The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.

Barrons2021-02-08

It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says ