Digital Assets LLC65. FTX Digital Holdings (Singapore) Pte Ltd66. FTX EMEA Ltd.67. FTX Equity Record Holdings Ltd68. FTX Europe AG69. FTX Exchange FZE70. FTX Hong Kong Ltd. 71. FTX Japan Holdings K.K. 72. FTX Japan K.K. 73. FTX Japan Services KK74. FTX Lend Inc.75. FTX Marketplace, Inc.76. FTX Products (Singapore) Pte Ltd. 77. FTX Property Holdings Ltd. 78. FTX Services Solutions Ltd. 79. FTX Structure Products AG80. FTX Switzerland GmbH81. FTX Trading GmbH82. FTX Trading Ltd83. FTX TURKEY TEKNOLOJİVE TİCARET ANONİMŞİRKET84. FTX US Derivatives LLC85. FTX US Services, Inc.86. FTX US Trading, Inc87. FTX Vault Trust Company88. FTX Ventures Ltd89. FTX Ventures Partnership90. FTX Zuma Ltd91. GG Trading Terminal Ltd. 92. Global Compass Dynamics Ltd. 93. Good Luck Games, LLC94. Goodman Investments Ltd. 95. Hannam Group Inc96. Hawaii Digital Assets Inc.97. Hilltop Technology Services LLC98. Hive Empire Trading Pty Ltd99. Innovatia Ltd. 100. Island Bay Ventures Inc101. K-DNA Financial Services Ltd 102. Killarney Lake Investments Ltd 103. Ledger Holdings Inc.104. LedgerPrime Bitcoin Yield Enhancement Fund, LLC105. LedgerPrime Bitcoin Yield Enhancement Master Fund LP106. LedgerPrime Digital Asset Opportunities Fund, LLC107. LedgerPrime Digital Asset Opportunities Master Fund LP108. Ledger Prime LLC109. LedgerPrime Ventures, LP110. Liquid Financial USA Inc.111. LiquidEX LLC112. Liquid Securities Singapore Pte Ltd 113. LT Baskets Ltd. 114. Maclaurin Investments Ltd. Mangrove Cay Ltd 116. North Dimension Inc117. North Dimension Ltd. 118. North Wireless Dimension Inc119. Paper Bird Inc120. Pioneer Street Inc.121. Quoine India Pte Ltd. 122. Quoine Pte Ltd. 123. Quoine Vietnam Co. Ltd 124. SNG INVESTMENTS YATIRIM VE DANIŞMANLIK ANONİM ŞİRKETİ 125. Strategy Ark Collective Ltd. 126. Technology Services Bahamas Limited127. Tigetwit Ltd. 129. Verdant Canyon Capital LLC130. West Innovative Barista Ltd. 131. West Realm Shires Financial Services Inc.132. West Realm Shires Services Inc.133. Western Concord Enterprises Ltd. 134. Zubr Exchange Ltd Risk Warning and Disclaimer</p><p>The market is risky, so investment needs to be cautious. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account the special investment objectives, financial situation or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, opinions or conclusions in this article are appropriate for their particular circumstances. Invest accordingly at your own responsibility.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"wallstreetcn_api","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The complexity far exceeds that of Lehman, one picture can understand the collapsed FTX empire</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe complexity far exceeds that of Lehman, one picture can understand the collapsed FTX empire\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">华尔街见闻</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-11-12 13:37</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body><b>Lehman Brothers' report took 18 months to compile, but its structure seems much simpler and straightforward. In contrast, people may have to wait longer to have a more detailed and precise understanding of the overall architecture of FTX.</b>Before the U.S. stock market opened on Friday, November 11, FTX filed for bankruptcy protection in the U.S. federal court under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.</p><p>Also filing for bankruptcy are the suspected initiator of the storm-cryptocurrency hedge fund Alameda Research, and the FTX.US American independent platform whose operations and liquidity claimed to be completely unaffected by the FTX.com crash. They, along with roughly 130 affiliates that filed for bankruptcy, are collectively referred to as the \"FTX Group.\"</p><p><b>In this regard, SBF's huge capital empire completely collapsed.</b></p><p>Many people compare FTX's crash to the \"Lehman moment\" in the currency circle. However, the complexity of its empire structure far exceeds that of Lehman Brothers.</p><p>On Friday, the media put together a chart that shows the complex structure of the entire FTX group as of March this year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faff3d1e797206ee63b2f266cbacbc05\" tg-width=\"5512\" tg-height=\"3148\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/71967588ad9260cb10c7f37073f62c85\" tg-width=\"1544\" tg-height=\"821\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>There are a few companies that need special attention:</p><p><ul><li>FTX Trading LTD is incorporated in Antigua and Barbuda and is the underlying company identified in FTX's legal disclaimer, and the FTX exchange is held by FTX Trading LTD;</li><li>West Realm Shires Inc is a U.S.-oriented subsidiary (i.e. FTX.us), and it is also protected by the state of Delaware;</li><li>FTX Ventures Ltd, a Bahamas-registered venture capital fund wholly owned by Paper Bird, an unknown holding company in Delaware, which in turn is wholly owned by SBF; Paper Bird also appears to have an 89% stake in FTX Trading LTD and owns Alameda's intra-company loans;</li><li>Located at the bottom left of the chart, is the U.S. and Cayman Islands-based LedgerPrime entity, stemming from FTX's acquisition of hedge fund Ledger Holdings last year; FTX rebranded LedgerPrime's crypto futures platform as FTX US Derivatives LLC and said the remaining business would be restructured into a family office dedicated to investing in Alameda;</li><li>Salameda Ltd (Hong Kong), which is 100% controlled by FTX's CFO Jen Chan, appears to be a peripheral institution docking with Alameda entities through a service agreement.</li></ul>The media said that because the publicly disclosed information is fragmented, the above chart may not be completely accurate, and the complete chart should appear in the review report of Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. What can be known in advance is that its complexity is far greater than that of Lehman Brothers.</p><p><b>Lehman Brothers' report took 18 months to compile, but its structure seems much simpler and straightforward. In contrast, people may have to wait longer to have a more detailed and precise understanding of the overall architecture of FTX.</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4a13e1970352d5d4149fb123fbf38dd3\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"411\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>The full list of \"FTX Group\" is as follows:</p><p>1. Alameda Aus Pty Ltd 2. Alameda Global Services Ltd. 3. Alameda Research (Bahamas) Ltd. 4. Alameda Research Holdings Inc.5. Alameda Research KK6. Alameda Research LLC7. Alameda Research Ltd. 8. Alameda Research Pte Ltd. 9. Alameda Research Yankari Ltd 10. Alameda TR Ltd11. Alameda TR Systems S. de R. L.12. Allston Way Ltd. 13. Altalix Ltd. 14. Analisya Pte Ltd. 15. Atlantis Technology Ltd. 21. Bancroft Way Ltd28. Bitvo, Inc.29. Blockfolio Holdings, Inc.30. Blockfolio, Inc.31. Blue Ridge Ltd. 37. BTLS Limited Tanzania38. Cardinal Ventures Ltd. 39. Cedar Bay Ltd. 40. Cedar Grove Technology Services, Ltd. 41. Clifton Bay Investments LLC42. Clifton Bay Investments Ltd. 43. CM-Equity AG44. Corner Stone Staffing45. Cottonwood Grove Ltd. 46. Cottonwood Technologies Ltd. 47. Crypto Bahamas LLC48. DAAG Trading, DMCC49. Deck Technologies Holdings LLC50. Deck Technologies Inc.51. Deep Creek Ltd52. Digital Custody Inc.53. Euclid Way Ltd 60. FTX (Gibraltar) Ltd. 61. FTX Canada Inc62. FTX Certificates GmbH63. FTX Crypto Services Ltd. 64. FTX Digital Assets LLC65. FTX Digital Holdings (Singapore) Pte Ltd66. FTX EMEA Ltd.67. FTX Equity Record Holdings Ltd68. FTX Europe AG69. FTX Exchange FZE70. FTX Hong Kong Ltd. 71. FTX Japan Holdings K.K. 72. FTX Japan K.K. 73. FTX Japan Services KK74. FTX Lend Inc.75. FTX Marketplace, Inc.76. FTX Products (Singapore) Pte Ltd. 77. FTX Property Holdings Ltd. 78. FTX Services Solutions Ltd. 79. FTX Structure Products AG80. FTX Switzerland GmbH81. FTX Trading GmbH82. FTX Trading Ltd83. FTX TURKEY TEKNOLOJİVE TİCARET ANONİMŞİRKET84. FTX US Derivatives LLC85. FTX US Services, Inc.86. FTX US Trading, Inc87. FTX Vault Trust Company88. FTX Ventures Ltd89. FTX Ventures Partnership90. FTX Zuma Ltd91. GG Trading Terminal Ltd. 92. Global Compass Dynamics Ltd. 93. Good Luck Games, LLC94. Goodman Investments Ltd. 95. Hannam Group Inc96. Hawaii Digital Assets Inc.97. Hilltop Technology Services LLC98. Hive Empire Trading Pty Ltd99. Innovatia Ltd. 100. Island Bay Ventures Inc101. K-DNA Financial Services Ltd 102. Killarney Lake Investments Ltd 103. Ledger Holdings Inc.104. LedgerPrime Bitcoin Yield Enhancement Fund, LLC105. LedgerPrime Bitcoin Yield Enhancement Master Fund LP106. LedgerPrime Digital Asset Opportunities Fund, LLC107. LedgerPrime Digital Asset Opportunities Master Fund LP108. Ledger Prime LLC109. LedgerPrime Ventures, LP110. Liquid Financial USA Inc.111. LiquidEX LLC112. Liquid Securities Singapore Pte Ltd 113. LT Baskets Ltd. 114. Maclaurin Investments Ltd. Mangrove Cay Ltd 116. North Dimension Inc117. North Dimension Ltd. 118. North Wireless Dimension Inc119. Paper Bird Inc120. Pioneer Street Inc.121. Quoine India Pte Ltd. 122. Quoine Pte Ltd. 123. Quoine Vietnam Co. Ltd 124. SNG INVESTMENTS YATIRIM VE DANIŞMANLIK ANONİM ŞİRKETİ 125. Strategy Ark Collective Ltd. 126. Technology Services Bahamas Limited127. Tigetwit Ltd. 129. Verdant Canyon Capital LLC130. West Innovative Barista Ltd. 131. West Realm Shires Financial Services Inc.132. West Realm Shires Services Inc.133. Western Concord Enterprises Ltd. 134. Zubr Exchange Ltd Risk Warning and Disclaimer</p><p>The market is risky, so investment needs to be cautious. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account the special investment objectives, financial situation or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, opinions or conclusions in this article are appropriate for their particular circumstances. Invest accordingly at your own responsibility.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3674794\">华尔街见闻</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1f1a26bb817de6639ca261862fe02525","relate_stocks":{"CRCT":"Cricut, Inc.","ONTF":"ON24, Inc.","SANA":"Sana Biotechnology, Inc.","BK4539":"次新股","BK4196":"保健护理服务","CGEM":"Cullinan Therapeutics","BK4191":"家用电器","BK4023":"应用软件","BK4082":"医疗保健设备","BOLT":"Bolt Biotherapeutics, Inc.","LABP":"Landos Biopharma, Inc.","LHDX":"Lucira Health, Inc.","BK4139":"生物科技","BK4007":"制药","TERN":"Terns Pharmaceuticals, Inc."},"source_url":"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3674794","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2282301544","content_text":"雷曼兄弟的报告整理花了整整18个月的时间,但其结构看起来要简单直白地多。相比之下,人们可能要等更长的时间,才能对FTX的整体架构有更为详细和精确的了解。11月11日周五美股盘前,FTX根据美国破产法第11章向美国联邦法院申请破产保护。一同申请破产的还有疑似风暴的始作俑者——加密货币对冲基金Alameda Research,以及号称运营和流动性完全未受FTX.com崩盘影响的FTX.US美国独立平台。它们连同大约130家申请破产的附属公司被统称为“FTX集团”。就此,SBF的庞大资本帝国彻底陨落。很多人将FTX的崩盘比作币圈的“雷曼时刻”,然而,其帝国构造的复杂程度远远超过了雷曼兄弟。周五,媒体整理了一份图表,图表显示了截至今年3月整个FTX集团的复杂结构。有几家公司需要特别注意:FTX Trading LTD在安提瓜和巴布达注册成立,是FTX法律免责声明中确定的基础公司,FTX交易所就由 FTX Trading LTD 所持有;West Realm Shires Inc是面向美国的子公司(即FTX.us),它还受到特拉华州的保护;在巴哈马注册的风险投资基金FTX Ventures Ltd,由特拉华州一家不知名控股公司 Paper Bird 全资持有,而 Paper Bird 又由SBF全资持有;Paper Bird 似乎还持有FTX Trading LTD 89%的股份,并拥有 Alameda 的公司内部贷款;位于图表左下方的,是总部位于美国和开曼群岛的 LedgerPrime 实体,源于FTX去年对对冲基金 Ledger Holdings 的收购;FTX将 LedgerPrime 的加密货币期货平台重新命名为 FTX US Derivatives LLC,并表示剩余业务将重组成一个家族办公室,专门为 Alameda 进行投资;Salameda Ltd(香港)由FTX的CFO Jen Chan 100%控股,似乎是通过服务协议与 Alameda 实体进行对接的外围机构。媒体表示,由于公开披露的信息是零散的,上述图表不一定完全准确,完整图表应该会在美国破产法第11章的审查报告中出现。可以预先知道的是,其复杂程度要远远超过雷曼兄弟。雷曼兄弟的报告整理花了整整18个月的时间,但其结构看起来要简单直白地多。相比之下,人们可能要等待更长的时间,才能对FTX的整体架构有更为详细和精确的了解。“FTX集团”的完整名单如下:1. Alameda Aus Pty Ltd2. Alameda Global Services Ltd.3. Alameda Research (Bahamas) Ltd4. Alameda Research Holdings Inc.5. Alameda Research KK6. Alameda Research LLC7. Alameda Research Ltd8. Alameda Research Pte Ltd9. Alameda Research Yankari Ltd10. Alameda TR Ltd11. Alameda TR Systems S. de R. L.12. Allston Way Ltd13. Altalix Ltd14. Analisya Pte Ltd15. Atlantis Technology Ltd.21. Bancroft Way Ltd28. Bitvo, Inc.29. Blockfolio Holdings, Inc.30. Blockfolio, Inc.31. Blue Ridge Ltd37. BTLS Limited Tanzania38. Cardinal Ventures Ltd39. Cedar Bay Ltd40. Cedar Grove Technology Services, Ltd41. Clifton Bay Investments LLC42. Clifton Bay Investments Ltd43. CM-Equity AG44. Corner Stone Staffing45. Cottonwood Grove Ltd46. Cottonwood Technologies Ltd.47. Crypto Bahamas LLC48. DAAG Trading, DMCC49. Deck Technologies Holdings LLC50. Deck Technologies Inc.51. Deep Creek Ltd52. Digital Custody Inc.53. Euclid Way Ltd60. FTX (Gibraltar) Ltd61. FTX Canada Inc62. FTX Certificates GmbH63. FTX Crypto Services Ltd.64. FTX Digital Assets LLC65. FTX Digital Holdings (Singapore) Pte Ltd66. FTX EMEA Ltd.67. FTX Equity Record Holdings Ltd68. FTX Europe AG69. FTX Exchange FZE70. FTX Hong Kong Ltd71. FTX Japan Holdings K.K.72. FTX Japan K.K.73. FTX Japan Services KK74. FTX Lend Inc.75. FTX Marketplace, Inc.76. FTX Products (Singapore) Pte Ltd77. FTX Property Holdings Ltd78. FTX Services Solutions Ltd.79. FTX Structured Products AG80. FTX Switzerland GmbH81. FTX Trading GmbH82. FTX Trading Ltd83. FTX TURKEY TEKNOLOJİ VE TİCARET ANONİM ŞİRKET84. FTX US Derivatives LLC85. FTX US Services, Inc.86. FTX US Trading, Inc87. FTX Vault Trust Company88. FTX Ventures Ltd89. FTX Ventures Partnership90. FTX Zuma Ltd91. GG Trading Terminal Ltd92. Global Compass Dynamics Ltd.93. Good Luck Games, LLC94. Goodman Investments Ltd.95. Hannam Group Inc96. Hawaii Digital Assets Inc.97. Hilltop Technology Services LLC98. Hive Empire Trading Pty Ltd99. Innovatia Ltd100. Island Bay Ventures Inc101. K-DNA Financial Services Ltd102. Killarney Lake Investments Ltd103. Ledger Holdings Inc.104. LedgerPrime Bitcoin Yield Enhancement Fund, LLC105. LedgerPrime Bitcoin Yield Enhancement Master Fund LP106. LedgerPrime Digital Asset Opportunities Fund, LLC107. LedgerPrime Digital Asset Opportunities Master Fund LP108. Ledger Prime LLC109. LedgerPrime Ventures, LP110. Liquid Financial USA Inc.111. LiquidEX LLC112. Liquid Securities Singapore Pte Ltd113. LT Baskets Ltd.114. Maclaurin Investments Ltd.115. Mangrove Cay Ltd116. North Dimension Inc117. North Dimension Ltd118. North Wireless Dimension Inc119. Paper Bird Inc120. Pioneer Street Inc.121. Quoine India Pte Ltd122. Quoine Pte Ltd123. Quoine Vietnam Co. Ltd124. SNG INVESTMENTS YATIRIM VE DANIŞMANLIK ANONİM ŞİRKETİ125. Strategy Ark Collective Ltd.126. Technology Services Bahamas Limited127. Tigetwit Ltd129. Verdant Canyon Capital LLC130. West Innovative Barista Ltd.131. West Realm Shires Financial Services Inc.132. West Realm Shires Services Inc.133. Western Concord Enterprises Ltd.134. Zubr Exchange Ltd风险提示及免责条款市场有风险,投资需谨慎。本文不构成个人投资建议,也未考虑到个别用户特殊的投资目标、财务状况或需要。用户应考虑本文中的任何意见、观点或结论是否符合其特定状况。据此投资,责任自负。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"VIRI":0.9,"LABP":0.9,"CGEM":0.9,"TERN":0.9,"CRCT":0.9,"APR":0.9,"BOLT":0.9,"LHDX":0.9,"ONTF":0.79,"SANA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":674,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9912089762,"gmtCreate":1664704317156,"gmtModify":1676537496522,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9912089762","repostId":"1100486117","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1100486117","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"追踪海内外最新宏观政策和经济走势,分享来自莫尼塔宏观团队的最新观点。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"钟正生经济分析","id":"70","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/86f6d9605fc344e28cd4247a93dcdc2b"},"pubTimestamp":1664674529,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1100486117?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-10-02 09:35","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Rethink the \"Great Stagflation\" in the United States! Also on the enlightenment to the current asset price","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1100486117","media":"钟正生经济分析","summary":"一、高通胀的复杂性。1970-80年代美国高通胀的成因是极为复杂的:首先,财政和货币刺激过度,初步推升通胀;然后,粗暴的价格管制与犹豫的货币政策,未能有效浇灭通胀;再者,以两次石油危机为代表的供给冲击","content":"<p><html><head></head><body><b>1. The complexity of high inflation.</b>The causes of high inflation in the United States from 1970s to 1980s were extremely complicated: first, excessive fiscal and monetary stimulus initially pushed up inflation; Then, rude price control and hesitant monetary policy failed to effectively douse inflation; Furthermore, supply shocks represented by the two oil crises triggered cost-push inflation; Finally, the long-term overshoot inflation rate destabilizes inflation expectations, triggers a wage-price spiral, and deepens the obstinacy of inflation.</p><p><b>Second, the Fed's \"faults\" and \"merits\".</b>From 1970 to 1979, the Federal Reserve was not resolute enough in tightening for many reasons: first, the Federal Reserve once believed that inflation was a \"non-monetary phenomenon\"; Second, the primary goal of the Federal Reserve at that time was \"full employment\" rather than \"price stability\"; Finally, the Fed's decision-making is also influenced by political factors. After 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker absorbed the concept of the \"monetary school\", regarded curbing inflation as its own responsibility, strengthened its rate hike and controlled the money supply. Since then, the Federal Reserve has been committed to stabilizing inflation expectations for a long time, reshaping its credibility.</p><p><b>3. \"Soft landing\" and \"hard landing\".</b>From 1970s to 1980s, there were four rounds of economic recessions in the United States, which can be divided into two \"soft landings\" (1970 and 1980) and two \"hard landings\" (1973-75 and 1981-82). The result of the combined effect of high inflation, high interest rates and supply shocks. However, the conditions for achieving a \"soft landing\" are relatively harsh: first, the CPI inflation rate may need to fall in time in the early stage of the recession; Secondly, the Fed's rate hike cannot be too aggressive, and even needs to cut interest rates in time when a recession comes; Finally, if a new supply shock occurs, a \"hard landing\" may be more difficult to avoid.</p><p><b>4. Clues to asset prices.</b>In the 1970s and 1980s, inflation became the vane of the capital market. The U.S. CPI inflation rate has peaked three times in stages, and U.S. stocks have bottomed out in stages. But in this process, the market has a process of understanding and digesting the inflation situation and the logic of monetary policy. Over time, the U.S. bond market has traded less \"recession\" and more \"austerity.\" In the \"Volcker era\" after 1980, monetary policy began to become the key clue of asset prices. After the end of the \"Great Stagflation\", safe-haven assets such as the US dollar still performed positively for a long time.</p><p><b>5. New enlightenment to the present.</b>First, the causes of this round of inflation in the United States have many similarities with those in the 1970s and 1980s, but the overall pressure is more limited; Second, although the Federal Reserve has \"made mistakes\" in this round, it has taken the initiative in fighting inflation; Third, this round of U.S. economic recession is almost inevitable, and there is a risk of a \"hard landing\"; Fourthly, the price trend of this round of major asset classes may be strongly similar to that of 1970s and 1980s:<b>1)</b>U.S. stocks: Inflation is still the core influencing factor, and there will still be adjustment pressure in the future, but the adjustment may not be too deep, and the rebound may wait for the recession to materialize.<b>2)</b>U.S. debt: Monetary policy is still the core influencing factor, and it may not fall back immediately when the recession materializes. It needs to wait until monetary policy clearly begins to relax.<b>3)</b>US dollar: The \"strong US dollar\" may last for a long time, and the US dollar may require US Treasury yields to fall back.</p><p><i>Risk warning: The U.S. economy is weaker than expected, there are new supply shocks, and non-U.S. financial risks are rising.</i></p><p>Since 2022, the U.S. CPI inflation rate once rose above 9%, real GDP has shrunk for two consecutive quarters, the (quasi-) stagflation characteristics of the economy have become more distinct, and the capital market has also experienced large fluctuations. Since the Jackson Hole meeting in late August, the Federal Reserve has repeatedly mentioned \"historical experience\" on various occasions, indicating that the current economic environment in the United States is very similar to that in the 1970s and 1980s, and the Federal Reserve will also fully learn from the response experience at that time and do something. Something is not done in order to help the United States overcome \"stagflation.\"</p><p>What is the current inflationary pressure in the United States? How will monetary policy respond? Can the U.S. economy still achieve a \"soft landing\"? When will the capital market usher in \"spring\"? In this report, with questions about the present, we review the inflation, monetary policy, economic growth and asset price performance during the \"Great Stagflation\" period in the United States from 1970s to 1980s, and try to understand the logic and laws, with a view to judging the U.S. economy, monetary policy and market trends in the future.</p><p><b>01. The complexity of high inflation</b></p><p><b>The causes of high inflation in the United States from 1970s to 1980s were extremely complicated: first, excessive fiscal and monetary stimulus initially pushed up inflation; Then, rude price control and hesitant monetary policy failed to effectively douse inflation; Furthermore, supply shocks represented by the two oil crises triggered cost-push inflation; Finally, the long-term overshoot inflation rate destabilizes inflation expectations, triggers a wage-price spiral, and deepens the obstinacy of inflation.</b></p><p><b>From 1969 to 1982, the United States fell into a crisis of high inflation. The CPI inflation rate was generally higher than 5%, with the highest reaching 14.8%.</b>The year-on-year growth rate of CPI in the United States has risen rapidly at a rate of more than 3% since 1968. In March 1969, the CPI exceeded 5% year-on-year, and the 13-year era of \"high inflation\" began. From 1969 to 1982, there were three peaks in the year-on-year growth rate of U.S. CPI, with the peaks in January 1970 (6.2%), December 1974 (12.3%) and March 1980 (14.8%). In February 1982, the CPI fell below 5% year-on-year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0135dfd0a18c15e058312be783380d12\" tg-width=\"1066\" tg-height=\"490\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1965 to 1970, blind fiscal and monetary expansion gave birth to higher inflation.</b>With the end of economic reconstruction after World War II and the rise of European and Asian economies, the economic growth momentum of the United States has weakened, but blind stimulation at the policy level has led to obvious overheating of the economy. From 1965 to 1970, the real GDP growth rate of the United States continued to be higher than the potential growth rate, and the output gap (the difference between real GDP and potential GDP) accounted for as much as 3-6% of potential GDP. In other words, 3-6 percentage points of the U.S. economic growth rate at that time were stimulated by policies. During this period, the natural unemployment rate in the United States was 5.6-5.9%, but the actual unemployment rate basically remained within 4%. At that time, the role of fiscal stimulus was stronger than that of money. The proportion of U.S. federal fiscal expenditure to GDP increased by 3.2 percentage points from 1966 to 68, and the deficit ratio expanded from 0.2% in 1965 to 2.8% in 1968. In 1968, the U.S. government began to worry about fiscal balance. Then President Johnson signed the \"Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968\" in June to supplement fiscal revenue by increasing taxes. The Federal Reserve \"technically cut interest rates\" in August of the same year to hedge against the impact of tax increases, adding to the overheating of the economy.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb7621fa84eb213f441091515980951c\" tg-width=\"1077\" tg-height=\"426\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1971 to 74, rough price controls turned \"short pain\" into \"long pain\".</b>In August 1971, the Nixon administration imposed a 90-day wage and price freeze. But in fact, the scope of price control continued to expand, and it was not until 1974 that the U.S. government completely canceled its intervention in prices. During this period, except for special circumstances, all price increases of goods and services need to be approved by the government. In mid-1972, the U.S. CPI inflation rate fell below 3%. This price control is regarded as a special case of comprehensive government intervention in prices in peacetime in American economic history, and it is also regarded as a failed attempt. This is because, while the price limit measures curbed the price increase, they also severely dampened the enthusiasm of production enterprises, resulting in insufficient supply of social commodities, and paving the way for the subsequent deterioration of inflation. In 1974, Nixon stepped down due to the Watergate Incident, and the new President Carter came to power, and the price control measures gradually failed. Slightly funny, both the Nixon and Carter administrations tried to control prices through verbal \"exhortation\". For example, when Carter first came to power, he encouraged people to buy \"bargains\": \"Dare to show off to others, choose bargains yourself, and be proud of them\". These admonitions are almost futile in controlling prices. The U.S. CPI inflation rate broke 5% again in April 1973, and has since reached a stage high of 12.3% in December 1974.</p><p><b>A food crisis and two oil crises in 1973 and 1979 demonstrated the destructive power of supply shocks on American prices.</b>In 1973, the grain harvest in the former Soviet Union failed due to bad weather, and then entered the international market to buy a large amount of grain, which triggered the most serious food crisis since World War II. At the end of 1973, the year-on-year growth rate of U.S. food CPI once rose above 20%. From October 1973 to March 1974, the first oil crisis broke out: the members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, led by Saudi Arabia, announced an oil embargo on countries that supported Israel during the Yom Kippur War, with the United States bearing the brunt. The average price of crude oil at the World Bank jumped from US $2.7/barrel in September 1973 to US $13/barrel in early 1974, an increase of nearly 500%. From March to September 1974, the year-on-year growth rate of U.S. energy CPI exceeded 30%. From the beginning of 1979 to the beginning of 1980, the second oil crisis broke out: the Islamic Revolution broke out in Iran, and then the \"Iran-Iraq War\" broke out between Iran and Iraq, which led to a sharp drop in global oil production. World Bank international oil prices rose from less than US $15/barrel in December 1978 to more than US $40/barrel in November 1979. In March 1980, the U.S. energy CPI peaked at 47.1% year-on-year, and the U.S. CPI immediately peaked at 14.8% year-on-year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/368b46087ff151100ed782e7aa94b78d\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1970 to 1980, after the headline inflation rate in the United States continued to overshoot, inflation expectations got out of control. With the help of trade unions, a \"wage-price spiral\" gradually formed.</b>After the CPI inflation rate has been higher than 2% or even higher than 5% for many years, American residents have lost their original confidence in prices and inflation expectations have risen. At that time, both the Fed and the market had limited awareness and tracking of inflation expectations. The widely quoted University of Michigan survey and Cleveland Fed model expectations were only born around 1980. The earliest inflation expectation monitoring tool in the United States was The Livingston Survey, which was born in 1946, and summarized inflation forecasts from businesses, governments, banking, and academia. The survey shows that inflation expectations in the United States have gradually increased since 1970, especially after the two oil crises, and inflation expectations have also risen sharply with the headline inflation rate. The reverse impact of inflation expectations on prices is mainly transmitted through wages: workers demand wage increases, and then the spending power of residents and the cost pressure of enterprises rise, which at the same time contributes to price increases, that is, a \"wage-price spiral\" is formed.<b>In particular, in the 1970s, American trade unions were huge, and the transmission of wage demands was relatively smooth:</b>According to the data of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), at that time, trade union members in the United States accounted for nearly 30% of the total employees in the society, and there were as many as 200-400 strikes by more than 1,000 people every year (since 2000, this number has been less than 30 all the year round). From mid-1976 to mid-1978, the CPI inflation rate in the United States fell back to around 5-7%, but the average hourly wage of non-agricultural and non-managerial personnel in the United States increased by 6-8% year-on-year, which continued to be higher than the CPI inflation rate. The stickiness of wage increases prevented inflation from falling further and paved the way for a subsequent rebound in inflation.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fa062f9510e45fda47f5e682ec9ba17b\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1970 to 79, the Federal Reserve's policy response was relatively negative, continuing to \"lag behind the curve\" and failing to effectively curb inflation.</b>Before 1980, U.S. policy interest rates and inflation trends showed strong synchronization, reflecting that the Federal Reserve had been \"lagging behind the curve\" and \"catching up with the curve\" for a long time. In May 1969, the third month after the inflation rate exceeded 5%, the U.S. policy interest rate began to rise significantly and exceeded the inflation rate by more than 3 percentage points. After that, the inflation rate kept rising for about half a year before it began to fall. In the second half of 1973, while the inflation rate in the United States was still rising, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates due to economic pressure, and then the inflation rate accelerated. In 1978, the U.S. policy interest rate was basically the same as the inflation rate, and kept rising step by step. Until December 1978, the monthly federal funds rate rose above 10% and was 1 percentage point higher than the inflation rate, but soon the policy interest rate began to lag behind the inflation rate. Later, when the U.S. policy interest rate was significantly higher than the spot inflation rate, inflation dropped significantly, and the Federal Reserve took the initiative in curbing inflation: after 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker raised interest rates sharply to fight inflation; In mid-1981, the U.S. policy interest rate reached a peak of more than 19%. In October of the same year, the CPI fell both month-on-month and year-on-year; Since then, Federal Funds rate has continued to be 4-9 percentage points higher than the CPI inflation rate, and the inflation rate has continued to fall.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/707eeb51701422548c5e1b935b53479d\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"418\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>02. The Federal Reserve's \"faults\" and \"merits\"</b></p><p><b>From 1970 to 1979, the Federal Reserve was not resolute enough in tightening due to insufficient understanding of the relationship between inflation and monetary policy, as well as the lack of independence of monetary policy. After 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker absorbed the concept of the \"monetary school\", regarded curbing inflation as its own responsibility, strengthened its rate hike and controlled the money supply. Since then, the Federal Reserve has been committed to stabilizing inflation expectations for a long time, reshaping its credibility.</b></p><p><b>2.1. Reasons for the Fed's hesitation</b></p><p><b>From 1970 to 1979, the Federal Reserve continued to \"lag behind the curve\" for many reasons.</b></p><p><b>First, the Federal Reserve once considered inflation a \"non-monetary phenomenon.\"</b>At that time, the Federal Reserve was divided on the causes of high inflation, and tended to believe that inflation was mainly caused by non-monetary factors, and then monetary policy chose to respond negatively. For example, in 1970, the Federal Reserve led by Burns believed that the power of trade unions triggered cost-push inflation, and then advocated the use of \"income policy\" regulation rather than tightening the money supply. It also fueled the wage and price freeze later imposed by the Nixon administration. In 1974, Burns also believed that \"improper fiscal discipline\" was the main cause of inflation.</p><p><b>Second, the Fed's primary goal at that time was \"full employment\" rather than \"price stability.\"</b>Before the 1970s, Keynesian ideas dominated the logic of monetary policy. The Federal Reserve focused on aggregate demand management and firmly believed in the existence of the Phillips curve (the negative correlation between unemployment rate and inflation). Therefore, the primary goal of the Federal Reserve's monetary policy is to achieve \"full employment\", hoping to maintain a low and stable unemployment rate. Then, when the unemployment rate rises, the balance of monetary policy is tilted more towards the job market. When \"stagnation\" and \"inflation\" occurred at the same time, the Federal Reserve once believed that inflation would not continue to worsen. For example, Miller's Federal Reserve in 1978-79 believed that monetary easing would not deepen inflation as long as the unemployment rate was above full employment levels (above 5.5%).</p><p><b>Finally, the Fed's decision-making is also influenced by political factors.</b>Burns, who served as chairman from 1970 to 1978, and Miller, who served from 1978 to 79, were both influenced by the then president and lacked independence, wavering in balancing the relationship between inflation and economic growth. In hindsight, the Fed's tolerance for inflation in the 1970s may be exactly what the rulers wanted to see: on the one hand, the rulers did not want the Fed to undermine economic growth and affect votes by curbing inflation; On the other hand, higher inflation is also regarded as a hidden tax means, because the increase of nominal wages increases the progression of the whole tax system, resulting in a sharp increase in fiscal revenue. Data show that the proportion of personal income tax in GDP in the United States increased significantly during the periods of high inflation in 1969-70, 1974 and 1979-83.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/85870c4ece63c7cae63758bc6db5a828\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>2.2. The achievements of the Volcker era</b></p><p><b>After 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker absorbed the concept of the \"monetary school\" and took curbing inflation as its own responsibility. It firmly conducted rate hike and controlled the money supply. Although it \"created\" an economic recession, it finally defeated inflation.</b>In August, 1979, Volcker became the chairman of the Federal Reserve. He adopted the \"monetary school\" view represented by Friedman. The Federal Reserve led by him made it more clear that monetary policy was the core position of price stability, and incorporated the growth rate of money supply (M1) into the monetary policy goal, followed by a substantial rate hike, which made the Federal Funds rate higher than the CPI inflation rate, so as to achieve the goal of controlling money supply. In March 1980, Volcker carried out an ill-advised but short-lived experiment of credit control (the \"Special Credit Restriction Program\") in order to slow down the rate hike, but then restarted monetary policy tightening, and finally pushed Federal Funds rate to a peak of more than 20% in mid-1981. Although the sharp rate hike brought about the economic recession, it ultimately helped inflation fall.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7ab3004dd4948baa80533fe718adebaf\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"422\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>In addition, in the era of Volcker and Greenspan, the Federal Reserve established a new \"nominal anchor\" to stabilize inflation expectations and reshape the credibility of the Federal Reserve. This is also an important background for U.S. prices to return to long-term stability in the future.</b>In the 1980s, after experiencing the \"great stagflation\", the original expectation of price stability suffered serious damage. Even in the Volcker era, when the Federal Reserve defined its money supply target and firmly raised interest rates, the credibility of monetary policy was still questioned. It is not clear to the public whether the Fed can maintain its focus on inflation for a long time and have the ability to influence medium and long-term price trends. Therefore, Volcker and his next Federal Reserve President Greenspan are more committed to reconstructing stable inflation expectations, making them the \"nominal anchor\" of monetary policy, and ultimately re-establishing the credibility of monetary policy.</p><p><b>This is a complicated and long process: Volcker's experience of defeating inflation was a good starting point, and then the Fed shifted from money supply targeting to \"hidden inflation targeting.\"</b>In practice, the Federal Reserve focuses on the \"growth gap\" and the \"inflation expectation gap\" at the same time. In fact, it sets policy interest rates through the Taylor Rule, pursues stable medium-and long-term inflation targets, and achieves stable economic growth. In terms of inflation expectation management, the Federal Reserve monitors inflation expectations through changes in bond yields, and at the same time strengthens communication with the capital market, which enhances the credibility of monetary policy and the stability of market expectations. The monetary policy framework after the Volcker era achieved long-term results in price stability, creating the later era of Great Moderation (1984-2007).</p><p><b>03. \"Soft landing\" and \"hard landing\"</b></p><p><b>From 1970s to 1980s, there were four rounds of economic recessions in the United States, which were the result of the combined effects of high inflation, high interest rates and supply shocks. High inflation has a direct inhibitory effect on consumption, and drives the Federal Reserve to rate hike and further curb investment. Therefore, the degree of recession depends on the severity of inflation and the response of monetary policy, and the conditions for achieving a \"soft landing\" are relatively harsh.</b></p><p><b>3.1. The three major drivers of economic recession</b></p><p><b>According to the classification of the National Economic Research Bureau (NBER), the U.S. economy experienced four rounds of recessions from 1970s to 1980s:</b></p><p><ul><li><b>The first round was from January to November 1970 (11 months).</b>The real GDP of the United States fell from 3.2% in 1969 to 0.2% in 1970, but the economy hardly shrank. However, the unemployment rate in the United States rose significantly, from 3.5% in December 1969 to 6.1% in December 1970 (a stage high), and remained above 5% for the next 24 months.</p><p></li><li><b>The second round was from December 1973 to March 1975 (16 months).</b>The real GDP of the United States fell off a cliff from 5.6% year-on-year in 1973, and shrank year-on-year for five consecutive quarters, with the deepest quarterly year-on-year contraction reaching 2.3%. The unemployment rate in the United States has been higher than 7% for 31 consecutive months, rising from a low of 4.6% in October 1973 to 9.0% in May 1975, and then declining slowly.</p><p></li><li><b>The third round was from February to July 1980 (6 months).</b>The annualized rate of real GDP in the United States shrank sharply by 8% in the second quarter of 1980, but only by 0.8% year-on-year. During this period, the unemployment rate in the United States rose from 6.3% to 7.8%. In the second half of 1980, the U.S. economy immediately began to recover. In the fourth quarter, GDP rose sharply by 7.7% month-on-month, and the unemployment rate began to fall in August.</p><p></li><li><b>The fourth round was from August 1981 to November 1982 (16 months)</b>。 The real GDP of the United States has shrunk year-on-year for four consecutive quarters, with the deepest contraction of 2.6%. The unemployment rate in the United States began to rebound significantly from a stage low of 7.2% in August 1981, exceeded 8% in November of the same year, reached a peak of 10.8% in November 1982, and then slowly fell back, falling below 8% in February 1984.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93377c7b4f0d061e8d18147cc001a54a\" tg-width=\"1061\" tg-height=\"483\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><b>One of the recession drivers: high inflation.</b>Comparing the economic and inflation trends at that time, the two showed a very close correlation:<b>The nodes at which the U.S. economic recession occurs all correspond to the time when the CPI inflation rate rises or peaks.</b>For example, when the CPI inflation rate peaked in 1970, it happened to be the beginning of the rebound in the unemployment rate and the economic recession; From 1973 to 75, this round of unemployment rate rebounded and the economy was recognized as a recession, both after the CPI inflation rate broke 8%; At the beginning of 1980, when the CPI inflation rate hit a very high level of more than 14%, the unemployment rate rebounded significantly and the economy began to decline.<b>If the inflation rate is still rising when the recession occurs, the U.S. economy will continue to decline; Only after the inflation rate dropped did the U.S. economy begin to recover.</b>For example, in late 1970, the U.S. economy did not begin to recover until inflation fell below 5%; In 1975, when the inflation rate peaked and fell for a quarter, the U.S. GDP growth rate turned positive quarter-on-quarter and the unemployment rate began to decline.</p><p><b>The direct impact of inflation on the economy is mainly reflected in consumption.</b>Compared with policy interest rates, the negative correlation between U.S. inflation rate and private consumption growth rate is more obvious. Especially in the 1980s, when the policy interest rate jumped sharply, the inflation rate had already fallen early, and private consumption also began to pick up at that time, indicating that the easing of inflation was obviously helpful to the recovery of consumption.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/157a3ac9e6b19301fad3ca7e2e88c069\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"419\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>The second driver of recession: high interest rates.</b>Overall, the cooling effect of the Fed's rate hike on the economy at that time was obvious:<b>When the U.S. economy is overheating, rate hike's cooling effect on the economy can be described as immediate:</b>For example, in mid-1973, the U.S. manufacturing PMI exceeded 60, and the Federal Reserve rate hike quickly cooled the \"overheated\" economy.<b>When the U.S. economy itself is in a downturn or even recession, rate hike has deepened the economic contraction:</b>For example, in mid-1974, after the policy interest rate peaked, the downturn of the U.S. economy accelerated, and the U.S. GDP shrank sharply by 3.7% in the third quarter; From March to April 1980, after the monthly rate of federal funds reached a stage high of more than 17%, U.S. GDP shrank sharply by 8.0% in the second quarter of the same year.<b>On the contrary, interest rate cuts can help the economy recover:</b>In December 1970, when the policy interest rate fell below the inflation rate, the U.S. economy immediately recovered; In early 1975, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates and kept the policy rate nearly 5 percentage points below the inflation rate. The U.S. economy began to recover in the second quarter of 1975.<b>However, premature and immature interest rate cuts when inflation is not effectively controlled may end in \"repeated inflation + higher rate hike\", thus leading to a greater degree of recession or delaying the recovery that should have started earlier:</b>At the beginning of 1974, the Federal Reserve chose to cut interest rates, but as inflation continued to rise and the negative impact on the economy continued, the U.S. economy was still in recession; In May 1980, the monthly rate of federal funds had dropped to about 11% (supplemented by credit controls). In August, the U.S. economy temporarily left the recession range. However, since inflation repeatedly forced the Federal Reserve to choose greater rate hike, the U.S. economy fell into a new round of deeper recession in 1981.</p><p><b>The impact of interest rates on the economy is mainly reflected in investment.</b>Compared with inflation, the negative correlation between policy interest rate and private investment (lagging by one year) is more obvious. In the second half of 1980, the Federal Reserve briefly cut interest rates, and a year later, private investment in the United States rebounded significantly; In 1981, when the Federal Reserve resumed its sharp rate hike, the growth rate of private investment declined significantly a year later, but inflation also dropped significantly during this period, indicating that private investment is more sensitive to interest rate trends.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d940f253f486815be3e542cd6e173587\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"418\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>The third driver of recession: supply shocks.</b>The food and oil crises of 1973 and 1979 caused many drags on U.S. economic growth, thus triggering economic recessions.<b>First,</b>As mentioned above, supply shocks have raised the CPI inflation rate, and rising consumer prices have suppressed aggregate demand. In particular,<b>Supply shocks have triggered higher energy consumption costs and crowded out other consumption.</b>After 1974, the proportion of consumption of energy products and services in private consumption in the United States increased from about 6% before the shock to 7-9%, and did not drop significantly until after 1985.<b>Second, the supply shock has increased the cost of U.S. oil imports, causing GDP to \"evaporate\".</b>The first oil crisis caused oil prices to rise by about $10/barrel. In 1974, the net oil imports of the United States were about 6 million barrels per day. We estimate that rising oil prices will drag down U.S. GDP by approximately US $21.9 billion by increasing net import costs, dragging down nominal GDP growth by 1.4 percentage points; Similarly, after the second oil crisis, the rising cost of net oil imports dragged down the nominal growth rate of US GDP in 1979 by 2.8 percentage points.<b>Third, the supply shock caused a shortage of raw materials, weakening the industrial production capacity of the United States.</b>After two rounds of supply shocks in the 1970s, the total industrial production index of the United States fell sharply year-on-year. Comparing the two shocks, it can be found that during the first shock, the CPI inflation rate in the United States was lower, while the PPI inflation rate was higher, and then the industrial production was hit deeper, which also reflected that the impact of supply shocks on economic output was more important. It is mainly manifested on the \"supply side\".</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bbaa840667be8378540c48fd32436e79\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>3.2. What does the degree of recession depend on</b></p><p><b>For the above four rounds of recession, according to the degree of GDP contraction and the duration of the recession, they can be divided into two \"soft landings\" (1970 and 1980) and two \"hard landings\" (1973-75 and 1981-82).</b></p><p><ul><li><b>1970 \"soft landing\"</b>The background is that inflationary pressures are relatively limited. At that time, the highest CPI inflation rate was only 6.2%, and then the Federal Reserve did not make a substantial rate hike, and the highest policy interest rate was only about 9%. Inflation is limited. On the one hand, it has not suffered from supply shocks, and on the other hand, it is also related to the price controls of the Nixon administration.</p><p></li><li><b>1980 \"soft landing\"</b>The background is that inflation peaked and fell, and the Federal Reserve cut interest rates in a timely manner. At that time, the U.S. CPI inflation rate once reached an all-time high of 14.8%, and the monthly federal funds rate once reached 17.6%. However, when the recession began, the Federal Reserve quickly cut interest rates, and the policy rate dropped sharply to around 9%, and the economy quickly began to recover.</p><p></li><li><b>1973-75 \"hard landing\"</b>The main reason is that under the supply shock, the inflation rate is still rising during the recession, and then the policy interest rate has to rise rapidly with inflation (even if the policy interest rate is not significantly higher than the inflation rate);</p><p></li><li><b>1981-82 \"hard landing\"</b>The background is that the Federal Reserve is eager to curb inflation, so it has taken very aggressive rate hike measures (Federal Funds rate once reached about 20%). Although the inflation rate soon began to decline, the policy interest rate continued to be significantly higher than the inflation rate, which delayed the economic recovery process.</p><p></li></ul><b>From this, we can conclude that the requirements for \"soft landing\" are relatively stringent-first of all,</b>Inflationary pressure cannot be too great, and the CPI inflation rate may need to fall back in time in the early stages of the recession.<b>Secondly,</b>The Fed's rate hike cannot be too aggressive, and even needs to cut interest rates in time when a recession comes.<b>Finally,</b>If the government intervenes excessively in prices, or a new supply shock unfortunately occurs, then the \"soft landing\" may only be temporary, and inflation may rebound in the future, and a \"hard landing\" will be more difficult to avoid.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c05ee90fc4945e31d8dc59cbb9f3a8c\" tg-width=\"1073\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>04. Clues to asset prices</b></p><p><b>From the 1970s to the 1980s, high inflation was the \"biggest enemy\" of the U.S. economy and policies, so the inflation situation also became the vane of the capital market. In this process, the market has a process of understanding and digesting the inflation situation and the logic of monetary policy. In the \"Volcker era\" after 1980, monetary policy began to become the key clue of asset prices. In addition, the \"Great Stagflation\" has brought long-term pain to the economy and market, and then safe-haven assets such as the US dollar have performed positively for a long time.</b></p><p><b>4.1. U.S. stocks: Inflation is the biggest enemy</b></p><p><b>During this period, the trend of U.S. stocks was dominated by inflation. Whenever the inflation rate turned downward, U.S. stocks rebounded immediately.</b>July 1970, December 1974, and March 1980 corresponded to the three peaks of the U.S. CPI inflation rate, and were also the beginning of the rebound of the S&P 500 index. This may show that in the period of high inflation, the trend of inflation is what the market is most concerned about: as long as inflation remains high, the Federal Reserve may continue to tighten, and the U.S. economy will be threatened by both high inflation and high interest rates; As long as inflation falls, even if the economy is temporarily weak, the market believes that falling prices are conducive to economic recovery, and the Fed's tightening is expected to be relaxed, and the stock market will be included in the recovery expectation.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f3acab3e6f335ccd1d9e96b22ddd4750\" tg-width=\"1069\" tg-height=\"519\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>U.S. stocks are bottom out in the middle of a recession, and the extent of the adjustment does not entirely depend on the degree of the recession.</b>At the beginning of the four rounds of recessions defined by NBER, U.S. stocks were all under pressure. However, when the recession was not over, as monetary policy expectations loosened, inflationary pressures began to ease, and market recovery expectations increased, U.S. stocks were often the first to usher in a rebound. In other words,<b>The \"policy bottom\" is ahead of the \"market bottom\", and the \"market bottom\" is ahead of the \"economic bottom\".</b>From the data point of view, the bottom of the S&P 500 index all occurred during recession periods.</p><p><b>However, the extent of the adjustment in U.S. stocks does not depend entirely on the extent of the recession:</b>In the \"soft landings\" of 1970 and 1980, and in the \"hard landings\" of 1981-82, the S&P 500 index fell no more than 20%; Only in the \"hard landing\" of 1973-75, the S&P 500 index fell nearly 40%. Judging from the magnitude of the rebound, after four rounds of recession and the adjustment of U.S. stocks, the rebound of U.S. stocks is relatively strong, and the S&P 500 index has rebounded by more than 30% from the trough.</p><p><b>The logic behind it may be:</b>The overall market after the \"soft landing\" remains optimistic. Although the market after the \"hard landing\" is not so optimistic, due to the previous low \"base\", the price-performance ratio of US stocks can still attract capital inflows. This means that no matter what the degree of the recession is, as long as the bottom is found and the U.S. stock market is moderately \"tilted forward\", it is possible to obtain good returns.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/164eaafd25fa17da2d93917b48fdcdc5\" tg-width=\"1063\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>The Federal Reserve is not the \"eternal enemy\" of US stocks.</b>Comparing the performance of U.S. stocks after 1970 and 1980, even though the U.S. CPI inflation rate was higher, the Federal Reserve rate hike was more aggressive, and the degree of recession was not weak after 1980, the overall performance of U.S. stocks was significantly better than that in the 1970s. In the 1970s, the S&P 500 index remained almost sideways amid volatility, while after 1980, the S&P 500 index maintained a volatile upward trend. Especially compared with 1973-75 and 1981-82, they were both \"hard landings\", but the latter U.S. stocks fell less and rebounded more. The biggest difference between the two periods is that<b>The latter is more tightening by the Federal Reserve and may have played a more important role in \"creating\" a recession.</b>During the aggressive rate hike of the Federal Reserve, the inflation rate dropped significantly: on the one hand, it eased the suppression of high inflation on economic growth; on the other hand, the market had more confidence in the Federal Reserve, which in turn made recovery expectations stronger and risk appetite higher. In addition, after 1980, \"Reaganomics\" entered the historical stage, and after the market was fully and painfully cleared, American productivity increased rapidly. Therefore, U.S. stocks rebounded even stronger due to the \"two-wheel drive\" of the decline in policy interest rates after inflation was controllable and the profit growth of listed companies. From this perspective, inflation is the \"biggest enemy\" of US stocks, but the Federal Reserve is not; The Federal Reserve, which has the ability to curb inflation, eventually became a \"friend\" of the US stock market!</p><p><b>4.2. U.S. debt: \"dancing\" with monetary policy</b></p><p><b>In the 1970s, the U.S. bond market experienced a long-term bear market, with high inflation and high interest rates driving the US Treasury yields upward.</b>However, the volatility of 10-year US Treasury yields is significantly smaller than that of CPI inflation rate and policy interest rate. It is worth mentioning that the correlation between the U.S. economic recession and US Treasury yields is not obvious: before and after the four rounds of recessions in 1970, 1974-75, 1980 and 1982, the 10-year US Treasury yields fell back in the first round, the second round fluctuated upward, the third round rose sharply, and the fourth round fluctuated stronger. This may reflect the evolution of the Federal Reserve's monetary policy logic, that is, the emphasis on inflation continues to increase and the balance of the economy continues to weaken. Then<b>Over time, the market trades less \"recession\" and more \"tightening\".</b>It was not until after the third quarter of 1982, when the CPI inflation rate was lower than 5% and GDP shrank year-on-year, that the market believed that the Federal Reserve could cut interest rates without distractions, and US Treasury yields dropped significantly.</p><p><b>In the 1980s, the trend of 10-year US Treasury yields was more closely related to the trend of policy interest rates.</b>From 1980 to 81, the U.S. CPI inflation rate showed a downward trend, but the 10-year US Treasury yields rose rapidly, mainly driven by the strong tightening of monetary policy. After 1982, the 10-year US Treasury yields was relatively consistent with the fluctuation trend of policy interest rates, which reflected the effectiveness of monetary policy reform in the Volcker era, that is, the Federal Reserve's driving force for bond interest rates increased significantly.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d465d535d3e18340e29dfe32d95faea\" tg-width=\"1068\" tg-height=\"502\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>Although the 10-year US Treasury yields \"danced\" with the policy rate, the volatility was even smaller.</b>Before the 1970s, the absolute levels and trends of US Treasury yields and Federal Funds rate were very similar in 10 years. In the 1970s, when high inflation came and the Federal Reserve rate hike, although the 10-year US Treasury yields would also rise, the increase was even smaller, and then \"underperformed\" the policy interest rate. The reasons are: on the one hand, the emergence of high inflation and high interest rates has reduced market risk appetite, and U.S. debt has played a certain safe-haven attribute; On the other hand, due to concerns about economic growth, the market doubts the sustainability of high interest rates, which in turn depresses the medium and long-term US Treasury yields (the maturity premium of U.S. bonds is negative). When inflation fell and the Federal Reserve cut interest rates, although the 10-year US Treasury yields also fell, the magnitude was still limited, making US Treasury yields \"outperform\" the policy interest rate. The reason for this phenomenon may be the rise in inflation expectations. In fact, after 1983, the 10-year decline in US Treasury yields was insufficient, which once became a new problem faced by the Federal Reserve: the inflation rate in the United States has dropped to around 2%, but because the market inflation expectation has not dropped in time, the bond market interest rate has dropped slowly, hindering the economic recovery. Later, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker began to regard the bond market interest rate as the yardstick of inflation expectations, and paid more attention to the management of inflation expectations. It took 10 years for the trend of US Treasury yields to further align with the policy interest rate.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/73d7be6ac6bef4e338dc445e6ab9169f\" tg-width=\"1065\" tg-height=\"503\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>4.3. US dollar: Multiple factors create a strong US dollar</b></p><p><b>Factors such as the Federal Reserve's rate hike, rising market demand for safe havens, and the impact on non-US economies jointly created a strong US dollar in 1981-84.</b>In the 1970s, the collapse of the Bretton Woods system caused the rapid depreciation of the US dollar exchange rate. During this period, the US dollar exchange rate did not have a strong correlation with the US economic and monetary cycle. From 1981 to 84, the US dollar exchange rate continued to strengthen, and the the US Dollar Index once rose above the historical peak of 160 from around 85 in the second half of 1980; It was not until the Plaza Accord was signed in 1985 that the strong dollar came to an end.</p><p><b>How to understand the strong dollar during this period?</b>First of all, after 1980, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker strictly controlled the money supply, and the scarcity of the US dollar rose; Second, from 1981 to 82, the U.S. economy fell into recession due to the aggressive rate hike of the Federal Reserve, and U.S. stocks experienced significant adjustments. Economic and market risks stimulated the safe-haven attribute of the U.S. dollar; Third, in 1983-84, the U.S. economy bid farewell to high inflation and entered a strong recovery. The Federal Reserve's policy interest rate and US Treasury yields remained relatively high. During this period, the US dollar exchange rate is still strengthening: on the one hand, the market's confidence in the Federal Reserve has increased; On the other hand, the spillover effects of the Fed's tightening in the early stage on non-US economies appeared (such as the deep debt crisis in Latin America in 1982-85), which made US dollar assets fully attractive.</p><p>It is worth mentioning that<b>During the aggressive Fed rate hike, both the US Dollar Index and US Treasury yields are trending upward.</b>However,<b>The reaction of the US dollar exchange rate lags behind US Treasury yields:</b>For example, in June 1980, US Treasury yields had begun to rise rapidly in 10 years, while the US Dollar Index's rise lagged by about 3 months; In June, 1984, the 10-year US Treasury yields began to fall due to market expectations of interest rate cuts, but the US Dollar Index's decline lagged behind by nine months.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61242bb3f7016cf966b35fefe3930648\" tg-width=\"1067\" tg-height=\"452\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>05. New enlightenment to the present</b></p><p><b>1. The causes of this round of U.S. inflation have many similarities with those in the 1970s and 1980s, but the overall pressure is more limited.</b></p><p>Similar to the 1970s, the current high inflation in the United States is also the result of multiple factors such as monetary and fiscal easing, the slow action of the Federal Reserve, and supply shocks. But in comparison,<b>We tend to think that U.S. inflation will not get out of control as it was then:</b></p><p><ul><li><b>First,</b>This time, the U.S. government did not implement rude price controls like the Nixon administration did, and the balancing effect of price signals on supply and demand did not disappear, reducing the risk of recurrent inflation in the future;</p><p></li><li><b>And second,</b>At present, the risk of the \"wage-price\" spiral in the United States is relatively low. On the one hand, it benefits from the medium-and long-term inflation expectations that are still relatively stable, and on the other hand, it benefits from the long-term weakening of the power of American trade unions;</p><p></li><li><b>And third,</b>At present, the United States has a stronger ability to digest the \"oil crisis\". Especially after the shale oil revolution in 2010, the proportion of energy consumption in the United States in total private consumption has declined, and the United States has also changed from a net importer of crude oil to a net exporter. Therefore, the transmission of oil prices to the core inflation rate in the United States has declined. Therefore, even though the current U.S. CPI energy sub-item growth rate is as high as 40% year-on-year, reaching the level of the two oil crises in 1970s and 1980s, the core CPI inflation rate is significantly lower than at that time.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e9d6130cfa6c71161fdc10b5eaa79c0\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"411\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>2. Although the Federal Reserve has \"made mistakes\" in this round, it has taken the initiative in fighting inflation.</b></p><p>The \"capriciousness\" of monetary policy and the market's lack of confidence in monetary policy were important backgrounds for repeated stagflation in 1970s and 1980s. In comparison,<b>The Fed now has more initiative, and even if it underestimated the sustainability of inflation in 2021 (the \"inflation temporary theory\"), there may still be room for recovery from this mistake:</b></p><p><ul><li><b>First,</b>In terms of understanding and responding to \"stagflation\", the Federal Reserve is no longer \"crossing the river by feeling the stones\", and its monetary policy has already defined the goal of \"price stability\". Since the beginning of this year, the Federal Reserve has declared that \"price stability\" is the prerequisite for \"maximum employment\" and regards curbing inflation as the top priority of monetary policy.</p><p></li><li><b>Secondly,</b>After the Volcker-Greenspan era, the Federal Reserve had a stronger ability to monitor inflation expectations (such as the birth of inflation-protected bonds after 2000), communicated with the market more efficiently, and established a relatively good reputation. Since the beginning of this year, the Fed's tightening signal has significantly raised the nominal interest rate of U.S. debt, and the quick response of the capital market reflects the credibility of monetary policy. At present, U.S. inflation expectations have not been \"unanchored\". The ten-year inflation expectations monitored by the Cleveland Fed model do not exceed 2.5%, far below the level of 4-5% in the 1980s.</p><p></li><li><b>Finally,</b>The Federal Reserve is more independent today. Currently, inflation is the \"enemy\" faced by the Biden administration and the Federal Reserve, and the Fed's tightening is supported by the president. Even if economic pressure increases in the future and the president puts pressure on the Federal Reserve, it is expected that the Federal Reserve will defend its credibility more firmly. Just as Powell's Federal Reserve conducted four rate hike in 2018, despite criticism from then-President Trump.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/aeb68357b44663ea8caedbf43793c2db\" tg-width=\"1074\" tg-height=\"436\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>3. This round of U.S. economic recession is almost inevitable, and there is a risk of a \"hard landing\".</b></p><p>In the 1970s and 1980s, when the U.S. CPI inflation rate rose above 5%, the economic recession came as expected. Compare the current:</p><p><ul><li><b>First,</b>This year, the U.S. CPI inflation rate reached a maximum of 9.1%, which not only exceeded the previous level that triggered the recession, but also exceeded the level during the \"soft landing\" period of the U.S. economy in 1970;</p><p></li><li><b>And second,</b>At present, the Federal Reserve has shown great determination to curb inflation, or maintain policy interest rates at a \"sufficiently restrictive level\" for a long time, at the cost of economic recession (refer to our previous report \"The Defense of the Federal Reserve's Credibility\"). This means that, similar to the Volcker period in 1981-82, the Fed's tightening may be enough to \"create\" a recession;</p><p></li><li><b>And third,</b>At present, the risk of recurrent inflation in the future cannot be ruled out. If a new supply shock unfortunately occurs in the future, or the actual tightening of the Fed is insufficient (for example, when the U.S. economy actually enters a recession, political pressure rises, or financial risks occur in the future, the Fed stops tightening or even cuts interest rates prematurely), then U.S. inflation may still be repeated, leading to a greater recession.</p><p></li></ul><b>4. The price trend of this round of major asset classes may be strongly similar to that of 1970s and 1980s.</b></p><p><b>1) U.S. stocks: Inflation is still the core influencing factor, and there will still be adjustment pressure in the future, but the adjustment may not be too deep, and the rebound may wait for the recession to materialize.</b></p><p><ul><li><b>Similar to the 1970s and 1980s, the current inflation trend also has a strong correlation with the performance of US stocks.</b>In the first half of this year, as the U.S. CPI inflation rate continued to rise, U.S. stocks ushered in a round of deep adjustments; From mid-June to mid-August, commodity prices and inflation expectations cooled down, and U.S. stocks rebounded in stages; Since late August, as the persistence of high inflation has exceeded expectations, the Fed's policy orientation has become tougher, and U.S. stocks have paid more attention to monetary policy, staging a new round of \"tightening panic.\"</p><p></li><li><b>The U.S. stock market may remain under pressure for some time to come, similar to the 1981-82 period when Volcker fought inflation and \"created\" a recession.</b>From 1981 to 82, although the U.S. CPI inflation rate continued to fall, the Federal Reserve's tightening had an impact on the economy and stock market. Similarly, the current Federal Reserve seems to want to return to the \"Volcker era\" and is bound to ensure that inflation falls back at the cost of recession. At present, U.S. inflation is still at a high level, the economy has not yet experienced a substantial recession, and the market's valuation of the recession is not yet sufficient, and there may still be room for subsequent adjustments in U.S. stocks. Judging from historical experience, U.S. stocks may still fall in the early stages of the economic recession. It is not until monetary policy begins to relax in the middle and late stages of the recession that U.S. stocks will usher in a sustained rebound.</p><p></li><li><b>However, the Fed will not be the \"eternal enemy\" of U.S. stocks. If the Fed successfully helps inflation fall, the adjustment of U.S. stocks may not be too deep.</b>When Volcker \"created\" a recession in 1981-92, the adjustment of U.S. stocks was relatively limited and did not fall below the bottom in early 1980. Although the Fed's vigorous fight against inflation brings \"short-term pain\", it can avoid the \"long-term pain\" of repeated inflation. Considering that this round of inflation situation is more optimistic than in the 1970s and 1980s, and the Fed's actions are not too passive, this round of U.S. stock adjustment may not be too deep, and the rebound may be earlier than historical experience.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7f004d3c8a3173e8965e08861dace942\" tg-width=\"1077\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>2) U.S. debt: Monetary policy is still the core influencing factor, and it may not fall back immediately when the recession materializes. It needs to wait until monetary policy clearly begins to relax.</b></p><p><ul><li><b>Similar to the 1970s and 1980s, the core influencing factor of US Treasury yields in the current decade is also monetary policy.</b>The experience of the 1970s-1980s was that the bond market teetered between a \"recession trade\" and a \"tightening trade\". But as the Fed is more determined to fight inflation, the bond market is trading less \"recession\" and more \"tightening.\" In July this year, due to cooling inflation expectations and rising recession expectations, the 10-year US Treasury yields dropped significantly. However, since late August, as the Fed's policy orientation has become tougher, the market has paid more attention to tightening. Therefore, US Treasury yields has continued to rebound in the past 10 years and has risen above 4%, exceeding the stage high of 3.5% in mid-June.</p><p></li><li><b>If the Fed also insists on tightening during a recession, then the US Treasury yields in the early 10-year recession may not fall back soon.</b>Just as in the early days of the U.S. economic recession in 1981-82, even though the U.S. CPI inflation rate has dropped significantly from its high point, it is still far from the 2% target. Monetary policy has not been relaxed, and the 10-year US Treasury yields has remained at a high level. We expect that even if the U.S. economy begins to decline in the first half of 2023, the Federal Reserve may choose to stick to tightening and not cut interest rates, and the bond market may not trade in a recession prematurely.</p><p></li><li><b>A 10-year decline in US Treasury yields may require a substantial decline in policy interest rates.</b>In the second half of 1982, when the U.S. CPI inflation rate fell below 5% and the economic recession was deep, the Federal Reserve began to cut interest rates sharply, and the U.S. bond bull market really started. And note that the starting point of the decline in policy interest rates at that time was ahead of the 10-year US Treasury yields, and the decline was deeper. This means that after the monetary policy clearly begins to relax, the 10-year US Treasury yields may not drop significantly.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/18e234a92705cc42b9b876c30857ee92\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"410\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>3) U.S. dollar: The \"strong U.S. dollar\" may last for a long time, and the fall in the U.S. dollar exchange rate may require US Treasury yields to fall</b></p><p><ul><li><b>Looking at the mid-cycle, the current logic of the \"strong dollar\" is very similar to that of the 1980s.</b>From 1980 to 84, the US Dollar Index came out of the \"historical peak\". Even though the Federal Reserve cut interest rates during this period, the US dollar exchange rate remained strong for a long time. At present, the logic of supporting the US dollar is very similar to that in the 1980s: the US economy has obvious advantages over non-US regions, and the Fed's tightening confidence is stronger than other developed economies. Looking back, even if the U.S. economy moves from \"stagflation\" to \"recession\", non-U.S. economic and financial risks may not be eliminated (this can be seen from the fluctuations in European and Japanese bond and exchange rate markets this year). On the contrary, the market's trust in U.S. dollar assets will increase (for example, cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin have weakened at present). Therefore, for at least the next 1-2 years, the volatility center of the the US Dollar Index is expected to continue to be higher than the pre-COVID-19 level.</p><p></li><li><b>In the short term, US Treasury yields may be a \"leading indicator\" to judge the trend of the US dollar.</b>In 1980, the 10-year US Treasury yields started its upward cycle earlier than the US Dollar Index; In 1984-85, US Treasury yields fell back before the US Dollar Index in 10 years. In fact, past market performance has basically confirmed US Treasury yields's leadership over the US Dollar Index:<b>1-3 months after the 10-year US Treasury yields peaks and falls, the US Dollar Index usually also peaks and falls.</b>As mentioned earlier, the start of this round of U.S. bond bull market may have to wait until the recession materializes and monetary policy becomes loosened. After that, the signs of the US Dollar Index peaking and falling may become increasingly clear.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fa0454ffd0dbe555b8d8d2e59c3c5c0d\" tg-width=\"1075\" tg-height=\"408\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b><i>Risk warning:</i></b></p><p><b><i>1. The resilience of the US economy is less than expected.</i></b><i>Although there is still room for the recovery of the U.S. service industry, under the environment of high inflation and high interest rates, residents' consumer confidence is insufficient or actual consumption is suppressed, which in turn makes the economic growth weaker than the benchmark expectation; As the Federal Reserve's rate hike and demand cool, the pace of cooling in the U.S. job market may exceed expectations.</i></p><p><b><i>2. A new supply shock occurs.</i></b><i>If new supply shocks occur in the future and raise international energy, food and other commodity prices again, the pressure of \"stagflation\" in the United States may rise significantly, the Federal Reserve may have to \"create\" a recession to curb inflation, and market sentiment will turn pessimistic.</i></p><p><b><i>3. The Fed's tightening is insufficient or too strong.</i></b><i>If the Fed's insufficient tightening causes repeated inflation, the cost of the Fed's subsequent inflation control will be even greater; If the Fed's tightening efforts are significantly stronger than market expectations, the risk of market volatility may rise and may eventually threaten the real economy.</i></p><p><b><i>4. Economic and financial risks in non-US regions exceed expectations, etc.</i></b><i>At present, the economic and financial risks of large economies such as Europe and Asia are showing signs of rising. If large-scale economic and financial risk events occur in the future, the U.S. economy and market may be affected.</i></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/49ae9add1640b1e283a53b027b0227c7\" tg-width=\"1040\" tg-height=\"868\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc83db9c8a7fe6fe220fca7ca329cf0d\" tg-width=\"1040\" tg-height=\"513\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/580ee36c20670ad5f1a888d715380e06\" tg-width=\"999\" tg-height=\"928\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p></body></html></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>Rethink the \"Great Stagflation\" in the United States! Also on the enlightenment to the current asset price</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nRethink the \"Great Stagflation\" in the United States! Also on the enlightenment to the current asset price\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/70\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/86f6d9605fc344e28cd4247a93dcdc2b);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">钟正生经济分析 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2022-10-02 09:35</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body><b>1. The complexity of high inflation.</b>The causes of high inflation in the United States from 1970s to 1980s were extremely complicated: first, excessive fiscal and monetary stimulus initially pushed up inflation; Then, rude price control and hesitant monetary policy failed to effectively douse inflation; Furthermore, supply shocks represented by the two oil crises triggered cost-push inflation; Finally, the long-term overshoot inflation rate destabilizes inflation expectations, triggers a wage-price spiral, and deepens the obstinacy of inflation.</p><p><b>Second, the Fed's \"faults\" and \"merits\".</b>From 1970 to 1979, the Federal Reserve was not resolute enough in tightening for many reasons: first, the Federal Reserve once believed that inflation was a \"non-monetary phenomenon\"; Second, the primary goal of the Federal Reserve at that time was \"full employment\" rather than \"price stability\"; Finally, the Fed's decision-making is also influenced by political factors. After 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker absorbed the concept of the \"monetary school\", regarded curbing inflation as its own responsibility, strengthened its rate hike and controlled the money supply. Since then, the Federal Reserve has been committed to stabilizing inflation expectations for a long time, reshaping its credibility.</p><p><b>3. \"Soft landing\" and \"hard landing\".</b>From 1970s to 1980s, there were four rounds of economic recessions in the United States, which can be divided into two \"soft landings\" (1970 and 1980) and two \"hard landings\" (1973-75 and 1981-82). The result of the combined effect of high inflation, high interest rates and supply shocks. However, the conditions for achieving a \"soft landing\" are relatively harsh: first, the CPI inflation rate may need to fall in time in the early stage of the recession; Secondly, the Fed's rate hike cannot be too aggressive, and even needs to cut interest rates in time when a recession comes; Finally, if a new supply shock occurs, a \"hard landing\" may be more difficult to avoid.</p><p><b>4. Clues to asset prices.</b>In the 1970s and 1980s, inflation became the vane of the capital market. The U.S. CPI inflation rate has peaked three times in stages, and U.S. stocks have bottomed out in stages. But in this process, the market has a process of understanding and digesting the inflation situation and the logic of monetary policy. Over time, the U.S. bond market has traded less \"recession\" and more \"austerity.\" In the \"Volcker era\" after 1980, monetary policy began to become the key clue of asset prices. After the end of the \"Great Stagflation\", safe-haven assets such as the US dollar still performed positively for a long time.</p><p><b>5. New enlightenment to the present.</b>First, the causes of this round of inflation in the United States have many similarities with those in the 1970s and 1980s, but the overall pressure is more limited; Second, although the Federal Reserve has \"made mistakes\" in this round, it has taken the initiative in fighting inflation; Third, this round of U.S. economic recession is almost inevitable, and there is a risk of a \"hard landing\"; Fourthly, the price trend of this round of major asset classes may be strongly similar to that of 1970s and 1980s:<b>1)</b>U.S. stocks: Inflation is still the core influencing factor, and there will still be adjustment pressure in the future, but the adjustment may not be too deep, and the rebound may wait for the recession to materialize.<b>2)</b>U.S. debt: Monetary policy is still the core influencing factor, and it may not fall back immediately when the recession materializes. It needs to wait until monetary policy clearly begins to relax.<b>3)</b>US dollar: The \"strong US dollar\" may last for a long time, and the US dollar may require US Treasury yields to fall back.</p><p><i>Risk warning: The U.S. economy is weaker than expected, there are new supply shocks, and non-U.S. financial risks are rising.</i></p><p>Since 2022, the U.S. CPI inflation rate once rose above 9%, real GDP has shrunk for two consecutive quarters, the (quasi-) stagflation characteristics of the economy have become more distinct, and the capital market has also experienced large fluctuations. Since the Jackson Hole meeting in late August, the Federal Reserve has repeatedly mentioned \"historical experience\" on various occasions, indicating that the current economic environment in the United States is very similar to that in the 1970s and 1980s, and the Federal Reserve will also fully learn from the response experience at that time and do something. Something is not done in order to help the United States overcome \"stagflation.\"</p><p>What is the current inflationary pressure in the United States? How will monetary policy respond? Can the U.S. economy still achieve a \"soft landing\"? When will the capital market usher in \"spring\"? In this report, with questions about the present, we review the inflation, monetary policy, economic growth and asset price performance during the \"Great Stagflation\" period in the United States from 1970s to 1980s, and try to understand the logic and laws, with a view to judging the U.S. economy, monetary policy and market trends in the future.</p><p><b>01. The complexity of high inflation</b></p><p><b>The causes of high inflation in the United States from 1970s to 1980s were extremely complicated: first, excessive fiscal and monetary stimulus initially pushed up inflation; Then, rude price control and hesitant monetary policy failed to effectively douse inflation; Furthermore, supply shocks represented by the two oil crises triggered cost-push inflation; Finally, the long-term overshoot inflation rate destabilizes inflation expectations, triggers a wage-price spiral, and deepens the obstinacy of inflation.</b></p><p><b>From 1969 to 1982, the United States fell into a crisis of high inflation. The CPI inflation rate was generally higher than 5%, with the highest reaching 14.8%.</b>The year-on-year growth rate of CPI in the United States has risen rapidly at a rate of more than 3% since 1968. In March 1969, the CPI exceeded 5% year-on-year, and the 13-year era of \"high inflation\" began. From 1969 to 1982, there were three peaks in the year-on-year growth rate of U.S. CPI, with the peaks in January 1970 (6.2%), December 1974 (12.3%) and March 1980 (14.8%). In February 1982, the CPI fell below 5% year-on-year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0135dfd0a18c15e058312be783380d12\" tg-width=\"1066\" tg-height=\"490\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1965 to 1970, blind fiscal and monetary expansion gave birth to higher inflation.</b>With the end of economic reconstruction after World War II and the rise of European and Asian economies, the economic growth momentum of the United States has weakened, but blind stimulation at the policy level has led to obvious overheating of the economy. From 1965 to 1970, the real GDP growth rate of the United States continued to be higher than the potential growth rate, and the output gap (the difference between real GDP and potential GDP) accounted for as much as 3-6% of potential GDP. In other words, 3-6 percentage points of the U.S. economic growth rate at that time were stimulated by policies. During this period, the natural unemployment rate in the United States was 5.6-5.9%, but the actual unemployment rate basically remained within 4%. At that time, the role of fiscal stimulus was stronger than that of money. The proportion of U.S. federal fiscal expenditure to GDP increased by 3.2 percentage points from 1966 to 68, and the deficit ratio expanded from 0.2% in 1965 to 2.8% in 1968. In 1968, the U.S. government began to worry about fiscal balance. Then President Johnson signed the \"Revenue and Expenditure Control Act of 1968\" in June to supplement fiscal revenue by increasing taxes. The Federal Reserve \"technically cut interest rates\" in August of the same year to hedge against the impact of tax increases, adding to the overheating of the economy.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb7621fa84eb213f441091515980951c\" tg-width=\"1077\" tg-height=\"426\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1971 to 74, rough price controls turned \"short pain\" into \"long pain\".</b>In August 1971, the Nixon administration imposed a 90-day wage and price freeze. But in fact, the scope of price control continued to expand, and it was not until 1974 that the U.S. government completely canceled its intervention in prices. During this period, except for special circumstances, all price increases of goods and services need to be approved by the government. In mid-1972, the U.S. CPI inflation rate fell below 3%. This price control is regarded as a special case of comprehensive government intervention in prices in peacetime in American economic history, and it is also regarded as a failed attempt. This is because, while the price limit measures curbed the price increase, they also severely dampened the enthusiasm of production enterprises, resulting in insufficient supply of social commodities, and paving the way for the subsequent deterioration of inflation. In 1974, Nixon stepped down due to the Watergate Incident, and the new President Carter came to power, and the price control measures gradually failed. Slightly funny, both the Nixon and Carter administrations tried to control prices through verbal \"exhortation\". For example, when Carter first came to power, he encouraged people to buy \"bargains\": \"Dare to show off to others, choose bargains yourself, and be proud of them\". These admonitions are almost futile in controlling prices. The U.S. CPI inflation rate broke 5% again in April 1973, and has since reached a stage high of 12.3% in December 1974.</p><p><b>A food crisis and two oil crises in 1973 and 1979 demonstrated the destructive power of supply shocks on American prices.</b>In 1973, the grain harvest in the former Soviet Union failed due to bad weather, and then entered the international market to buy a large amount of grain, which triggered the most serious food crisis since World War II. At the end of 1973, the year-on-year growth rate of U.S. food CPI once rose above 20%. From October 1973 to March 1974, the first oil crisis broke out: the members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, led by Saudi Arabia, announced an oil embargo on countries that supported Israel during the Yom Kippur War, with the United States bearing the brunt. The average price of crude oil at the World Bank jumped from US $2.7/barrel in September 1973 to US $13/barrel in early 1974, an increase of nearly 500%. From March to September 1974, the year-on-year growth rate of U.S. energy CPI exceeded 30%. From the beginning of 1979 to the beginning of 1980, the second oil crisis broke out: the Islamic Revolution broke out in Iran, and then the \"Iran-Iraq War\" broke out between Iran and Iraq, which led to a sharp drop in global oil production. World Bank international oil prices rose from less than US $15/barrel in December 1978 to more than US $40/barrel in November 1979. In March 1980, the U.S. energy CPI peaked at 47.1% year-on-year, and the U.S. CPI immediately peaked at 14.8% year-on-year.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/368b46087ff151100ed782e7aa94b78d\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1970 to 1980, after the headline inflation rate in the United States continued to overshoot, inflation expectations got out of control. With the help of trade unions, a \"wage-price spiral\" gradually formed.</b>After the CPI inflation rate has been higher than 2% or even higher than 5% for many years, American residents have lost their original confidence in prices and inflation expectations have risen. At that time, both the Fed and the market had limited awareness and tracking of inflation expectations. The widely quoted University of Michigan survey and Cleveland Fed model expectations were only born around 1980. The earliest inflation expectation monitoring tool in the United States was The Livingston Survey, which was born in 1946, and summarized inflation forecasts from businesses, governments, banking, and academia. The survey shows that inflation expectations in the United States have gradually increased since 1970, especially after the two oil crises, and inflation expectations have also risen sharply with the headline inflation rate. The reverse impact of inflation expectations on prices is mainly transmitted through wages: workers demand wage increases, and then the spending power of residents and the cost pressure of enterprises rise, which at the same time contributes to price increases, that is, a \"wage-price spiral\" is formed.<b>In particular, in the 1970s, American trade unions were huge, and the transmission of wage demands was relatively smooth:</b>According to the data of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), at that time, trade union members in the United States accounted for nearly 30% of the total employees in the society, and there were as many as 200-400 strikes by more than 1,000 people every year (since 2000, this number has been less than 30 all the year round). From mid-1976 to mid-1978, the CPI inflation rate in the United States fell back to around 5-7%, but the average hourly wage of non-agricultural and non-managerial personnel in the United States increased by 6-8% year-on-year, which continued to be higher than the CPI inflation rate. The stickiness of wage increases prevented inflation from falling further and paved the way for a subsequent rebound in inflation.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fa062f9510e45fda47f5e682ec9ba17b\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>From 1970 to 79, the Federal Reserve's policy response was relatively negative, continuing to \"lag behind the curve\" and failing to effectively curb inflation.</b>Before 1980, U.S. policy interest rates and inflation trends showed strong synchronization, reflecting that the Federal Reserve had been \"lagging behind the curve\" and \"catching up with the curve\" for a long time. In May 1969, the third month after the inflation rate exceeded 5%, the U.S. policy interest rate began to rise significantly and exceeded the inflation rate by more than 3 percentage points. After that, the inflation rate kept rising for about half a year before it began to fall. In the second half of 1973, while the inflation rate in the United States was still rising, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates due to economic pressure, and then the inflation rate accelerated. In 1978, the U.S. policy interest rate was basically the same as the inflation rate, and kept rising step by step. Until December 1978, the monthly federal funds rate rose above 10% and was 1 percentage point higher than the inflation rate, but soon the policy interest rate began to lag behind the inflation rate. Later, when the U.S. policy interest rate was significantly higher than the spot inflation rate, inflation dropped significantly, and the Federal Reserve took the initiative in curbing inflation: after 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker raised interest rates sharply to fight inflation; In mid-1981, the U.S. policy interest rate reached a peak of more than 19%. In October of the same year, the CPI fell both month-on-month and year-on-year; Since then, Federal Funds rate has continued to be 4-9 percentage points higher than the CPI inflation rate, and the inflation rate has continued to fall.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/707eeb51701422548c5e1b935b53479d\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"418\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>02. The Federal Reserve's \"faults\" and \"merits\"</b></p><p><b>From 1970 to 1979, the Federal Reserve was not resolute enough in tightening due to insufficient understanding of the relationship between inflation and monetary policy, as well as the lack of independence of monetary policy. After 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker absorbed the concept of the \"monetary school\", regarded curbing inflation as its own responsibility, strengthened its rate hike and controlled the money supply. Since then, the Federal Reserve has been committed to stabilizing inflation expectations for a long time, reshaping its credibility.</b></p><p><b>2.1. Reasons for the Fed's hesitation</b></p><p><b>From 1970 to 1979, the Federal Reserve continued to \"lag behind the curve\" for many reasons.</b></p><p><b>First, the Federal Reserve once considered inflation a \"non-monetary phenomenon.\"</b>At that time, the Federal Reserve was divided on the causes of high inflation, and tended to believe that inflation was mainly caused by non-monetary factors, and then monetary policy chose to respond negatively. For example, in 1970, the Federal Reserve led by Burns believed that the power of trade unions triggered cost-push inflation, and then advocated the use of \"income policy\" regulation rather than tightening the money supply. It also fueled the wage and price freeze later imposed by the Nixon administration. In 1974, Burns also believed that \"improper fiscal discipline\" was the main cause of inflation.</p><p><b>Second, the Fed's primary goal at that time was \"full employment\" rather than \"price stability.\"</b>Before the 1970s, Keynesian ideas dominated the logic of monetary policy. The Federal Reserve focused on aggregate demand management and firmly believed in the existence of the Phillips curve (the negative correlation between unemployment rate and inflation). Therefore, the primary goal of the Federal Reserve's monetary policy is to achieve \"full employment\", hoping to maintain a low and stable unemployment rate. Then, when the unemployment rate rises, the balance of monetary policy is tilted more towards the job market. When \"stagnation\" and \"inflation\" occurred at the same time, the Federal Reserve once believed that inflation would not continue to worsen. For example, Miller's Federal Reserve in 1978-79 believed that monetary easing would not deepen inflation as long as the unemployment rate was above full employment levels (above 5.5%).</p><p><b>Finally, the Fed's decision-making is also influenced by political factors.</b>Burns, who served as chairman from 1970 to 1978, and Miller, who served from 1978 to 79, were both influenced by the then president and lacked independence, wavering in balancing the relationship between inflation and economic growth. In hindsight, the Fed's tolerance for inflation in the 1970s may be exactly what the rulers wanted to see: on the one hand, the rulers did not want the Fed to undermine economic growth and affect votes by curbing inflation; On the other hand, higher inflation is also regarded as a hidden tax means, because the increase of nominal wages increases the progression of the whole tax system, resulting in a sharp increase in fiscal revenue. Data show that the proportion of personal income tax in GDP in the United States increased significantly during the periods of high inflation in 1969-70, 1974 and 1979-83.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/85870c4ece63c7cae63758bc6db5a828\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"421\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>2.2. The achievements of the Volcker era</b></p><p><b>After 1979, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker absorbed the concept of the \"monetary school\" and took curbing inflation as its own responsibility. It firmly conducted rate hike and controlled the money supply. Although it \"created\" an economic recession, it finally defeated inflation.</b>In August, 1979, Volcker became the chairman of the Federal Reserve. He adopted the \"monetary school\" view represented by Friedman. The Federal Reserve led by him made it more clear that monetary policy was the core position of price stability, and incorporated the growth rate of money supply (M1) into the monetary policy goal, followed by a substantial rate hike, which made the Federal Funds rate higher than the CPI inflation rate, so as to achieve the goal of controlling money supply. In March 1980, Volcker carried out an ill-advised but short-lived experiment of credit control (the \"Special Credit Restriction Program\") in order to slow down the rate hike, but then restarted monetary policy tightening, and finally pushed Federal Funds rate to a peak of more than 20% in mid-1981. Although the sharp rate hike brought about the economic recession, it ultimately helped inflation fall.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7ab3004dd4948baa80533fe718adebaf\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"422\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>In addition, in the era of Volcker and Greenspan, the Federal Reserve established a new \"nominal anchor\" to stabilize inflation expectations and reshape the credibility of the Federal Reserve. This is also an important background for U.S. prices to return to long-term stability in the future.</b>In the 1980s, after experiencing the \"great stagflation\", the original expectation of price stability suffered serious damage. Even in the Volcker era, when the Federal Reserve defined its money supply target and firmly raised interest rates, the credibility of monetary policy was still questioned. It is not clear to the public whether the Fed can maintain its focus on inflation for a long time and have the ability to influence medium and long-term price trends. Therefore, Volcker and his next Federal Reserve President Greenspan are more committed to reconstructing stable inflation expectations, making them the \"nominal anchor\" of monetary policy, and ultimately re-establishing the credibility of monetary policy.</p><p><b>This is a complicated and long process: Volcker's experience of defeating inflation was a good starting point, and then the Fed shifted from money supply targeting to \"hidden inflation targeting.\"</b>In practice, the Federal Reserve focuses on the \"growth gap\" and the \"inflation expectation gap\" at the same time. In fact, it sets policy interest rates through the Taylor Rule, pursues stable medium-and long-term inflation targets, and achieves stable economic growth. In terms of inflation expectation management, the Federal Reserve monitors inflation expectations through changes in bond yields, and at the same time strengthens communication with the capital market, which enhances the credibility of monetary policy and the stability of market expectations. The monetary policy framework after the Volcker era achieved long-term results in price stability, creating the later era of Great Moderation (1984-2007).</p><p><b>03. \"Soft landing\" and \"hard landing\"</b></p><p><b>From 1970s to 1980s, there were four rounds of economic recessions in the United States, which were the result of the combined effects of high inflation, high interest rates and supply shocks. High inflation has a direct inhibitory effect on consumption, and drives the Federal Reserve to rate hike and further curb investment. Therefore, the degree of recession depends on the severity of inflation and the response of monetary policy, and the conditions for achieving a \"soft landing\" are relatively harsh.</b></p><p><b>3.1. The three major drivers of economic recession</b></p><p><b>According to the classification of the National Economic Research Bureau (NBER), the U.S. economy experienced four rounds of recessions from 1970s to 1980s:</b></p><p><ul><li><b>The first round was from January to November 1970 (11 months).</b>The real GDP of the United States fell from 3.2% in 1969 to 0.2% in 1970, but the economy hardly shrank. However, the unemployment rate in the United States rose significantly, from 3.5% in December 1969 to 6.1% in December 1970 (a stage high), and remained above 5% for the next 24 months.</p><p></li><li><b>The second round was from December 1973 to March 1975 (16 months).</b>The real GDP of the United States fell off a cliff from 5.6% year-on-year in 1973, and shrank year-on-year for five consecutive quarters, with the deepest quarterly year-on-year contraction reaching 2.3%. The unemployment rate in the United States has been higher than 7% for 31 consecutive months, rising from a low of 4.6% in October 1973 to 9.0% in May 1975, and then declining slowly.</p><p></li><li><b>The third round was from February to July 1980 (6 months).</b>The annualized rate of real GDP in the United States shrank sharply by 8% in the second quarter of 1980, but only by 0.8% year-on-year. During this period, the unemployment rate in the United States rose from 6.3% to 7.8%. In the second half of 1980, the U.S. economy immediately began to recover. In the fourth quarter, GDP rose sharply by 7.7% month-on-month, and the unemployment rate began to fall in August.</p><p></li><li><b>The fourth round was from August 1981 to November 1982 (16 months)</b>。 The real GDP of the United States has shrunk year-on-year for four consecutive quarters, with the deepest contraction of 2.6%. The unemployment rate in the United States began to rebound significantly from a stage low of 7.2% in August 1981, exceeded 8% in November of the same year, reached a peak of 10.8% in November 1982, and then slowly fell back, falling below 8% in February 1984.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93377c7b4f0d061e8d18147cc001a54a\" tg-width=\"1061\" tg-height=\"483\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><b>One of the recession drivers: high inflation.</b>Comparing the economic and inflation trends at that time, the two showed a very close correlation:<b>The nodes at which the U.S. economic recession occurs all correspond to the time when the CPI inflation rate rises or peaks.</b>For example, when the CPI inflation rate peaked in 1970, it happened to be the beginning of the rebound in the unemployment rate and the economic recession; From 1973 to 75, this round of unemployment rate rebounded and the economy was recognized as a recession, both after the CPI inflation rate broke 8%; At the beginning of 1980, when the CPI inflation rate hit a very high level of more than 14%, the unemployment rate rebounded significantly and the economy began to decline.<b>If the inflation rate is still rising when the recession occurs, the U.S. economy will continue to decline; Only after the inflation rate dropped did the U.S. economy begin to recover.</b>For example, in late 1970, the U.S. economy did not begin to recover until inflation fell below 5%; In 1975, when the inflation rate peaked and fell for a quarter, the U.S. GDP growth rate turned positive quarter-on-quarter and the unemployment rate began to decline.</p><p><b>The direct impact of inflation on the economy is mainly reflected in consumption.</b>Compared with policy interest rates, the negative correlation between U.S. inflation rate and private consumption growth rate is more obvious. Especially in the 1980s, when the policy interest rate jumped sharply, the inflation rate had already fallen early, and private consumption also began to pick up at that time, indicating that the easing of inflation was obviously helpful to the recovery of consumption.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/157a3ac9e6b19301fad3ca7e2e88c069\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"419\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>The second driver of recession: high interest rates.</b>Overall, the cooling effect of the Fed's rate hike on the economy at that time was obvious:<b>When the U.S. economy is overheating, rate hike's cooling effect on the economy can be described as immediate:</b>For example, in mid-1973, the U.S. manufacturing PMI exceeded 60, and the Federal Reserve rate hike quickly cooled the \"overheated\" economy.<b>When the U.S. economy itself is in a downturn or even recession, rate hike has deepened the economic contraction:</b>For example, in mid-1974, after the policy interest rate peaked, the downturn of the U.S. economy accelerated, and the U.S. GDP shrank sharply by 3.7% in the third quarter; From March to April 1980, after the monthly rate of federal funds reached a stage high of more than 17%, U.S. GDP shrank sharply by 8.0% in the second quarter of the same year.<b>On the contrary, interest rate cuts can help the economy recover:</b>In December 1970, when the policy interest rate fell below the inflation rate, the U.S. economy immediately recovered; In early 1975, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates and kept the policy rate nearly 5 percentage points below the inflation rate. The U.S. economy began to recover in the second quarter of 1975.<b>However, premature and immature interest rate cuts when inflation is not effectively controlled may end in \"repeated inflation + higher rate hike\", thus leading to a greater degree of recession or delaying the recovery that should have started earlier:</b>At the beginning of 1974, the Federal Reserve chose to cut interest rates, but as inflation continued to rise and the negative impact on the economy continued, the U.S. economy was still in recession; In May 1980, the monthly rate of federal funds had dropped to about 11% (supplemented by credit controls). In August, the U.S. economy temporarily left the recession range. However, since inflation repeatedly forced the Federal Reserve to choose greater rate hike, the U.S. economy fell into a new round of deeper recession in 1981.</p><p><b>The impact of interest rates on the economy is mainly reflected in investment.</b>Compared with inflation, the negative correlation between policy interest rate and private investment (lagging by one year) is more obvious. In the second half of 1980, the Federal Reserve briefly cut interest rates, and a year later, private investment in the United States rebounded significantly; In 1981, when the Federal Reserve resumed its sharp rate hike, the growth rate of private investment declined significantly a year later, but inflation also dropped significantly during this period, indicating that private investment is more sensitive to interest rate trends.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d940f253f486815be3e542cd6e173587\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"418\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>The third driver of recession: supply shocks.</b>The food and oil crises of 1973 and 1979 caused many drags on U.S. economic growth, thus triggering economic recessions.<b>First,</b>As mentioned above, supply shocks have raised the CPI inflation rate, and rising consumer prices have suppressed aggregate demand. In particular,<b>Supply shocks have triggered higher energy consumption costs and crowded out other consumption.</b>After 1974, the proportion of consumption of energy products and services in private consumption in the United States increased from about 6% before the shock to 7-9%, and did not drop significantly until after 1985.<b>Second, the supply shock has increased the cost of U.S. oil imports, causing GDP to \"evaporate\".</b>The first oil crisis caused oil prices to rise by about $10/barrel. In 1974, the net oil imports of the United States were about 6 million barrels per day. We estimate that rising oil prices will drag down U.S. GDP by approximately US $21.9 billion by increasing net import costs, dragging down nominal GDP growth by 1.4 percentage points; Similarly, after the second oil crisis, the rising cost of net oil imports dragged down the nominal growth rate of US GDP in 1979 by 2.8 percentage points.<b>Third, the supply shock caused a shortage of raw materials, weakening the industrial production capacity of the United States.</b>After two rounds of supply shocks in the 1970s, the total industrial production index of the United States fell sharply year-on-year. Comparing the two shocks, it can be found that during the first shock, the CPI inflation rate in the United States was lower, while the PPI inflation rate was higher, and then the industrial production was hit deeper, which also reflected that the impact of supply shocks on economic output was more important. It is mainly manifested on the \"supply side\".</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bbaa840667be8378540c48fd32436e79\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>3.2. What does the degree of recession depend on</b></p><p><b>For the above four rounds of recession, according to the degree of GDP contraction and the duration of the recession, they can be divided into two \"soft landings\" (1970 and 1980) and two \"hard landings\" (1973-75 and 1981-82).</b></p><p><ul><li><b>1970 \"soft landing\"</b>The background is that inflationary pressures are relatively limited. At that time, the highest CPI inflation rate was only 6.2%, and then the Federal Reserve did not make a substantial rate hike, and the highest policy interest rate was only about 9%. Inflation is limited. On the one hand, it has not suffered from supply shocks, and on the other hand, it is also related to the price controls of the Nixon administration.</p><p></li><li><b>1980 \"soft landing\"</b>The background is that inflation peaked and fell, and the Federal Reserve cut interest rates in a timely manner. At that time, the U.S. CPI inflation rate once reached an all-time high of 14.8%, and the monthly federal funds rate once reached 17.6%. However, when the recession began, the Federal Reserve quickly cut interest rates, and the policy rate dropped sharply to around 9%, and the economy quickly began to recover.</p><p></li><li><b>1973-75 \"hard landing\"</b>The main reason is that under the supply shock, the inflation rate is still rising during the recession, and then the policy interest rate has to rise rapidly with inflation (even if the policy interest rate is not significantly higher than the inflation rate);</p><p></li><li><b>1981-82 \"hard landing\"</b>The background is that the Federal Reserve is eager to curb inflation, so it has taken very aggressive rate hike measures (Federal Funds rate once reached about 20%). Although the inflation rate soon began to decline, the policy interest rate continued to be significantly higher than the inflation rate, which delayed the economic recovery process.</p><p></li></ul><b>From this, we can conclude that the requirements for \"soft landing\" are relatively stringent-first of all,</b>Inflationary pressure cannot be too great, and the CPI inflation rate may need to fall back in time in the early stages of the recession.<b>Secondly,</b>The Fed's rate hike cannot be too aggressive, and even needs to cut interest rates in time when a recession comes.<b>Finally,</b>If the government intervenes excessively in prices, or a new supply shock unfortunately occurs, then the \"soft landing\" may only be temporary, and inflation may rebound in the future, and a \"hard landing\" will be more difficult to avoid.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c05ee90fc4945e31d8dc59cbb9f3a8c\" tg-width=\"1073\" tg-height=\"367\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>04. Clues to asset prices</b></p><p><b>From the 1970s to the 1980s, high inflation was the \"biggest enemy\" of the U.S. economy and policies, so the inflation situation also became the vane of the capital market. In this process, the market has a process of understanding and digesting the inflation situation and the logic of monetary policy. In the \"Volcker era\" after 1980, monetary policy began to become the key clue of asset prices. In addition, the \"Great Stagflation\" has brought long-term pain to the economy and market, and then safe-haven assets such as the US dollar have performed positively for a long time.</b></p><p><b>4.1. U.S. stocks: Inflation is the biggest enemy</b></p><p><b>During this period, the trend of U.S. stocks was dominated by inflation. Whenever the inflation rate turned downward, U.S. stocks rebounded immediately.</b>July 1970, December 1974, and March 1980 corresponded to the three peaks of the U.S. CPI inflation rate, and were also the beginning of the rebound of the S&P 500 index. This may show that in the period of high inflation, the trend of inflation is what the market is most concerned about: as long as inflation remains high, the Federal Reserve may continue to tighten, and the U.S. economy will be threatened by both high inflation and high interest rates; As long as inflation falls, even if the economy is temporarily weak, the market believes that falling prices are conducive to economic recovery, and the Fed's tightening is expected to be relaxed, and the stock market will be included in the recovery expectation.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f3acab3e6f335ccd1d9e96b22ddd4750\" tg-width=\"1069\" tg-height=\"519\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>U.S. stocks are bottom out in the middle of a recession, and the extent of the adjustment does not entirely depend on the degree of the recession.</b>At the beginning of the four rounds of recessions defined by NBER, U.S. stocks were all under pressure. However, when the recession was not over, as monetary policy expectations loosened, inflationary pressures began to ease, and market recovery expectations increased, U.S. stocks were often the first to usher in a rebound. In other words,<b>The \"policy bottom\" is ahead of the \"market bottom\", and the \"market bottom\" is ahead of the \"economic bottom\".</b>From the data point of view, the bottom of the S&P 500 index all occurred during recession periods.</p><p><b>However, the extent of the adjustment in U.S. stocks does not depend entirely on the extent of the recession:</b>In the \"soft landings\" of 1970 and 1980, and in the \"hard landings\" of 1981-82, the S&P 500 index fell no more than 20%; Only in the \"hard landing\" of 1973-75, the S&P 500 index fell nearly 40%. Judging from the magnitude of the rebound, after four rounds of recession and the adjustment of U.S. stocks, the rebound of U.S. stocks is relatively strong, and the S&P 500 index has rebounded by more than 30% from the trough.</p><p><b>The logic behind it may be:</b>The overall market after the \"soft landing\" remains optimistic. Although the market after the \"hard landing\" is not so optimistic, due to the previous low \"base\", the price-performance ratio of US stocks can still attract capital inflows. This means that no matter what the degree of the recession is, as long as the bottom is found and the U.S. stock market is moderately \"tilted forward\", it is possible to obtain good returns.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/164eaafd25fa17da2d93917b48fdcdc5\" tg-width=\"1063\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>The Federal Reserve is not the \"eternal enemy\" of US stocks.</b>Comparing the performance of U.S. stocks after 1970 and 1980, even though the U.S. CPI inflation rate was higher, the Federal Reserve rate hike was more aggressive, and the degree of recession was not weak after 1980, the overall performance of U.S. stocks was significantly better than that in the 1970s. In the 1970s, the S&P 500 index remained almost sideways amid volatility, while after 1980, the S&P 500 index maintained a volatile upward trend. Especially compared with 1973-75 and 1981-82, they were both \"hard landings\", but the latter U.S. stocks fell less and rebounded more. The biggest difference between the two periods is that<b>The latter is more tightening by the Federal Reserve and may have played a more important role in \"creating\" a recession.</b>During the aggressive rate hike of the Federal Reserve, the inflation rate dropped significantly: on the one hand, it eased the suppression of high inflation on economic growth; on the other hand, the market had more confidence in the Federal Reserve, which in turn made recovery expectations stronger and risk appetite higher. In addition, after 1980, \"Reaganomics\" entered the historical stage, and after the market was fully and painfully cleared, American productivity increased rapidly. Therefore, U.S. stocks rebounded even stronger due to the \"two-wheel drive\" of the decline in policy interest rates after inflation was controllable and the profit growth of listed companies. From this perspective, inflation is the \"biggest enemy\" of US stocks, but the Federal Reserve is not; The Federal Reserve, which has the ability to curb inflation, eventually became a \"friend\" of the US stock market!</p><p><b>4.2. U.S. debt: \"dancing\" with monetary policy</b></p><p><b>In the 1970s, the U.S. bond market experienced a long-term bear market, with high inflation and high interest rates driving the US Treasury yields upward.</b>However, the volatility of 10-year US Treasury yields is significantly smaller than that of CPI inflation rate and policy interest rate. It is worth mentioning that the correlation between the U.S. economic recession and US Treasury yields is not obvious: before and after the four rounds of recessions in 1970, 1974-75, 1980 and 1982, the 10-year US Treasury yields fell back in the first round, the second round fluctuated upward, the third round rose sharply, and the fourth round fluctuated stronger. This may reflect the evolution of the Federal Reserve's monetary policy logic, that is, the emphasis on inflation continues to increase and the balance of the economy continues to weaken. Then<b>Over time, the market trades less \"recession\" and more \"tightening\".</b>It was not until after the third quarter of 1982, when the CPI inflation rate was lower than 5% and GDP shrank year-on-year, that the market believed that the Federal Reserve could cut interest rates without distractions, and US Treasury yields dropped significantly.</p><p><b>In the 1980s, the trend of 10-year US Treasury yields was more closely related to the trend of policy interest rates.</b>From 1980 to 81, the U.S. CPI inflation rate showed a downward trend, but the 10-year US Treasury yields rose rapidly, mainly driven by the strong tightening of monetary policy. After 1982, the 10-year US Treasury yields was relatively consistent with the fluctuation trend of policy interest rates, which reflected the effectiveness of monetary policy reform in the Volcker era, that is, the Federal Reserve's driving force for bond interest rates increased significantly.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d465d535d3e18340e29dfe32d95faea\" tg-width=\"1068\" tg-height=\"502\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>Although the 10-year US Treasury yields \"danced\" with the policy rate, the volatility was even smaller.</b>Before the 1970s, the absolute levels and trends of US Treasury yields and Federal Funds rate were very similar in 10 years. In the 1970s, when high inflation came and the Federal Reserve rate hike, although the 10-year US Treasury yields would also rise, the increase was even smaller, and then \"underperformed\" the policy interest rate. The reasons are: on the one hand, the emergence of high inflation and high interest rates has reduced market risk appetite, and U.S. debt has played a certain safe-haven attribute; On the other hand, due to concerns about economic growth, the market doubts the sustainability of high interest rates, which in turn depresses the medium and long-term US Treasury yields (the maturity premium of U.S. bonds is negative). When inflation fell and the Federal Reserve cut interest rates, although the 10-year US Treasury yields also fell, the magnitude was still limited, making US Treasury yields \"outperform\" the policy interest rate. The reason for this phenomenon may be the rise in inflation expectations. In fact, after 1983, the 10-year decline in US Treasury yields was insufficient, which once became a new problem faced by the Federal Reserve: the inflation rate in the United States has dropped to around 2%, but because the market inflation expectation has not dropped in time, the bond market interest rate has dropped slowly, hindering the economic recovery. Later, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker began to regard the bond market interest rate as the yardstick of inflation expectations, and paid more attention to the management of inflation expectations. It took 10 years for the trend of US Treasury yields to further align with the policy interest rate.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/73d7be6ac6bef4e338dc445e6ab9169f\" tg-width=\"1065\" tg-height=\"503\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>4.3. US dollar: Multiple factors create a strong US dollar</b></p><p><b>Factors such as the Federal Reserve's rate hike, rising market demand for safe havens, and the impact on non-US economies jointly created a strong US dollar in 1981-84.</b>In the 1970s, the collapse of the Bretton Woods system caused the rapid depreciation of the US dollar exchange rate. During this period, the US dollar exchange rate did not have a strong correlation with the US economic and monetary cycle. From 1981 to 84, the US dollar exchange rate continued to strengthen, and the the US Dollar Index once rose above the historical peak of 160 from around 85 in the second half of 1980; It was not until the Plaza Accord was signed in 1985 that the strong dollar came to an end.</p><p><b>How to understand the strong dollar during this period?</b>First of all, after 1980, the Federal Reserve led by Volcker strictly controlled the money supply, and the scarcity of the US dollar rose; Second, from 1981 to 82, the U.S. economy fell into recession due to the aggressive rate hike of the Federal Reserve, and U.S. stocks experienced significant adjustments. Economic and market risks stimulated the safe-haven attribute of the U.S. dollar; Third, in 1983-84, the U.S. economy bid farewell to high inflation and entered a strong recovery. The Federal Reserve's policy interest rate and US Treasury yields remained relatively high. During this period, the US dollar exchange rate is still strengthening: on the one hand, the market's confidence in the Federal Reserve has increased; On the other hand, the spillover effects of the Fed's tightening in the early stage on non-US economies appeared (such as the deep debt crisis in Latin America in 1982-85), which made US dollar assets fully attractive.</p><p>It is worth mentioning that<b>During the aggressive Fed rate hike, both the US Dollar Index and US Treasury yields are trending upward.</b>However,<b>The reaction of the US dollar exchange rate lags behind US Treasury yields:</b>For example, in June 1980, US Treasury yields had begun to rise rapidly in 10 years, while the US Dollar Index's rise lagged by about 3 months; In June, 1984, the 10-year US Treasury yields began to fall due to market expectations of interest rate cuts, but the US Dollar Index's decline lagged behind by nine months.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61242bb3f7016cf966b35fefe3930648\" tg-width=\"1067\" tg-height=\"452\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>05. New enlightenment to the present</b></p><p><b>1. The causes of this round of U.S. inflation have many similarities with those in the 1970s and 1980s, but the overall pressure is more limited.</b></p><p>Similar to the 1970s, the current high inflation in the United States is also the result of multiple factors such as monetary and fiscal easing, the slow action of the Federal Reserve, and supply shocks. But in comparison,<b>We tend to think that U.S. inflation will not get out of control as it was then:</b></p><p><ul><li><b>First,</b>This time, the U.S. government did not implement rude price controls like the Nixon administration did, and the balancing effect of price signals on supply and demand did not disappear, reducing the risk of recurrent inflation in the future;</p><p></li><li><b>And second,</b>At present, the risk of the \"wage-price\" spiral in the United States is relatively low. On the one hand, it benefits from the medium-and long-term inflation expectations that are still relatively stable, and on the other hand, it benefits from the long-term weakening of the power of American trade unions;</p><p></li><li><b>And third,</b>At present, the United States has a stronger ability to digest the \"oil crisis\". Especially after the shale oil revolution in 2010, the proportion of energy consumption in the United States in total private consumption has declined, and the United States has also changed from a net importer of crude oil to a net exporter. Therefore, the transmission of oil prices to the core inflation rate in the United States has declined. Therefore, even though the current U.S. CPI energy sub-item growth rate is as high as 40% year-on-year, reaching the level of the two oil crises in 1970s and 1980s, the core CPI inflation rate is significantly lower than at that time.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e9d6130cfa6c71161fdc10b5eaa79c0\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"411\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>2. Although the Federal Reserve has \"made mistakes\" in this round, it has taken the initiative in fighting inflation.</b></p><p>The \"capriciousness\" of monetary policy and the market's lack of confidence in monetary policy were important backgrounds for repeated stagflation in 1970s and 1980s. In comparison,<b>The Fed now has more initiative, and even if it underestimated the sustainability of inflation in 2021 (the \"inflation temporary theory\"), there may still be room for recovery from this mistake:</b></p><p><ul><li><b>First,</b>In terms of understanding and responding to \"stagflation\", the Federal Reserve is no longer \"crossing the river by feeling the stones\", and its monetary policy has already defined the goal of \"price stability\". Since the beginning of this year, the Federal Reserve has declared that \"price stability\" is the prerequisite for \"maximum employment\" and regards curbing inflation as the top priority of monetary policy.</p><p></li><li><b>Secondly,</b>After the Volcker-Greenspan era, the Federal Reserve had a stronger ability to monitor inflation expectations (such as the birth of inflation-protected bonds after 2000), communicated with the market more efficiently, and established a relatively good reputation. Since the beginning of this year, the Fed's tightening signal has significantly raised the nominal interest rate of U.S. debt, and the quick response of the capital market reflects the credibility of monetary policy. At present, U.S. inflation expectations have not been \"unanchored\". The ten-year inflation expectations monitored by the Cleveland Fed model do not exceed 2.5%, far below the level of 4-5% in the 1980s.</p><p></li><li><b>Finally,</b>The Federal Reserve is more independent today. Currently, inflation is the \"enemy\" faced by the Biden administration and the Federal Reserve, and the Fed's tightening is supported by the president. Even if economic pressure increases in the future and the president puts pressure on the Federal Reserve, it is expected that the Federal Reserve will defend its credibility more firmly. Just as Powell's Federal Reserve conducted four rate hike in 2018, despite criticism from then-President Trump.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/aeb68357b44663ea8caedbf43793c2db\" tg-width=\"1074\" tg-height=\"436\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>3. This round of U.S. economic recession is almost inevitable, and there is a risk of a \"hard landing\".</b></p><p>In the 1970s and 1980s, when the U.S. CPI inflation rate rose above 5%, the economic recession came as expected. Compare the current:</p><p><ul><li><b>First,</b>This year, the U.S. CPI inflation rate reached a maximum of 9.1%, which not only exceeded the previous level that triggered the recession, but also exceeded the level during the \"soft landing\" period of the U.S. economy in 1970;</p><p></li><li><b>And second,</b>At present, the Federal Reserve has shown great determination to curb inflation, or maintain policy interest rates at a \"sufficiently restrictive level\" for a long time, at the cost of economic recession (refer to our previous report \"The Defense of the Federal Reserve's Credibility\"). This means that, similar to the Volcker period in 1981-82, the Fed's tightening may be enough to \"create\" a recession;</p><p></li><li><b>And third,</b>At present, the risk of recurrent inflation in the future cannot be ruled out. If a new supply shock unfortunately occurs in the future, or the actual tightening of the Fed is insufficient (for example, when the U.S. economy actually enters a recession, political pressure rises, or financial risks occur in the future, the Fed stops tightening or even cuts interest rates prematurely), then U.S. inflation may still be repeated, leading to a greater recession.</p><p></li></ul><b>4. The price trend of this round of major asset classes may be strongly similar to that of 1970s and 1980s.</b></p><p><b>1) U.S. stocks: Inflation is still the core influencing factor, and there will still be adjustment pressure in the future, but the adjustment may not be too deep, and the rebound may wait for the recession to materialize.</b></p><p><ul><li><b>Similar to the 1970s and 1980s, the current inflation trend also has a strong correlation with the performance of US stocks.</b>In the first half of this year, as the U.S. CPI inflation rate continued to rise, U.S. stocks ushered in a round of deep adjustments; From mid-June to mid-August, commodity prices and inflation expectations cooled down, and U.S. stocks rebounded in stages; Since late August, as the persistence of high inflation has exceeded expectations, the Fed's policy orientation has become tougher, and U.S. stocks have paid more attention to monetary policy, staging a new round of \"tightening panic.\"</p><p></li><li><b>The U.S. stock market may remain under pressure for some time to come, similar to the 1981-82 period when Volcker fought inflation and \"created\" a recession.</b>From 1981 to 82, although the U.S. CPI inflation rate continued to fall, the Federal Reserve's tightening had an impact on the economy and stock market. Similarly, the current Federal Reserve seems to want to return to the \"Volcker era\" and is bound to ensure that inflation falls back at the cost of recession. At present, U.S. inflation is still at a high level, the economy has not yet experienced a substantial recession, and the market's valuation of the recession is not yet sufficient, and there may still be room for subsequent adjustments in U.S. stocks. Judging from historical experience, U.S. stocks may still fall in the early stages of the economic recession. It is not until monetary policy begins to relax in the middle and late stages of the recession that U.S. stocks will usher in a sustained rebound.</p><p></li><li><b>However, the Fed will not be the \"eternal enemy\" of U.S. stocks. If the Fed successfully helps inflation fall, the adjustment of U.S. stocks may not be too deep.</b>When Volcker \"created\" a recession in 1981-92, the adjustment of U.S. stocks was relatively limited and did not fall below the bottom in early 1980. Although the Fed's vigorous fight against inflation brings \"short-term pain\", it can avoid the \"long-term pain\" of repeated inflation. Considering that this round of inflation situation is more optimistic than in the 1970s and 1980s, and the Fed's actions are not too passive, this round of U.S. stock adjustment may not be too deep, and the rebound may be earlier than historical experience.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7f004d3c8a3173e8965e08861dace942\" tg-width=\"1077\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>2) U.S. debt: Monetary policy is still the core influencing factor, and it may not fall back immediately when the recession materializes. It needs to wait until monetary policy clearly begins to relax.</b></p><p><ul><li><b>Similar to the 1970s and 1980s, the core influencing factor of US Treasury yields in the current decade is also monetary policy.</b>The experience of the 1970s-1980s was that the bond market teetered between a \"recession trade\" and a \"tightening trade\". But as the Fed is more determined to fight inflation, the bond market is trading less \"recession\" and more \"tightening.\" In July this year, due to cooling inflation expectations and rising recession expectations, the 10-year US Treasury yields dropped significantly. However, since late August, as the Fed's policy orientation has become tougher, the market has paid more attention to tightening. Therefore, US Treasury yields has continued to rebound in the past 10 years and has risen above 4%, exceeding the stage high of 3.5% in mid-June.</p><p></li><li><b>If the Fed also insists on tightening during a recession, then the US Treasury yields in the early 10-year recession may not fall back soon.</b>Just as in the early days of the U.S. economic recession in 1981-82, even though the U.S. CPI inflation rate has dropped significantly from its high point, it is still far from the 2% target. Monetary policy has not been relaxed, and the 10-year US Treasury yields has remained at a high level. We expect that even if the U.S. economy begins to decline in the first half of 2023, the Federal Reserve may choose to stick to tightening and not cut interest rates, and the bond market may not trade in a recession prematurely.</p><p></li><li><b>A 10-year decline in US Treasury yields may require a substantial decline in policy interest rates.</b>In the second half of 1982, when the U.S. CPI inflation rate fell below 5% and the economic recession was deep, the Federal Reserve began to cut interest rates sharply, and the U.S. bond bull market really started. And note that the starting point of the decline in policy interest rates at that time was ahead of the 10-year US Treasury yields, and the decline was deeper. This means that after the monetary policy clearly begins to relax, the 10-year US Treasury yields may not drop significantly.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/18e234a92705cc42b9b876c30857ee92\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"410\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b>3) U.S. dollar: The \"strong U.S. dollar\" may last for a long time, and the fall in the U.S. dollar exchange rate may require US Treasury yields to fall</b></p><p><ul><li><b>Looking at the mid-cycle, the current logic of the \"strong dollar\" is very similar to that of the 1980s.</b>From 1980 to 84, the US Dollar Index came out of the \"historical peak\". Even though the Federal Reserve cut interest rates during this period, the US dollar exchange rate remained strong for a long time. At present, the logic of supporting the US dollar is very similar to that in the 1980s: the US economy has obvious advantages over non-US regions, and the Fed's tightening confidence is stronger than other developed economies. Looking back, even if the U.S. economy moves from \"stagflation\" to \"recession\", non-U.S. economic and financial risks may not be eliminated (this can be seen from the fluctuations in European and Japanese bond and exchange rate markets this year). On the contrary, the market's trust in U.S. dollar assets will increase (for example, cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin have weakened at present). Therefore, for at least the next 1-2 years, the volatility center of the the US Dollar Index is expected to continue to be higher than the pre-COVID-19 level.</p><p></li><li><b>In the short term, US Treasury yields may be a \"leading indicator\" to judge the trend of the US dollar.</b>In 1980, the 10-year US Treasury yields started its upward cycle earlier than the US Dollar Index; In 1984-85, US Treasury yields fell back before the US Dollar Index in 10 years. In fact, past market performance has basically confirmed US Treasury yields's leadership over the US Dollar Index:<b>1-3 months after the 10-year US Treasury yields peaks and falls, the US Dollar Index usually also peaks and falls.</b>As mentioned earlier, the start of this round of U.S. bond bull market may have to wait until the recession materializes and monetary policy becomes loosened. After that, the signs of the US Dollar Index peaking and falling may become increasingly clear.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fa0454ffd0dbe555b8d8d2e59c3c5c0d\" tg-width=\"1075\" tg-height=\"408\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p><b><i>Risk warning:</i></b></p><p><b><i>1. The resilience of the US economy is less than expected.</i></b><i>Although there is still room for the recovery of the U.S. service industry, under the environment of high inflation and high interest rates, residents' consumer confidence is insufficient or actual consumption is suppressed, which in turn makes the economic growth weaker than the benchmark expectation; As the Federal Reserve's rate hike and demand cool, the pace of cooling in the U.S. job market may exceed expectations.</i></p><p><b><i>2. A new supply shock occurs.</i></b><i>If new supply shocks occur in the future and raise international energy, food and other commodity prices again, the pressure of \"stagflation\" in the United States may rise significantly, the Federal Reserve may have to \"create\" a recession to curb inflation, and market sentiment will turn pessimistic.</i></p><p><b><i>3. The Fed's tightening is insufficient or too strong.</i></b><i>If the Fed's insufficient tightening causes repeated inflation, the cost of the Fed's subsequent inflation control will be even greater; If the Fed's tightening efforts are significantly stronger than market expectations, the risk of market volatility may rise and may eventually threaten the real economy.</i></p><p><b><i>4. Economic and financial risks in non-US regions exceed expectations, etc.</i></b><i>At present, the economic and financial risks of large economies such as Europe and Asia are showing signs of rising. If large-scale economic and financial risk events occur in the future, the U.S. economy and market may be affected.</i></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/49ae9add1640b1e283a53b027b0227c7\" tg-width=\"1040\" tg-height=\"868\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc83db9c8a7fe6fe220fca7ca329cf0d\" tg-width=\"1040\" tg-height=\"513\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/580ee36c20670ad5f1a888d715380e06\" tg-width=\"999\" tg-height=\"928\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p></body></html></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4f6ec6e99c0c8b9feb7f296b78c65a54","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1100486117","content_text":"一、高通胀的复杂性。1970-80年代美国高通胀的成因是极为复杂的:首先,财政和货币刺激过度,初步推升通胀;然后,粗暴的价格管制与犹豫的货币政策,未能有效浇灭通胀;再者,以两次石油危机为代表的供给冲击引发了成本推动型通胀;最后,长期超调的通胀率破坏了通胀预期的稳定,引发工资-物价螺旋,加深了通胀的顽固性。二、美联储的“过”与“功”。1970-1979年,美联储紧缩不够坚决,原因是多方面的:首先,美联储一度认为通胀是“非货币现象”;其次,当时美联储的首要目标是“充分就业”而非“物价稳定”;最后,美联储决策还受到政治因素影响。1979年以后,沃尔克领导的美联储吸收“货币学派”理念,将遏制通胀视为己任,坚定加息和控制货币供给。此后,美联储在较长时间里致力于稳定通胀预期,重塑了美联储的信誉。三、“软着陆”与“硬着陆”。1970-80年代美国共出现4轮经济衰退,可分为两次“软着陆”(1970年和1980年)和两次“硬着陆”(1973-75年和1981-82年),这是高通胀、高利率和供给冲击共同作用的结果。但实现“软着陆”的条件是较为苛刻的:首先,CPI通胀率或需在衰退初期及时回落;其次,美联储加息不能过于激进,甚至需要在衰退到来时及时降息;最后,若发生新的供给冲击,“硬着陆”可能更难避免。四、资产价格的线索。1970-80年代,通胀成为资本市场的风向标。美国CPI通胀率三次阶段性触顶,美股皆阶段性触底。但在此过程中,市场对通胀形势以及货币政策逻辑都有一个理解与消化的过程。随时间推移,美债市场更少地交易“衰退”、更多地交易“紧缩”。在1980年以后的“沃尔克时代”,货币政策开始成为资产价格的关键线索。“大滞胀”结束后,美元等避险资产仍在较长时间里表现积极。五、对当下的新启示。第一,本轮美国通胀成因与1970-80年代有诸多相似性,但整体压力更为有限;第二,本轮美联储虽然也曾“犯错”,但在抗击通胀方面更占据主动;第三,本轮美国经济衰退几成必然,且存在“硬着陆”风险;第四,本轮大类资产价格走势与1970-80年代或有较强相似性:1)美股:通胀仍是核心影响因素,未来仍有调整压力,但调整幅度或不会太深,反弹或待衰退兑现。2)美债:货币政策仍是核心影响因素,衰退兑现时也未必立即回落,需等到货币政策明确开始放松。3)美元:“强势美元”可能持续较久,美元回落或需美债利率回落。风险提示:美国经济弱于预期,出现新的供给冲击,非美金融风险上升等。2022年以来,美国CPI通胀率一度升破9%,实际GDP连续两个季度环比萎缩,经济的(类)滞胀特征更加鲜明,资本市场也经历了大幅波动。8月下旬杰克逊霍尔会议以来,美联储在各类场合不断提到“历史经验”,说明当前美国经济环境与1970-80年代极为相似,而美联储也将充分借鉴当时的应对经验,有所为而有所不为,以期帮助美国战胜“滞胀”。当前美国通胀压力几何?货币政策会如何应对?美国经济是否还能实现“软着陆”?资本市场何时迎来“春天”?在本篇报告中,我们带着对当下的疑问,重温1970-80年代美国“大滞胀”时期的通胀、货币政策、经济增长和资产价格表现,并尝试理解其中的逻辑与规律,以期对判断未来一段时间美国经济、货币政策和市场走向有所启发。01、高通胀的复杂性1970-80年代美国高通胀的成因是极为复杂的:首先,财政和货币刺激过度,初步推升通胀;然后,粗暴的价格管制与犹豫的货币政策,未能有效浇灭通胀;再者,以两次石油危机为代表的供给冲击引发了成本推动型通胀;最后,长期超调的通胀率破坏了通胀预期的稳定,引发工资-物价螺旋,加深了通胀的顽固性。1969-1982年,美国陷入高通胀危机,CPI通胀率普遍高于5%,最高曾达到14.8%。美国CPI同比增速自1968年开始便以3%以上的速度较快上升,1969年3月CPI同比破5%,从此开始了长达13年的“高通胀”时代。在1969-1982年里,美国CPI同比增速走势出现三轮波峰,峰值分别在1970年1月(6.2%)、1974年12月(12.3%)和1980年3月(14.8%)。1982年2月CPI同比回落至5%以下。1965-70年,财政和货币盲目扩张,孕育通胀走高。随着二战后经济重建告一段落,加上欧洲与亚洲经济的兴起,美国经济增长动能趋弱,但政策层面盲目刺激,导致经济明显过热。1965-1970年,美国实际GDP增速持续高于潜在增速水平,且产出缺口(实际GDP与潜在GDP差值)占潜在GDP的比重高达3-6%。换言之,当时美国经济增速中有3-6个百分点都是政策刺激出来的。这一时期,美国自然失业率在5.6-5.9%,但实际失业率基本保持在4%以内。在当时,财政刺激的角色强于货币。美国联邦财政支出占GDP比重由在1966-68年期间上升了3.2个百分点,赤字率由1965年的0.2%扩大至1968年的2.8%。1968年,美国政府开始担心财政平衡问题,时任总统约翰逊6月签署了“1968收支控制法”,通过加税补充财政收入。而美联储于同年8月“技术性降息”以对冲加税的影响,为经济过热添火助力。1971-74年,粗暴的价格管制将“短痛”变为“长痛”。1971年8月,尼克松政府实行了为时90天的工资和物价冻结。但实际上,随后价格管制的范围不断扩大,直至1974年美国政府才完全取消对物价的干预。这期间,除特殊情况外,所有商品和服务涨价都需要经过政府审批。1972年中,美国CPI通胀率回落至3%以下。这一次价格管制,被视为美国经济史上和平时期政府全面干预价格的一个特例,也被认为是一次失败的尝试。这是因为,限价措施在抑制物价上涨的同时,也严重打击了生产企业的积极性,造成社会商品供应不足,为后来通胀的恶化埋下伏笔。1974年尼克松因“水门事件”下台,新总统卡特上台,价格管制措施逐步失效。略显滑稽的是,尼克松和卡特政府均尝试通过口头“劝诫”来管控物价。例如,卡特刚上台时曾鼓励民众买“便宜货”:“要敢于向他人炫耀,自己专挑便宜货买,并为此感到自豪”。这些劝诫对于管控物价几乎是徒劳的,美国CPI通胀率自1973年4月重新破5%,此后一路上行并于1974年12月达到12.3%的阶段高点。1973年和1979年的一次粮食危机和两次石油危机,展示了供给冲击对美国物价的破坏力。1973年,前苏联谷物受恶劣天气影响而歉收,继而进入国际市场大量购买粮食,引发了二战以来最为严重的粮食危机。1973年末,美国食品CPI同比增速一度升破20%。1973年10月至1974年3月,第一次石油危机爆发:以沙特为首的石油输出国组织成员国宣布,对赎罪日战争期间支持以色列的国家实施石油禁运,美国首当其冲。世界银行原油均价由1973年9月的2.7美元/桶,跃升至1974年初的13美元/桶,涨幅接近500%。1974年3-9月,美国能源CPI同比增速均超过30%。1979年初至1980年初,第二次石油危机爆发:伊朗爆发伊斯兰革命,而后伊朗和伊拉克爆发“两伊战争”,导致全球石油产量锐减。世界银行国际油价由1978年12月的不到15美元/桶升,至1979年11月的40美元/桶以上。1980年3月,美国能源CPI同比达到47.1%的峰值,美国CPI同比也随即达到14.8%的顶点。1970-80年,美国标题通胀率持续超调后,通胀预期失控,在工会力量助推下,“工资-物价螺旋”逐渐形成。在CPI通胀率连续多年高于2%、甚至高于5%后,美国居民对物价失去原有的信心,通胀预期上升。当时,无论是美联储还是市场,对于通胀预期的认知和跟踪都比较有限。当下广泛引用的密歇根大学调查和克利夫兰联储模型预期,在1980年前后才陆续诞生。美国最早的通胀预期监测工具是1946年诞生的利文斯顿调查(The Livingston Survey),它总结了来自企业、政府、银行业和学术界的通胀预测。该调查显示,1970年以后美国通胀预期逐渐走高,尤其两次石油危机后,通胀预期也随标题通胀率陡然上升。通胀预期对于物价的反向影响主要通过工资传导:劳工要求涨薪,继而居民的消费能力与企业的成本压力上升,同时促成物价上涨,即形成“工资-物价螺旋”。尤其是,1970年代美国工会力量庞大,工资诉求的传导较为通畅:据美国劳工统计局(BLS)数据,当时美国工会成员占社会总雇员的近三成,每年发生千人以上罢工运动高达200-400起(2000年以后这一数字已常年低于30起)。1976年中至1978年中,美国CPI通胀率回落至5-7%左右,但美国非农非管理人员平均时薪同比增速达到6-8%、持续高于CPI通胀率。工资上涨的粘性阻碍了通胀的进一步回落,并为后来通胀的反弹做铺垫。1970-79年,美联储的政策应对较为消极,持续“落后于曲线”,未能有效遏制通胀。1980年以前,美国政策利率与通胀走势呈现较强同步性,体现了美联储在较长的时间里都在“落后于曲线”、“追赶曲线”。1969年5月,在通胀率破5%后的第三个月,美国政策利率才开始明显上升并超过通胀率3个百分点以上,此后通胀率保持上升了半年左右才开始回落。1973年下半年,美国通胀率仍在上升的情况下,美联储迫于经济压力而降息,继而通胀率加速上升。1978年,美国政策利率与通胀率基本持平,并保持亦步亦趋地上升,直到1978年12月,联邦基金月率升破10%并高出通胀率1个百分点,但很快政策利率又开始落后于通胀率。后来,当美国政策利率显著高于即期通胀率后,通胀才明显回落,美联储在遏制通胀方面才算拥有了主动:1979年以后,沃尔克领导的美联储大幅升息抗击通胀;1981年中,美国政策利率到达19%以上的高峰,同年10月CPI环比和同比同时下降;此后联邦基金利率持续高于CPI通胀率4-9个百分点不等,通胀率持续回落。02、美联储的“ 过” 与“ 功”1970-1979年,美联储紧缩不够坚决,原因既包括对通胀与货币政策的关系认知不足,也包括货币政策的独立性缺失。1979年以后,沃尔克领导的美联储吸收“货币学派”理念,将遏制通胀视为己任,坚定加息和控制货币供给。此后,美联储在较长时间里致力于稳定通胀预期,重塑了美联储的信誉。2.1、美联储犹豫的原因1970-1979年,美联储持续“落后于曲线”,原因是多方面的。首先,美联储一度认为通胀是“非货币现象”。当时,美联储对于高通胀的成因出现分歧,并倾向于认为通胀主要由非货币因素造成,继而货币政策选择消极应对。例如,1970年,伯恩斯领导的美联储认为,工会力量引发了成本推动型通胀,继而主张动用“收入政策”调控,而不愿收紧货币供给。这也推动了尼克松政府后来实施的工资和物价冻结。1974年,伯恩斯又认为,“不恰当的财政纪律”是导致通胀的主因。其次,美联储在当时的首要目标是“充分就业”而非“物价稳定”。1970年代以前,凯恩斯主义理念主导货币政策逻辑,美联储专注于总需求管理,并坚信菲利普斯曲线(失业率与通胀的负相关性)的存在。因此,美联储将货币政策的首要目标落脚在实现“充分就业”,希望维持较低且稳定的失业率水平,继而当失业率上升时,货币政策的天平更向就业市场倾斜。当“滞”与“胀”同时发生时,美联储一度认为通胀不会继续恶化。例如,1978-79年米勒领导的美联储认为,只要失业率在充分就业水平之上(5.5%以上),货币宽松就不会加深通胀。最后,美联储决策还受到政治因素影响。1970-1978年担任主席的伯恩斯、以及1978-79年任职的米勒,均受到时任总统的影响而缺乏独立性,在平衡通胀与经济增长的关系时摇摆不定。事后来看,1970年代美联储对通胀的容忍可能正是执政者所希望看到的:一方面,执政者不希望美联储因遏制通胀而破坏经济增长、影响选票;另一方面,较高的通胀也被视为一种隐性的税收手段,因名义工资上涨提高了整个税收体系的累进程度,使财政收入大幅上升。数据显示,美国个人所得税占GDP比重在1969-70年、1974年以及1979-83年的高通胀时期,均有明显上升。2.2、沃尔克时代的功绩1979年以后,沃尔克领导的美联储吸收“货币学派”理念,将遏制通胀为己任,坚定地加息和控制货币供给,虽然“制造”了经济衰退,但也最终战胜了通胀。1979 年8月,沃尔克就任美联储主席,其采取了以弗里德曼为代表的“货币学派”观点,其领导的美联储更加明确了货币政策对于物价稳定的核心地位,并将货币供给(M1)增速纳入货币政策目标,继而大幅加息,使联邦基金利率高于CPI通胀率,以达到控制货币供给的目标。1980年3月,沃尔克曾实施了一次不甚明智但短暂的信贷控制试验(“特别信贷限制计划”),以期减缓加息幅度,但随后又重启货币政策紧缩,并最终在1981年中将联邦基金利率一度推升至20%以上的峰值。大幅加息虽然带来了经济衰退,但最终帮助通胀回落。此外,在沃尔克和格林斯潘时代,美联储建立了新的“名义锚”,以稳定通胀预期并重塑美联储的信誉,这也是日后美国物价回归长期稳定的重要背景。1980年代,在经历“大滞胀”后,原本的物价稳定预期遭遇严重损害。即便在沃尔克时代,美联储明确了货币供给目标、坚定地提高了利率,但货币政策的可信度仍受质疑。公众并不清楚美联储能否长期保持对通胀的重视,并有能力影响中长期物价走势。因此,沃尔克和其下任联储主席格林斯潘,更致力于重构稳定的通胀预期,使其成为货币政策的“名义锚”,最终重新树立货币政策的可信度。这是一个复杂而漫长的过程:沃尔克战胜通胀的经历是良好起点,而后美联储由货币供给目标转向“隐性通胀目标制”。实际操作中,美联储同时盯住“增长缺口”和“通胀预期缺口”,事实上通过泰勒规则制定政策利率,追求稳定的中长期通胀目标,实现稳定的经济增长。在通胀预期管理上,美联储通过债券收益率变动来监测通胀预期,同时加强与资本市场的沟通,增强了货币政策的可信度与市场预期的稳定性。沃尔克时代后的货币政策框架,在物价稳定方面取得了长期性成果,造就了后来的大稳健时代(Great Moderation,1984-2007年)。03、“ 软着陆” 与“ 硬着陆”1970-80年代美国共出现4轮经济衰退,这是高通胀、高利率和供给冲击共同作用的结果。高通胀对于消费产生直接的抑制作用,并驱使美联储加息、进一步抑制投资。因此,衰退的程度取决于通胀的严峻性以及货币政策的应对,实现“软着陆”的条件是较为苛刻的。3.1、经济衰退的三大推手按照美国国民经济研究局(NBER)的划分,1970-80年代美国经济共出现四轮衰退:第一轮是1970年1月至11月(11个月)。美国实际GDP同比由1969年的3.2%下滑至1970年的0.2%,但经济几乎没有萎缩。而美国失业率却显著攀升,由1969年12月的3.5%升至1970年12月的6.1%(阶段高点),在此后的24个月里均保持在5%以上。第二轮是1973年12月至1975年3月(16个月)。美国实际GDP同比由1973年的5.6%断崖式下滑,曾连续5个季度同比萎缩,季度同比萎缩最深达2.3%。美国失业率连续31个月高于7%,由1973年10月阶段低点的4.6%,一路走高至1975年5月的9.0%,此后缓慢下降。第三轮是1980年2月至7月(6个月)。美国实际GDP环比折年率于1980年二季度大幅萎缩8%,不过同比仅萎缩0.8%。在这一时期,美国失业率由6.3%最高升至7.8%。1980年下半年,美国经济立即开始复苏,四季度GDP环比大幅上涨7.7%,失业率于8月开始回落。第四轮是1981年8月至1982年11月(16个月)。美国实际GDP曾连续4个季度同比萎缩、最深萎缩2.6%。美国失业率在1981年8月开始从7.2%的阶段低点显著回升,同年11月破8%,1982年11月达到10.8%的峰值,此后缓慢回落,1984年2月才降至8%以下。衰退推手之一:高通胀。比较当时的经济与通胀走势,二者呈现出十分紧密的相关性:美国经济衰退发生的节点,均对应CPI通胀率上升或触顶的时候。例如,1970年CPI通胀率触顶时点,恰好是失业率反弹与经济衰退的开端;1973-75年,这一轮失业率反弹和经济被认定为衰退的时点,都在CPI通胀率破8%以后;1980年初,当CPI通胀率触及14%以上的极高水平时,失业率显著反弹、经济开始衰退。如果衰退发生时,通胀率仍在上升,则美国经济继续下行;只有通胀率回落后,美国经济才开始复苏。例如,1970年末,直到通胀回落至5%以下,美国经济才开始复苏;1975年,当通胀率触顶回落一个季度后,美国GDP环比增速转正、失业率开始下降。通胀对经济的直接影响主要体现在消费上。相比政策利率,美国通胀率与私人消费增速的负相关性更为明显。尤其在1980年代,当政策利率大幅跃升时,通胀率已经提早回落,当时私人消费也开始回升,说明通胀缓和对于消费回暖有明显帮助。衰退推手之二:高利率。整体而言,当时美联储加息对经济的降温效应是明显的:当美国经济处于过热时,加息对经济的降温效果可谓立竿见影:如1973年中,美国制造业PMI超过60,美联储加息使“过热”的经济快速降温。当美国经济本身处于下行甚至衰退时,加息则深化了经济萎缩的幅度:如1974年中,政策利率达峰后,美国经济下行速度加快,三季度美国GDP环比大幅萎缩3.7%;1980年3-4月,联邦基金月率达到17%以上的阶段高点后,同年二季度美国GDP环比大幅萎缩8.0%。反之,降息可助力经济复苏:1970年12月,当政策利率降至通胀率之下时,美国经济立刻处于复苏状态;1975年初,美联储降息并使政策利率低于通胀率近5个百分点,美国经济于1975年二季度开始复苏。但是,在通胀未得到有效控制时过早地、不成熟地降息,可能会以“通胀反复+更高幅度的加息”收场,从而酿至更大程度的衰退,或延缓本应更早开始的复苏:1974年初,美联储选择降息,但由于通胀继续走高、对经济的负面影响持续,美国经济仍步入衰退;1980年5月,联邦基金月率已降至11%左右(辅以信贷管制),8月美国经济暂时脱离衰退区间,但由于此后通胀反复迫使美联储选择更大力度地加息,1981年美国经济陷入新一轮程度更深的衰退。利率对经济的影响主要体现在投资上。相比通胀,政策利率与私人投资(滞后1年)的负相关性更为明显。1980年下半年,美联储短暂降息,一年后美国私人投资明显反弹;1981年,当美联储重新大幅加息后,一年后的私人投资增速明显下滑,但该时期通胀也已明显回落,说明私人投资对利率走势更为敏感。衰退推手之三:供给冲击。1973年和1979年的粮食和石油危机,对美国经济增长造成了多方面拖累,因此都引发了经济衰退。第一,如上文提到,供给冲击抬升了CPI通胀率,消费价格上涨抑制了总需求。尤其是,供给冲击引发能源消费成本上升,并挤占了其他消费。1974年以后,美国能源产品和服务消费占私人消费比重,由冲击前的6%左右上升至7-9%,直到1985年以后才明显回落。第二,供给冲击增大了美国石油进口成本,导致GDP“蒸发”。第一次石油危机导致油价上涨约10美元/桶,1974年美国石油净进口量约为600万桶/日。我们测算,石油涨价通过增加净进口成本对美国GDP的拖累约为219亿美元,拖累GDP名义增速1.4个百分点;类似地,第二次石油危机后,石油净进口成本上升拖累了1979年美国GDP名义增速2.8个百分点。第三,供给冲击引发原材料紧缺,削弱了美国工业生产能力。1970年代的两轮供给冲击后,美国工业生产总指数同比均出现大幅下降。对比两次冲击可以发现,第一次冲击时,美国CPI通胀率较低、而PPI通胀率更高,继而工业生产所受冲击程度更深,这也体现了供给冲击对经济产出的影响更主要地表现在“供给端”。3.2、衰退程度取决于什么对于上述4轮衰退,按照GDP萎缩程度、以及衰退时长划分,可分为两次“软着陆”(1970年和1980年)和两次“硬着陆”(1973-75年和1981-82年)。1970年“软着陆”的背景是,通胀压力相对有限。当时CPI通胀率最高仅为6.2%,继而美联储也未大幅加息,政策利率最高仅为9%左右。而通胀有限,一方面是没有遭受供给冲击,另一方面也和尼克松政府的价格管制有关。1980年“软着陆”的背景是,通胀见顶回落、美联储及时降息。当时美国CPI通胀率一度达到14.8%的历史高点,联邦基金月率曾经达到17.6%,但当衰退开始时,美联储迅速降息,政策利率大幅下降至9%左右时,经济很快开始复苏。1973-75年“硬着陆”的主要原因是,供给冲击下,衰退期间通胀率仍在上行,继而政策利率也不得不跟随通胀快速上升(即使政策利率并未显著高于通胀率);1981-82年“硬着陆”的背景是,美联储迫切希望遏制通胀,从而采取十分激进的加息措施(联邦基金利率曾达到20%左右),虽然通胀率很快开始下降,但政策利率仍持续、显著高于通胀率,使经济复苏进程延缓。由此,我们可以得出结论:“软着陆”的要求是较为苛刻的——首先,通胀压力不能太大,CPI通胀率或需要在衰退初期及时回落。其次,美联储加息不能过于激进,甚至需要在衰退到来时及时降息。最后,如果政府对价格进行过度干预,或者不幸发生了新的供给冲击,那么“软着陆”可能只是暂时的,日后通胀可能反弹、“硬着陆”更难避免。04、资产价格的线索1970-80年代,高通胀是美国经济和政策的“最大敌人”,因而通胀形势也成为资本市场的风向标。在此过程中,市场对通胀形势以及货币政策逻辑都有一个理解与消化的过程。在1980年以后的“沃尔克时代”,货币政策开始成为资产价格的关键线索。此外,“大滞胀”为经济和市场带来了长期伤痛,继而美元等避险资产在较长时间里表现积极。4.1、美股:通胀是最大的敌人这一时期美股走势由通胀主导,每当通胀率调头向下,美股便立即反弹。1970年7月、1974年12月和1980年3月,对应着美国CPI通胀率的三轮顶点,同时也是标普500指数反弹的开端。这或说明,在高通胀时期,通胀走势是市场最为关注的:只要通胀居高不下,美联储就有继续紧缩的可能,美国经济便受到高通胀和高利率的共同威胁;而只要通胀回落,即便经济暂时疲弱,市场相信回落的物价有利于经济复苏、且美联储紧缩有望放松,股市便计入复苏预期。美股在衰退中期触底反弹,调整幅度不完全取决于衰退程度。在NBER定义的4轮衰退初期,美股均承压,但衰退尚未结束时,由于货币政策预期趋松、通胀压力开始缓和,市场复苏预期增强,美股往往率先迎来反弹。换言之,“政策底”领先于“市场底”,“市场底”又领先于“经济底”。从数据上看,标普500指数的底部均出现在衰退时期内。不过,美股调整幅度并不完全取决于衰退程度:1970年和1980年的“软着陆”中,以及1981-82年的“硬着陆”中,标普500指数跌幅均不超过20%;只有1973-75年的“硬着陆”中,标普500指数跌幅接近40%。从反弹幅度看,四轮衰退和美股调整后,美股反弹都是较为强劲的,标普500指数由低谷反弹的幅度均超30%。其背后的逻辑或许在于:“软着陆”后的市场整体保持乐观,“硬着陆”后的市场虽然没有那么乐观,但由于此前“基数”较低,美股的性价比仍能吸引资金流入。这意味着,无论衰退程度如何,只要找准底部适度“前倾”布局美股,均有可能获得不错的收益。美联储不是美股“永远的敌人”。对比1970年后和1980年后的美股表现,即便1980年后美国CPI通胀率更高、美联储加息更为激进、衰退程度也不弱,但美股的整体表现显著好于1970年代。1970年代,标普500指数在波动中几乎保持横盘,而1980年以后标普500指数维持震荡上行趋势。尤其对比1973-75年和1981-82年,都是“硬着陆”,但后者美股下跌幅度更小、反弹幅度更大。两段时期最大的区别在于,后者美联储紧缩力度更强,在“制造”衰退中可能发挥了更重要的作用。在美联储激进加息过程中,通胀率显著下降:一方面缓解了高通胀对经济增长的抑制,另一方面市场对于美联储更有信心,继而令复苏预期更强、风险偏好更高。此外,1980年后,“里根经济学”登上历史舞台,在市场充分而痛苦地出清后,美国生产率快速提升。因而,美股受到通胀可控后的政策利率下降、以及上市公司盈利增长的“双轮驱动”,反弹更为强劲。从这个角度来看,通胀才是美股“最大的敌人”,而美联储不是;有能力遏制通胀的美联储,反而最终成为了美股的“朋友”!4.2、美债:与货币政策“共舞”1970年代,美债市场经历了一段长期熊市,高通胀和高利率共同驱动美债利率上行。但是,10年美债利率的波幅明显小于CPI通胀率和政策利率的波幅。值得一提的是,美国经济衰退与美债利率的相关性并不明显:在1970年、1974-75年、1980年和1982年的四轮衰退前后,10年美债利率在第一轮有所回落,第二轮震荡上行,第三轮大幅走高,第四轮震荡偏强。这或体现了美联储货币政策逻辑的演进过程,即对通胀的重视不断提高、对经济的兼顾不断弱化。继而随时间推移,市场更少地交易“衰退”、更多地交易“紧缩”。直到1982年三季度以后,当CPI通胀率低于5%、GDP同比萎缩时,市场相信美联储能够心无旁骛地降息,美债利率才明显走低。1980年代,10年美债利率走势与政策利率走势更加紧密。1980-81年,美国CPI通胀率呈下行走势,但10年美债利率快速上行,主要由货币政策强力紧缩驱动。1982年以后,10年美债利率与政策利率波动趋势比较贴合,这体现了沃尔克时代货币政策改革的成效,即美联储对债券利率的驱动力显著提升。虽然10年美债利率与政策利率“共舞”,但波动幅度更小。1970年代以前,10年美债利率与联邦基金利率的绝对水平和走势都很相近。1970年代,当高通胀到来、美联储加息时,10年美债利率虽然也会上升,但上升幅度更小,继而“跑输”政策利率。原因在于:一方面,高通胀和高利率的出现,降低了市场风险偏好,美债发挥了一定避险属性;另一方面,市场出于对经济增长的担忧,怀疑高利率的可持续性,继而压低了中长端美债利率(美债期限溢价为负)。当通胀回落、美联储降息后,10年美债利率虽也回落,但幅度仍然有限,使美债利率“跑赢”政策利率,这一现象的原因或许在通胀预期的上升。事实上,1983年以后,10年美债利率下降幅度不足,一度成为美联储面临的新问题:美国通胀率已回落至2%附近,但由于市场通胀预期仍未及时回落,债券市场利率下降缓慢,阻碍了经济复苏。后来,沃尔克领导的美联储开始将债券市场利率视为通胀预期的标尺,更加重视对通胀预期的管理,10年美债利率走势才进一步贴合政策利率。4.3、美元:多因素造就强美元美联储加息、市场避险需求上升、非美经济受冲击等因素,共同造就了1981-84年的强势美元。1970年代,布雷顿森林体系崩溃造成美元汇率迅速贬值,这一时期的美元汇率与美国经济和货币周期相关性不强。1981-84年,美元汇率持续走强,美元指数由1980年下半年的85左右,一度升破160的历史峰值;直到1985年《广场协议》签署,强势美元才得以终结。如何理解这一时期的强势美元?首先,1980年以后,沃尔克领导的美联储严格控制货币供给,美元的稀缺性上升;第二,1981-82年,美国经济因美联储激进加息而陷入衰退,美股经历明显调整,经济和市场风险激发了美元的避险属性;第三,1983-84年,美国经济告别了高通胀,步入强劲复苏,美联储政策利率和美债利率仍维持着相对高位。这一时期美元汇率仍在走强:一方面,市场对美联储的信心提升;另一方面,前期美联储紧缩对非美经济的外溢效应显现(如1982-85年拉美深陷债务危机),这使美元资产具备十足的吸引力。值得一提的是,在美联储激进加息时期,美元指数和美债利率均呈上行趋势。不过,美元汇率的反应滞后于美债利率:例如1980年6月,10年美债利率已经开始快速上行,而美元指数的上行滞后了3个月左右;1984年6月,10年美债利率受市场降息预期影响而开始回落,但美元指数的回落滞后了9个月。05、对当下的新启示1、本轮美国通胀成因与1970-80年代有诸多相似性,但整体压力更为有限。类似1970年代,当前美国的高通胀同样是货币和财政宽松、美联储行动迟缓、供给冲击等多重因素交织的结果。但对比来看,我们倾向于认为美国通胀不会像当时那般失控:第一,这一次美国政府并未像当年尼克松政府那样实施粗暴的价格管制,价格信号对供需的平衡作用并未消失,降低了日后通胀反复的风险;第二,当前美国“工资-物价”螺旋风险相对更低,一方面得益于目前仍较稳定的中长期通胀预期,另一方面得益于美国工会力量的长期削弱;第三,当前美国消化“石油危机”的能力更强,尤其2010年页岩油革命后,美国能源消费占私人消费总额的比重已下降,美国也从原油的净进口国转变为净出口国,因此油价对美国核心通胀率的传导下降。因此,即便当前美国CPI能源分项同比增速高达40%、达到1970-80年代两次石油危机的程度,但核心CPI通胀率明显低于当时。2、本轮美联储虽然也曾“犯错”,但在抗击通胀方面更占据主动。货币政策的“反复无常”,以及市场对货币政策缺乏信心,是1970-80年代滞胀反复的重要背景。对比来看,美联储如今掌握更多主动,即便在2021年低估了通胀的可持续性(“通胀暂时论”),但这一错误或仍有挽回的余地:首先,在认识和应对“滞胀”上,如今美联储已不再“摸着石头过河”,货币政策早已明确“物价稳定”的目标。今年以来,美联储宣称“物价稳定”是“最大就业”的前提,将遏制通胀视为货币政策的首要任务。其次,沃尔克-格林斯潘时代后,美联储监控通胀预期的能力更强(如2000年以后通胀保值债券诞生),与市场沟通的效率更高,建立了较为良好的信誉。今年以来,美联储紧缩信号显著抬升了美债名义利率,资本市场的敏捷反应折射出货币政策的可信性。当下美国通胀预期并未“脱锚”,克利夫兰联储模型监测的十年通胀预期不超过2.5%,远不及1980年代4-5%的水平。最后,如今美联储的独立性更强。当前,通胀是拜登政府和美联储共同面对的“敌人”,美联储紧缩受到总统的支持。即便未来经济压力加大、总统向美联储施压,预计美联储也会较为坚定地捍卫信誉。正如鲍威尔领导的美联储曾在2018年四次加息,不顾时任总统特朗普的批评一样。3、本轮美国经济衰退几成必然,且存在“硬着陆”风险。1970-80年代,当美国CPI通胀率升高至5%以上时,经济衰退便如期而至。对比当前:第一,今年美国CPI通胀率最高达到9.1%,不仅超过了此前触发衰退的水平,且已超过1970年美国经济“软着陆”时期水平;第二,当前美联储表现出很大决心遏制通胀,或将政策利率维持在“足够限制性水平(sufficiently restrictive level)”较长时间,不惜付出经济衰退的代价(参考我们此前报告《美联储信誉保卫战》)。这意味着,类似1981-82年沃尔克时期,本次美联储紧缩力度可能足以“制造”一场衰退;第三,目前尚不能排除未来通胀反复的风险。如果未来不幸发生了新的供给冲击,或者美联储实际紧缩力度不足(如未来当美国经济切实进入衰退、政治压力上升、或发生金融风险时,美联储过早停止紧缩甚至降息),那么美国通胀仍可能反复,从而酿至更大程度的衰退。4、本轮大类资产价格走势与1970-80年代或有较强相似性。1)美股:通胀仍是核心影响因素,未来仍有调整压力,但调整幅度或不会太深,反弹或待衰退兑现。类似1970-80年代,当前通胀走势与美股表现也有较强相关性。今年上半年,随着美国CPI通胀率不断上升,美股迎来一轮深度调整;6月中旬至8月中旬,大宗商品价格与通胀预期降温,美股阶段性反弹;8月下旬以来,随着高通胀的持续性超出预期,美联储政策取向更加强硬,美股对货币政策的关注加强,上演了新一轮“紧缩恐慌”。未来一段时间美股市场或仍将承压,类似1981-82年沃尔克抗击通胀并“制造”衰退的时期。1981-82年,虽然美国CPI通胀率持续回落,但美联储紧缩对经济和股市造成冲击。类似地,当前美联储似乎想要重回“沃尔克时代”,势必确保通胀回落,不惜付出衰退代价。目前,美国通胀仍处高位、经济尚未实质性衰退,市场对衰退的计价尚不充分,后续美股或仍有调整空间。从历史经验看,美股在经济衰退初期仍可能下跌,直到衰退中后期货币政策开始放松,美股才迎来持续性反弹。不过,美联储不会是美股“永远的敌人”,若美联储顺利帮助通胀回落,美股调整幅度或不会太深。1981-92年沃尔克“制造”衰退时,美股调整幅度相对有限,并未跌破1980年初的底部。美联储大力抗击通胀虽带来“短痛”,但可避免通胀反复的“长痛”。考虑到,本轮通胀形势比1970-80年代还更乐观一些,美联储行动也不算太过被动,这一轮美股调整幅度或不会太深、反弹也可能较历史经验更提前一些。2)美债:货币政策仍是核心影响因素,衰退兑现时也未必立即回落,需等到货币政策明确开始放松时。类似1970-80年代,当前10年美债利率的核心影响因素也是货币政策。1970-80年代的经验是,债券市场在“衰退交易”和“紧缩交易”之间徘徊。但随着美联储抗击通胀更加坚决,债券市场更少地交易“衰退”、更多地交易“紧缩”。今年7月,因通胀预期降温、衰退预期升温,10年美债利率明显回落。但8月下旬以来,随着美联储政策取向更加强硬,市场更加关注紧缩,因而近期10年美债利率持续反弹并已升破4%,超过6月中旬3.5%的阶段高点。如果美联储在衰退时也坚持紧缩,那么衰退初期10年美债利率未必很快回落。正如在1981-82年美国经济衰退初期,即便美国CPI通胀率已由高点明显回落,但与2%的目标仍有很大距离,货币政策并未放松,10年美债利率保持在高位。我们预计,即便2023年上半年美国经济开始衰退,但美联储可能选择坚持紧缩、不会降息,债市可能也不会过早交易衰退。10年美债利率下降或需政策利率实质性下降。1982年下半年,美国CPI通胀率回落至5%以下、经济衰退程度较深时,美联储开始大幅降息,美债牛市才真正开启。且注意到,当时政策利率下降的起点领先于10年美债利率、下降幅度也更深。这意味着,待货币政策明确开始放松后,10年美债利率或才能明显下降。3)美元:“强势美元”可能持续较久,美元汇率回落或需美债利率回落中周期看,当前“强势美元”的逻辑与1980年代十分相似。1980-84年,美元指数走出了“历史大顶”,即便期间美联储降息,美元汇率也长期保持强势。当前,支撑美元的逻辑与1980年代十分相似:美国经济相对非美地区有明显优势,美联储紧缩底气强于其他发达经济体。往后看,即便美国经济由“滞胀”走向“衰退”,非美经济金融风险也未必消除(这从今年欧洲、日本债券和汇率市场波动中便可窥见一斑),反而市场对美元资产的信任会增强(如当前比特币等加密货币已然走弱)。因此,至少在未来1-2年,美元指数波动中枢有望持续高于新冠疫情前水平。短周期看,美债利率或是判断美元走势的“领先性指标”。1980年,10年美债利率早于美元指数开启上行周期;1984-85年,10年美债利率先于美元指数回落。事实上,过往的市场表现也基本印证了美债利率对美元指数的领先性:在10年美债利率触顶回落后的1-3个月,美元指数通常也见顶回落。如前所述,本轮美债牛市的开启或需等到衰退兑现且货币政策趋松,在此之后美元指数触顶回落迹象或才能日渐清晰。风险提示:1、美国经济韧性不及预期。虽然美国服务业复苏仍有空间,但高通胀和高利率环境下,居民消费信心不足或压制实际消费,继而使经济增长状况弱于基准预期;随着美联储加息和需求降温,美国就业市场降温节奏或超预期。2、发生新的供给冲击。如果未来新的供给冲击发生,并再度抬升国际能源、食品等商品价格,美国“滞胀”压力或将显著抬升,美联储可能不得不“制造”衰退才能遏制通胀,市场情绪将转为悲观。3、美联储紧缩力度不足或过强。如果美联储紧缩力度不足造成通胀反复,美联储后续治理通胀的成本更大;如果美联储紧缩力度明显强于市场预期,市场波动风险或将上升并可能最终威胁实体经济。4、非美地区经济金融风险超预期等。当前欧洲、亚洲等大型经济体的经济金融风险出现上升迹象。如果未来发生大型经济金融风险事件,美国经济和市场或受到波及。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":408,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9908815898,"gmtCreate":1659358949014,"gmtModify":1705979444338,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9908815898","repostId":"1146279071","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1146279071","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1659313800,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1146279071?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-08-01 08:30","market":"hk","language":"zh","title":"The United States has included 159 Chinese concept stocks in the list of \"to be delisted\", how to deal with it","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1146279071","media":"环球时报","summary":"符合条件的中概股回归港股是首选,其次是A股,此外新加坡也正在吸引中企IPO。","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>Experts said that it is the first choice for eligible Chinese concept stocks to return to Hong Kong stocks, followed by A shares. In addition, Singapore is also attracting IPOs from Chinese companies. July 29th,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>The stock price suddenly plummeted by 11% on the New York Stock Exchange. The main trigger came from the fact that the largest Chinese concept stock by market value was included in the \"pre-delisting\" list by the US Securities and Exchange Commission. After the U.S. \"Foreign Company Accountability Act\" came into effect in 2021, many Chinese companies listed in the United States were included in the \"pre-delisting\" list of U.S. stocks by the U.S. for \"audit reasons\". Experts believe that Chinese concept stocks need to be more and more prepared for the future U.S. capital market. Be prepared for the trend of \"politicization\".</p><p>Return to Hong Kong Dual Primary Listing</p><p>Also on the list with Alibaba<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MOGU\">Mushroom Street</a>And<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CMCM\">Cheetah Mobile</a>。 As of the end of July, the US Securities and Exchange Commission had included 159 Chinese concept stocks in the list of \"to be delisted\" in accordance with the US Foreign Companies Accountability Act. The Wall Street Journal reported that after the Foreign Companies Accountability Act takes effect in 2021, the United States can ban the securities transactions of companies whose audit firms have not been inspected by U.S. audit oversight agencies for three consecutive years.</p><p>Some media said that if China and the United States fail to reach a consensus and complete the inspection of accounting firms in 2022, 192 Chinese concept stock companies may be forced to delist in 2023. As of March this year, a total of 261 Chinese companies were listed in the United States, with a total market value of about $1.3 trillion, according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Committee.</p><p>On July 26, Alibaba announced its application for dual primary listing in Hong Kong. At present, the uncertainty of U.S. regulatory policy is threatening all Chinese concept stocks including Ali. Realizing a \"dual primary listing\" in Hong Kong can greatly reduce potential risks.</p><p>After Alibaba announced its decision, it was listed on Nasdaq on the 27th<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/KC\">Kingsoft Cloud</a>Also applied for dual primary listing in Hong Kong. The Wall Street Journal stated that Kingsoft Cloud was submitting to<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00388\">HKEX</a>According to the preliminary prospectus, it plans to use the proceeds from the issuance to upgrade the technical infrastructure, including the purchase of high-performance servers and data center services.</p><p>According to reports, earlier this year, a video sharing platform company listed on Nasdaq<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI\">Bilibili</a>A similar plan has also been put forward, intending to change the secondary listing status of Hong Kong stocks to the primary listing. According to statistics, at least more than 10 Chinese concept stocks on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange have completed or are applying for conversion to dual primary listings. The vast majority of Chinese concept stocks recently listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange choose the same dual primary listing method as Ali, including<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEKE\">Shells</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZH\">Zhihu</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TUYA\">Tuya Smart</a>And<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MNSO\">MINISO</a>Etc.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/601995\">CICC</a>Analysts in the research department believe that by choosing dual primary listing in Hong Kong, leading high-quality companies can not only enjoy the rich liquidity brought by being included in Hong Kong Stock Connect, but also ensure that their primary listing status will not be damaged under extreme delisting situations overseas.</p><p>Hong Kong A shares welcome Chinese concept stocks</p><p>Dong Dengxin, director of the Institute of Financial Securities of Wuhan University of Science and Technology, said in an interview with the Global Times on July 31 that Chinese companies were keen to go public in European and American capital markets before, mainly because the European and American market systems are mature and the market capacity is large, especially the American capital market has a high degree of recognition for entrepreneurial and unprofitable companies, and usually gives higher valuations. Therefore, some growing companies that have not yet met the financial requirements for listing in the mainland are more keen to list in the United States. This is conducive to Chinese enterprises connecting with the mature global management system and exploring the global market.</p><p>\"The return of Chinese concept stocks is the general trend in the context of increasing listing risks in the United States.\" Dong Dengxin said that the return of qualified Chinese concept stocks to Hong Kong stocks is the first choice, followed by the return to A shares. Dong Dengxin believes that the stay of Chinese concept stocks largely depends on the cooperation between Chinese and American regulators, but the \"politicization\" trend of the US capital market requires Chinese concept stocks to be fully psychologically prepared for this.</p><p>After Alibaba announced its application for dual listing in Hong Kong, Xu Zhengyu, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government, said that at present, 70% of Chinese concept stocks listed in the United States have returned to Hong Kong for primary or secondary listing. He said that Hong Kong welcomes any enterprise that meets the standards and requirements of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange to come to Hong Kong to raise funds.</p><p>Hong Kong Financial Secretary Chen Maobo previously stated that the innovation of listing rules will help further attract high-quality Chinese concept stocks to be listed in Hong Kong, enrich market choices, increase market liquidity, and enhance the competitiveness of Hong Kong's global financing platform. Hong Kong's \"Sing Tao Daily\" recently stated that Hong Kong is still the first choice for the return of Chinese concept stocks, especially large enterprises, mainly considering market liquidity and local investor portfolio.</p><p>On March 25, 2022, the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange issued the Interim Measures for CDR Listing and Trading, supporting the return of Chinese concept stocks with a market value of more than 20 billion yuan to A-share listing. This path allows companies to go back to the Science and Technology Innovation Board for listing while retaining the red-chip structure. In May 2019,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/688981\">SMIC</a>Announced delisting from the US stock market. July 16, 2020,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00981\">SMIC</a>The successful listing on the Science and Technology Innovation Board has become an important case for red-chip companies to return to A-shares.</p><p>Singapore attracts IPOs from Chinese companies</p><p>\"Singapore pays attention to the listing of Chinese companies to hedge risks.\" Bloomberg News recently reported that the shrinkage of the new stock market of SGX for many years may soon end, because more Chinese concept stocks aimed at reducing political risks between China and the United States, as well as unicorns in Southeast Asia (startups with a valuation of more than US $1 billion) seek to raise funds for listing in Singapore.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/S68.SI\">Singapore Exchange</a>Bao Desheng, head of global sales and development, said that in the next five years, the SGX may have 30 to 40 initial and secondary listings a year-more than double the average of about 13 listings a year since 2017. Bao Desheng also said that SGX is negotiating and communicating with more than 100 companies in China and Southeast Asia, covering financial technology, consumer technology, real estate investment trusts and other fields.</p><p>According to Bloomberg News, the number of newly listed companies on the SGX has continued to decrease in the past decade or so. Therefore, SGX is stepping up negotiations with Chinese companies seeking to list outside the United States or Hong Kong, China, and interested in increasing their popularity in Southeast Asia.</p><p>In 2021, there were 8 companies listed on SGX. On April 28 this year, Yangzijiang Financial Holdings Co., Ltd. was listed on SGX.<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NIO\">Nio</a>On May 20th, it was officially listed in Singapore for the second time, and its shares listed on SGX will be fully interchangeable with American depositary receipts listed on NYSE.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"highlight_wallstreetcn","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The United States has included 159 Chinese concept stocks in the list of \"to be delisted\", how to deal with it</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe United States has included 159 Chinese concept stocks in the list of \"to be delisted\", how to deal with it\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">环球时报</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-08-01 08:30</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>Experts said that it is the first choice for eligible Chinese concept stocks to return to Hong Kong stocks, followed by A shares. In addition, Singapore is also attracting IPOs from Chinese companies. July 29th,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a>The stock price suddenly plummeted by 11% on the New York Stock Exchange. The main trigger came from the fact that the largest Chinese concept stock by market value was included in the \"pre-delisting\" list by the US Securities and Exchange Commission. After the U.S. \"Foreign Company Accountability Act\" came into effect in 2021, many Chinese companies listed in the United States were included in the \"pre-delisting\" list of U.S. stocks by the U.S. for \"audit reasons\". Experts believe that Chinese concept stocks need to be more and more prepared for the future U.S. capital market. Be prepared for the trend of \"politicization\".</p><p>Return to Hong Kong Dual Primary Listing</p><p>Also on the list with Alibaba<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MOGU\">Mushroom Street</a>And<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CMCM\">Cheetah Mobile</a>。 As of the end of July, the US Securities and Exchange Commission had included 159 Chinese concept stocks in the list of \"to be delisted\" in accordance with the US Foreign Companies Accountability Act. The Wall Street Journal reported that after the Foreign Companies Accountability Act takes effect in 2021, the United States can ban the securities transactions of companies whose audit firms have not been inspected by U.S. audit oversight agencies for three consecutive years.</p><p>Some media said that if China and the United States fail to reach a consensus and complete the inspection of accounting firms in 2022, 192 Chinese concept stock companies may be forced to delist in 2023. As of March this year, a total of 261 Chinese companies were listed in the United States, with a total market value of about $1.3 trillion, according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Committee.</p><p>On July 26, Alibaba announced its application for dual primary listing in Hong Kong. At present, the uncertainty of U.S. regulatory policy is threatening all Chinese concept stocks including Ali. Realizing a \"dual primary listing\" in Hong Kong can greatly reduce potential risks.</p><p>After Alibaba announced its decision, it was listed on Nasdaq on the 27th<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/KC\">Kingsoft Cloud</a>Also applied for dual primary listing in Hong Kong. The Wall Street Journal stated that Kingsoft Cloud was submitting to<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00388\">HKEX</a>According to the preliminary prospectus, it plans to use the proceeds from the issuance to upgrade the technical infrastructure, including the purchase of high-performance servers and data center services.</p><p>According to reports, earlier this year, a video sharing platform company listed on Nasdaq<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BILI\">Bilibili</a>A similar plan has also been put forward, intending to change the secondary listing status of Hong Kong stocks to the primary listing. According to statistics, at least more than 10 Chinese concept stocks on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange have completed or are applying for conversion to dual primary listings. The vast majority of Chinese concept stocks recently listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange choose the same dual primary listing method as Ali, including<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEKE\">Shells</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZH\">Zhihu</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TUYA\">Tuya Smart</a>And<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MNSO\">MINISO</a>Etc.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/601995\">CICC</a>Analysts in the research department believe that by choosing dual primary listing in Hong Kong, leading high-quality companies can not only enjoy the rich liquidity brought by being included in Hong Kong Stock Connect, but also ensure that their primary listing status will not be damaged under extreme delisting situations overseas.</p><p>Hong Kong A shares welcome Chinese concept stocks</p><p>Dong Dengxin, director of the Institute of Financial Securities of Wuhan University of Science and Technology, said in an interview with the Global Times on July 31 that Chinese companies were keen to go public in European and American capital markets before, mainly because the European and American market systems are mature and the market capacity is large, especially the American capital market has a high degree of recognition for entrepreneurial and unprofitable companies, and usually gives higher valuations. Therefore, some growing companies that have not yet met the financial requirements for listing in the mainland are more keen to list in the United States. This is conducive to Chinese enterprises connecting with the mature global management system and exploring the global market.</p><p>\"The return of Chinese concept stocks is the general trend in the context of increasing listing risks in the United States.\" Dong Dengxin said that the return of qualified Chinese concept stocks to Hong Kong stocks is the first choice, followed by the return to A shares. Dong Dengxin believes that the stay of Chinese concept stocks largely depends on the cooperation between Chinese and American regulators, but the \"politicization\" trend of the US capital market requires Chinese concept stocks to be fully psychologically prepared for this.</p><p>After Alibaba announced its application for dual listing in Hong Kong, Xu Zhengyu, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government, said that at present, 70% of Chinese concept stocks listed in the United States have returned to Hong Kong for primary or secondary listing. He said that Hong Kong welcomes any enterprise that meets the standards and requirements of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange to come to Hong Kong to raise funds.</p><p>Hong Kong Financial Secretary Chen Maobo previously stated that the innovation of listing rules will help further attract high-quality Chinese concept stocks to be listed in Hong Kong, enrich market choices, increase market liquidity, and enhance the competitiveness of Hong Kong's global financing platform. Hong Kong's \"Sing Tao Daily\" recently stated that Hong Kong is still the first choice for the return of Chinese concept stocks, especially large enterprises, mainly considering market liquidity and local investor portfolio.</p><p>On March 25, 2022, the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange issued the Interim Measures for CDR Listing and Trading, supporting the return of Chinese concept stocks with a market value of more than 20 billion yuan to A-share listing. This path allows companies to go back to the Science and Technology Innovation Board for listing while retaining the red-chip structure. In May 2019,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/688981\">SMIC</a>Announced delisting from the US stock market. July 16, 2020,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00981\">SMIC</a>The successful listing on the Science and Technology Innovation Board has become an important case for red-chip companies to return to A-shares.</p><p>Singapore attracts IPOs from Chinese companies</p><p>\"Singapore pays attention to the listing of Chinese companies to hedge risks.\" Bloomberg News recently reported that the shrinkage of the new stock market of SGX for many years may soon end, because more Chinese concept stocks aimed at reducing political risks between China and the United States, as well as unicorns in Southeast Asia (startups with a valuation of more than US $1 billion) seek to raise funds for listing in Singapore.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/S68.SI\">Singapore Exchange</a>Bao Desheng, head of global sales and development, said that in the next five years, the SGX may have 30 to 40 initial and secondary listings a year-more than double the average of about 13 listings a year since 2017. Bao Desheng also said that SGX is negotiating and communicating with more than 100 companies in China and Southeast Asia, covering financial technology, consumer technology, real estate investment trusts and other fields.</p><p>According to Bloomberg News, the number of newly listed companies on the SGX has continued to decrease in the past decade or so. Therefore, SGX is stepping up negotiations with Chinese companies seeking to list outside the United States or Hong Kong, China, and interested in increasing their popularity in Southeast Asia.</p><p>In 2021, there were 8 companies listed on SGX. On April 28 this year, Yangzijiang Financial Holdings Co., Ltd. was listed on SGX.<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NIO\">Nio</a>On May 20th, it was officially listed in Singapore for the second time, and its shares listed on SGX will be fully interchangeable with American depositary receipts listed on NYSE.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3666316\">环球时报</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a0f5de7b05d2e007b8f20e57385c23cd","relate_stocks":{"TTTN":"老虎中美互联网巨头ETF","QNETCN":"纳斯达克中美互联网老虎指数"},"source_url":"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3666316","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/cc96873d3d23ee6ac10685520df9c100","article_id":"1146279071","content_text":"专家表示,符合条件的中概股回归港股是首选,其次是A股,此外新加坡也正在吸引中企IPO。7月29日,阿里巴巴股价在纽交所突然大跌11%,主要导火索来自于这家市值最大的中概股被美国证监会列入“预摘牌”名单。在2021年美国《外国公司问责法》生效后,在美国上市的多家中企被美方以“审计原因”列入美股“预摘牌”名单,专家认为中概股需要为未来美国资本市场愈发“政治化”的趋势做好准备。回港双重主要上市与阿里巴巴一同列入名单的还有蘑菇街和猎豹移动。截至7月底,美国证监会根据美国《外国公司问责法》已将159家中概股列入“欲摘牌”名单中。《华尔街日报》报道称,《外国公司问责法》2021年生效后,美国可以禁止那些审计公司连续三年不接受美国审计监督机构检查的公司的证券交易。有媒体称,若中美双方无法在2022年内达成共识并完成对会计师事务所的检查,192家中概股公司或将在2023年被迫摘牌。根据美中经济和安全审议委员会的数据,截至今年3月,共有261家中国公司在美国上市,总市值约为1.3万亿美元。7月26日,阿里巴巴宣布申请在香港实现双重主要上市。目前美国监管政策的不确定性,正在威胁阿里在内的所有中概股。而在香港实现“双重主要上市”则能大大减少潜在风险。在阿里巴巴宣布决定后,27日在纳斯达克上市的金山云也申请在香港双重主要上市。《华尔街日报》称,金山云在递交给香港交易所的初步招股书中表示,计划将发行所得资金用于升级技术基础建设,包括购买高性能服务器及数据中心服务。报道称,今年早些时候,在纳斯达克上市的视频分享平台公司哔哩哔哩也提出了类似计划,打算将港股第二上市地位转为主要上市。据统计,港交所至少有超过10家中概股已经完成或正在申请转换为双重主要上市。近期在港交所挂牌的中概股,绝大多数选择与阿里一样的双重主要上市方式,包括贝壳、知乎、涂鸦智能和名创优品等。中金公司研究部的分析师认为,选择在香港双重主要上市,头部优质企业不仅可以享受纳入港股通所带来的丰富流动性,也可保证在海外极端摘牌情境下主上市地位不受损。港股A股迎接中概股武汉科技大学金融证券研究所所长董登新7月31日接受《环球时报》采访时表示,此前中国企业热衷赴欧美资本市场上市,主要是因为欧美市场制度成熟,市场容量大,尤其是美国资本市场对于创业型且未盈利的公司具有较高的认可度,通常会给予较高的估值。因此,一些正在成长中、在财务上尚未达到在内地上市要求的公司比较热衷于在美国上市。这有利于中国企业接轨全球成熟的管理制度,开拓全球市场。“在美国上市风险不断加大的情况下中概股回归是大势所趋。”董登新表示,符合条件的中概股回归港股是首选,其次是回归A股。董登新认为,中概股去留很大程度上取决于中美监管间的合作,但美国资本市场“政治化”趋势需要中概股对此做好充足心理准备。阿里巴巴公布申请在香港双重上市后,香港特别行政区政府财经事务及库务局局长许正宇表示,目前有70%在美国上市的中概股已回港作第一或第二上市,他说,香港欢迎任何符合港交所标准和要求的企业来港集资。香港财政司司长陈茂波此前表示,上市规则创新将有利进一步吸纳优质中概股在港上市,丰富市场选择,增加市场流动性,提升香港全球融资平台的竞争力。香港《星岛日报》近日称,主要考虑市场流动性及当地投资者组合,香港目前仍然是中概股回归首选地,尤其是大型企业。2022年3月25日上交所和深交所发布CDR上市交易暂行办法,支持200亿人民币以上市值中概股回A股上市。此条路径允许企业在保留红筹架构的情况下回科创板上市。2019年5月,中芯国际宣布从美股退市。2020年7月16日,中芯国际成功在科创板挂牌上市,成为红筹公司回归A股的重要案例。新加坡吸引中企IPO“新加坡关注中国企业上市以对冲风险。”美国彭博社近日报道称,新交所新股市场多年来萎缩的情况可能会很快结束,因为将有更多为降低中美政治风险的中概股,及东南亚的独角兽企业(估值超过10亿美元的初创公司)寻求在新加坡上市融资。新加坡交易所全球销售及拓展部主管保得胜表示,未来五年内,新交所每年可能会有30到40家首次和二次上市——是自 2017年以来平均每年约13家上市的两倍多。保得胜还称,新交所正在与中国和东南亚的100多家公司谈判沟通,涵盖金融科技、消费科技类、地产投资信托等领域。据彭博社报道,新交所近十几年来新上市公司数量持续减少。因此新交所正加紧与寻求在美国或中国香港以外上市,以及有意提高在东南亚知名度的中国公司进行谈判。2021年,有8家公司在新交所上市。今年4月28日,扬子江金融控股有限公司在新交所上市。蔚来5月20日正式在新加坡二次上市,其新交所上市的股票将完全可与纽交所上市的美国存托凭证互换。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TTTN":0.9,"QNETCN":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":414,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9025692797,"gmtCreate":1653667338919,"gmtModify":1676535324324,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9025692797","repostId":"1172880145","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1172880145","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1653649544,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1172880145?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-05-27 19:05","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Occidental Petroleum and Chevron hit new highs, proving Buffett's buying logic?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1172880145","media":"华尔街大事件","summary":"在美股众多板块当中,石油板块确实不负所望。数据显示,截至目前雪佛龙单周涨幅达5.23%,西方石油单周涨幅达8.54%。两家石油股巨头的股价表现均创阶段性新高。石油股备受关注背后,巴菲特的持仓动作也是一","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>Among the many sectors in the U.S. stock market, the oil sector has indeed lived up to expectations. Data shows that as of now<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVX\">Chevron</a>The weekly increase reached 5.23%,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>The weekly increase reached 8.54%. The stock price performance of the two oil stock giants hit a stage high.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d05e58028c4e25af3ae644e33389a6a\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b94782207ce4f6fa29ebc240286e2970\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Behind the attention that oil stocks have attracted, Buffett's position action is also a major attraction.</p><p>In the first quarter of 2022,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BRK.A\">Berkshire</a>A rare high turnover rate. According to statistics, Berkshire's overall turnover rate rose to 12.49% in the first quarter of this year, the highest since 2015 (the turnover rate in the third quarter of 2015 was 21.21%).</p><p><b>In addition to the financial, consumption and other fields that Buffett has always preferred before, he has recently continued to increase his allocation to energy stocks such as oil.</b></p><p>According to the data of the 13F report, Berkshire increased its position in Chevron by 120 million to 159 million shares in the first quarter, with a market value of US $25.919 billion, accounting for 7% of Berkshire's overall market value in the first quarter, and rose to the fourth largest holdings (the top ten new holdings in the fourth quarter of last year). \"Red Weekly\" noticed that Berkshire had opened a position in Chevron in the third quarter of 2020 and has been holding positions continuously so far.</p><p>At the same time, there is another oil stock-Occidental Petroleum, and Buffett also increased his holdings significantly. According to market news, Berkshire increased its holdings of 5.89 million shares of Occidental Petroleum in the first quarter. After the increase, the market value of its holdings was approximately US $13.2 billion, ranking the sixth largest holding. It is worth mentioning that Berkshire's current holdings in the oil industry have exceeded US $40 billion, accounting for 11% of the total market value of its holdings.</p><p>Buffett favors and increases the layout of oil stocks. At the same time, the recent market trend is prominent, which is related to multiple factors.</p><p>Regarding increasing positions in Occidental Petroleum, Buffett thinks its annual report is very good. It said that the short-term fluctuations in the market caused by the \"gambling mentality\" since late February have allowed them to find good buying opportunities.</p><p><b>With the soaring prices of oil and natural gas, energy stocks including Chevron and Occidental Petroleum have all achieved substantial growth in performance.</b>According to Chevron's financial report, its net profit attributable to ordinary shareholders in the first quarter was US $6.259 billion, a year-on-year increase of 350%; Revenue in the first quarter was US $54.373 billion, a year-on-year increase of 69.76%.</p><p>The first quarterly report shows that Occidental Petroleum ushered in the best financial report record in history, with revenue increasing by 57% year-on-year to US $8.34 billion, and net profit attributable to the parent company reaching a record of US $4.67 billion, turning losses into profits year-on-year;</p><p>Quarterly free cash flow of $3.3 billion also set a record high, and adjusted earnings per share of $2.12 exceeded market expectations.</p><p><b>Buffett also said earlier that oil is currently in a state of imbalance between supply and demand.</b>According to Zhitong Financial News, energy consulting firm Turner, Mason & Co. estimates that refining capacity in other parts of the world has decreased by 2.13 million barrels per day. Moreover, with no plans to put new U.S. refineries on production, refiners are making record profits at a time when supply constraints are becoming increasingly severe.</p><p>In fact, since 2021, the global crude oil supply and demand balance has begun to tighten, and the gap is expected to be 1.72 million barrels per day by 2022. The core reason is the continuous production reduction plan of OPEC member countries starting in early 2021, making OPEC The proportion of meeting the global additional gap gradually drops to 90%. Major countries are also difficult to be self-sufficient in their own crude oil demand and production capacity.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c2c7cdffff8d042b2c8b36de3346f96d\" tg-width=\"554\" tg-height=\"203\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Data source: OPEC,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/300059\">Oriental Fortune</a>Securities Research Institute</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5365c3463564a83a3359f57d9a9a3e0b\" tg-width=\"554\" tg-height=\"206\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>Data source: OPEC, Orient Fortune Securities Research Institute</p><p><b>With the gradual imbalance between supply and demand, with the long-term existence of inflation-stagflation, oil prices will trend at a high level for a long time, which will greatly improve the profits of oil companies.</b></p><p>On May 26 of the same period, British Chancellor of the Exchequer Sunak announced a 25% profit tax on the oil and gas industry. \"The oil and gas industry has made huge profits not because of recent changes to risk-taking, innovation or efficiency, but because of the surge in global commodity prices,\" Sunak said.</p><p>According to the Buffett Reading Club, Occidental Petroleum management has said that every $1 increase in oil prices will generate the company $225 million in annual revenue. In 2021, the annual average oil price calculated by the company at that time was US $66.14. At the price level at that time, the oil and gas business brought a total operating profit of US $4.1 billion to the company.</p><p>With the current oil price soaring to historical highs, assuming that the annual average oil price remains at US $106/barrel, the company will have the potential to create an additional profit of US $9 billion.</p><p><b>In terms of increasing reserves, historical data is equally grim. Although supply-side capital expenditures have doubled and reserve replacement rates have not improved, demand continues to lead to a widening gap between supply and demand in the future.</b></p><p>Natural resource research firm Goehring & Rozencwajg Associates released the study titled \"The Incredibly Shrinking Oil Majors\" on October 1, 2021. The four oil majors they studied set a goal in 2000 to increase reserves by 5% per year. However, all four businesses failed, and their reserves were actually declining.</p><p>According to Goehring Research, \"From 2000 to 2010, the Big Four spent US $615 billion on upstream capital expenditures. During the same period, they produced 50.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent and discovered new reserves of 41.1 billion barrels of oil equivalent, resulting in a reserve replacement rate of 86% and an average discovery and development cost of US $14.30 per barrel of oil equivalent.</p><p>Between 2010 and 2020, upstream capital expenditures surged to $1.15. At the same time, the companies produced 50.6 billion barrels of oil equivalent and discovered new reserves of 43.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent-a good fit with the previous decade.</p><p>Despite nearly doubling upstream capital expenditures, the companies are still unable to replace production with new reserves. Indeed, the reserve replacement rate remained at 85% despite increased spending.</p><p>The effectiveness has not improved significantly, but the cost of finding and developing new reserves has almost doubled, from $14.30 to $26.40 per barrel of oil equivalent. \"</p><p>Despite the slowdown in global economic growth and the transformation of old and new energy sources, global crude oil demand will still maintain an annual increase of 1-1.5 million barrels per day from 2023 to 2025, and it is difficult for crude oil supply capacity to meet the demand increase. In the medium and long term, the global crude oil supply and demand gap will exist for a long time.</p><p>Taking history as a guide, energy companies tend to perform more prominently during inflation.</p><p>The performance of U.S. stocks during the inflation-stagflation period in the 1970s, and the stock price returns of energy companies exceeded 10 times. By the end of 1981, among the top 20 companies in the U.S. stock market, the energy sector even accounted for half.</p><p><b>Looking back at the Fed's six inflation-rate hike cycles, we can find that energy companies have the best chances of outperforming the market and earning excess returns.</b></p><p></body></html></p>","source":"lsy1643368503284","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>Occidental Petroleum and Chevron hit new highs, proving Buffett's buying logic?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nOccidental Petroleum and Chevron hit new highs, proving Buffett's buying logic?\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">华尔街大事件</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-05-27 19:05</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>Among the many sectors in the U.S. stock market, the oil sector has indeed lived up to expectations. Data shows that as of now<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVX\">Chevron</a>The weekly increase reached 5.23%,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Western Petroleum</a>The weekly increase reached 8.54%. The stock price performance of the two oil stock giants hit a stage high.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d05e58028c4e25af3ae644e33389a6a\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b94782207ce4f6fa29ebc240286e2970\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Behind the attention that oil stocks have attracted, Buffett's position action is also a major attraction.</p><p>In the first quarter of 2022,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BRK.A\">Berkshire</a>A rare high turnover rate. According to statistics, Berkshire's overall turnover rate rose to 12.49% in the first quarter of this year, the highest since 2015 (the turnover rate in the third quarter of 2015 was 21.21%).</p><p><b>In addition to the financial, consumption and other fields that Buffett has always preferred before, he has recently continued to increase his allocation to energy stocks such as oil.</b></p><p>According to the data of the 13F report, Berkshire increased its position in Chevron by 120 million to 159 million shares in the first quarter, with a market value of US $25.919 billion, accounting for 7% of Berkshire's overall market value in the first quarter, and rose to the fourth largest holdings (the top ten new holdings in the fourth quarter of last year). \"Red Weekly\" noticed that Berkshire had opened a position in Chevron in the third quarter of 2020 and has been holding positions continuously so far.</p><p>At the same time, there is another oil stock-Occidental Petroleum, and Buffett also increased his holdings significantly. According to market news, Berkshire increased its holdings of 5.89 million shares of Occidental Petroleum in the first quarter. After the increase, the market value of its holdings was approximately US $13.2 billion, ranking the sixth largest holding. It is worth mentioning that Berkshire's current holdings in the oil industry have exceeded US $40 billion, accounting for 11% of the total market value of its holdings.</p><p>Buffett favors and increases the layout of oil stocks. At the same time, the recent market trend is prominent, which is related to multiple factors.</p><p>Regarding increasing positions in Occidental Petroleum, Buffett thinks its annual report is very good. It said that the short-term fluctuations in the market caused by the \"gambling mentality\" since late February have allowed them to find good buying opportunities.</p><p><b>With the soaring prices of oil and natural gas, energy stocks including Chevron and Occidental Petroleum have all achieved substantial growth in performance.</b>According to Chevron's financial report, its net profit attributable to ordinary shareholders in the first quarter was US $6.259 billion, a year-on-year increase of 350%; Revenue in the first quarter was US $54.373 billion, a year-on-year increase of 69.76%.</p><p>The first quarterly report shows that Occidental Petroleum ushered in the best financial report record in history, with revenue increasing by 57% year-on-year to US $8.34 billion, and net profit attributable to the parent company reaching a record of US $4.67 billion, turning losses into profits year-on-year;</p><p>Quarterly free cash flow of $3.3 billion also set a record high, and adjusted earnings per share of $2.12 exceeded market expectations.</p><p><b>Buffett also said earlier that oil is currently in a state of imbalance between supply and demand.</b>According to Zhitong Financial News, energy consulting firm Turner, Mason & Co. estimates that refining capacity in other parts of the world has decreased by 2.13 million barrels per day. Moreover, with no plans to put new U.S. refineries on production, refiners are making record profits at a time when supply constraints are becoming increasingly severe.</p><p>In fact, since 2021, the global crude oil supply and demand balance has begun to tighten, and the gap is expected to be 1.72 million barrels per day by 2022. The core reason is the continuous production reduction plan of OPEC member countries starting in early 2021, making OPEC The proportion of meeting the global additional gap gradually drops to 90%. Major countries are also difficult to be self-sufficient in their own crude oil demand and production capacity.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c2c7cdffff8d042b2c8b36de3346f96d\" tg-width=\"554\" tg-height=\"203\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Data source: OPEC,<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/300059\">Oriental Fortune</a>Securities Research Institute</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5365c3463564a83a3359f57d9a9a3e0b\" tg-width=\"554\" tg-height=\"206\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>Data source: OPEC, Orient Fortune Securities Research Institute</p><p><b>With the gradual imbalance between supply and demand, with the long-term existence of inflation-stagflation, oil prices will trend at a high level for a long time, which will greatly improve the profits of oil companies.</b></p><p>On May 26 of the same period, British Chancellor of the Exchequer Sunak announced a 25% profit tax on the oil and gas industry. \"The oil and gas industry has made huge profits not because of recent changes to risk-taking, innovation or efficiency, but because of the surge in global commodity prices,\" Sunak said.</p><p>According to the Buffett Reading Club, Occidental Petroleum management has said that every $1 increase in oil prices will generate the company $225 million in annual revenue. In 2021, the annual average oil price calculated by the company at that time was US $66.14. At the price level at that time, the oil and gas business brought a total operating profit of US $4.1 billion to the company.</p><p>With the current oil price soaring to historical highs, assuming that the annual average oil price remains at US $106/barrel, the company will have the potential to create an additional profit of US $9 billion.</p><p><b>In terms of increasing reserves, historical data is equally grim. Although supply-side capital expenditures have doubled and reserve replacement rates have not improved, demand continues to lead to a widening gap between supply and demand in the future.</b></p><p>Natural resource research firm Goehring & Rozencwajg Associates released the study titled \"The Incredibly Shrinking Oil Majors\" on October 1, 2021. The four oil majors they studied set a goal in 2000 to increase reserves by 5% per year. However, all four businesses failed, and their reserves were actually declining.</p><p>According to Goehring Research, \"From 2000 to 2010, the Big Four spent US $615 billion on upstream capital expenditures. During the same period, they produced 50.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent and discovered new reserves of 41.1 billion barrels of oil equivalent, resulting in a reserve replacement rate of 86% and an average discovery and development cost of US $14.30 per barrel of oil equivalent.</p><p>Between 2010 and 2020, upstream capital expenditures surged to $1.15. At the same time, the companies produced 50.6 billion barrels of oil equivalent and discovered new reserves of 43.3 billion barrels of oil equivalent-a good fit with the previous decade.</p><p>Despite nearly doubling upstream capital expenditures, the companies are still unable to replace production with new reserves. Indeed, the reserve replacement rate remained at 85% despite increased spending.</p><p>The effectiveness has not improved significantly, but the cost of finding and developing new reserves has almost doubled, from $14.30 to $26.40 per barrel of oil equivalent. \"</p><p>Despite the slowdown in global economic growth and the transformation of old and new energy sources, global crude oil demand will still maintain an annual increase of 1-1.5 million barrels per day from 2023 to 2025, and it is difficult for crude oil supply capacity to meet the demand increase. In the medium and long term, the global crude oil supply and demand gap will exist for a long time.</p><p>Taking history as a guide, energy companies tend to perform more prominently during inflation.</p><p>The performance of U.S. stocks during the inflation-stagflation period in the 1970s, and the stock price returns of energy companies exceeded 10 times. By the end of 1981, among the top 20 companies in the U.S. stock market, the energy sector even accounted for half.</p><p><b>Looking back at the Fed's six inflation-rate hike cycles, we can find that energy companies have the best chances of outperforming the market and earning excess returns.</b></p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source:<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/mXrXxY-4sK4KhBQ9yNfn8w\">华尔街大事件</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f3ecc14db02762fcb82cdbb76e654301","relate_stocks":{"BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","CVX":"雪佛龙","BK4581":"高盛持仓","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4559":"巴菲特持仓","BK4570":"地缘局势概念股","BK4566":"资本集团","BK4176":"多领域控股","OXY":"西方石油","BK4201":"综合性石油与天然气企业","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓"},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/mXrXxY-4sK4KhBQ9yNfn8w","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1172880145","content_text":"在美股众多板块当中,石油板块确实不负所望。数据显示,截至目前雪佛龙单周涨幅达5.23%,西方石油单周涨幅达8.54%。两家石油股巨头的股价表现均创阶段性新高。石油股备受关注背后,巴菲特的持仓动作也是一大看点。2022年一季度,伯克希尔罕见的高换手率。据统计,今年一季度伯克希尔整体换手率上升至12.49%,创2015年以来(2015年三季度换手率为21.21%)的最高值。除了巴菲特此前一直偏爱的金融、消费等领域,其近来持续增加对石油等能源股的配置。据13F报告数据显示,伯克希尔一季度增仓雪佛龙1.2亿股至1.59亿股,持仓市值为259.19亿美元,占伯克希尔一季度整体持仓市值为7%,并上升至第四大重仓股(去年四季度新进前十大重仓股)。《红周刊》注意到,伯克希尔曾于2020年三季度建仓雪佛龙,至今连续持仓。同时还有另外一只石油股——西方石油,巴菲特也大笔增持。据市场消息,伯克希尔一季度增持西方石油589万股,增持后持仓市值约132亿美元,位列第六重仓股。值得一提的是,伯克希尔目前对石油行业的持仓已超过400亿美元,占总持仓市值比重达11%。巴菲特青睐并加大石油股的布局,同时市场近期走势的凸显,与多重因素有关。对于加仓西方石油,巴菲特认为其年报很好。其表示,2月下旬以来市场因“赌博心态”引发的短期波动让他们找到了良好的买入机会。随着石油、天然气价格飙升,包括雪佛龙、西方石油等能源股均实现了业绩大幅增长。据雪佛龙财报显示,其一季度实现归属于普通股东净利润为62.59亿美元,同比大增350%;一季度营收为543.73亿美元,同比增长69.76%。一季报显示,西方石油迎来了有史以来最好的财报记录,营收同比增长57%,达83.4亿美元,归母净利润创纪录达46.7亿美元,同比扭亏为盈;季度自由现金流为33亿美元,也创下了历史新高,调整后每股盈利为2.12美元,超过市场预期。巴菲特此前也表示,石油目前处于一个供需失衡的状态。据智通财经消息,能源咨询公司Turner, Mason & Co.预计,世界其他地方的炼油日产能已经减少213万桶。而且,由于没有计划让新的美国炼油厂投产,目前炼油企业正获得创纪录的利润,而供应紧张形势却变得越来越严峻。事实上自从2021年开始,全球原油供需平衡表就在开始偏紧,至2022年全年预计缺口在172万桶每日,核心原因是OPEC成员国从2021年初开始的的持续减产计划,使得OPEC满足全球额外缺口比例逐渐低至90%。主要国家自身原油需求与生产能力也出现难以自给自足的现象。数据来源:OPEC、东方财富证券研究所数据来源:OPEC、东方财富证券研究所在供需逐渐失衡的状态下,伴随通胀—滞胀的长期存在,油价将长期高位走势,这将大幅改善石油公司的利润。同期5月26日,英国财政大臣苏纳克宣布对石油和天然气行业征收25%的利润税。苏纳克表示:“石油和天然气行业之所以能获得巨额利润,不是因为最近对风险承担、创新或效率的改变,而是由于全球大宗商品价格飙升。”据巴菲特读书会消息,西方石油管理层曾表示,油价每上涨1美元,将为公司每年产生2.25亿美元的收益。在2021年,当时公司所计算的全年平均油价为66.14美元,在当时的价格水平下,油气业务共为公司带来了41亿美元的营运利润。而随着目前油价飙升至历史高位,假设全年平均油价维持在106美元/桶,那么公司将有潜力创造90亿美元的额外利润。而在增加储备方面,历史数据同样严峻。尽管供给侧资本开支翻倍,而储备替代率并未改善,需求持续导致未来供求缺口增大。自然资源研究公司Goehring & Rozencwajg Associates于2021年10月1日发布了标题为“令人难以置信的萎缩的石油巨头”的研究。他们研究的四个石油巨头在2000年制定了一个目标,即每年增加5%的储量。然而,四家企业都失败了,它们的储备实际上都在下降。据Goehring 研究表示,“从2000年到2010年,四大巨头在上游资本支出上花费了6150亿美元。同期,他们生产了503亿桶油当量,发现了411亿桶油当量的新储量,导致储量替代率为86%,且平均发现和开发成本为每桶油当量 14.30美元。2010年至2020年间,上游资本支出飙升至1.15美元。与此同时,这些公司生产了506亿桶油当量,并发现了433亿桶油当量的新储量——与前十年非常吻合。尽管上游资本支出几乎翻了一番,但这些公司仍然无法用新的储备来替代生产。事实上,尽管支出增加,储备替代率仍保持在85%。成效没有显著提高,但寻找和开发新储量的成本却几乎翻了一番,从每桶油当量14.30美元增加到 26.40美元。”虽然面临全球经济增速放缓和新旧能源转型,2023-2025年全球原油需求每年仍将维持100-150万桶/日的增量,原油供给能力较难满足需求增量,从中长期来看,全球原油供需缺口将长期存在。以史为鉴,通胀期间能源公司往往表现更为突出。美股在1970年代通胀—滞胀阶段的表现,能源公司股价收益表现超过了10倍。到1981年底美股市值前20大公司中,能源板块甚至占了一半。回顾美联储的6次通胀—加息周期,可以发现能源公司跑赢市场并获得超额回报的胜算最大。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CVX":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9,"BRK.A":0.9,"OXY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":423,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9028861435,"gmtCreate":1653195646527,"gmtModify":1676535238889,"author":{"id":"4087300025751020","authorId":"4087300025751020","name":"老八公","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e27256ede8324832365cde987fa4cf48","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4087300025751020","idStr":"4087300025751020"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OK","listText":"OK","text":"OK","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9028861435","repostId":"1141205493","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":568,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}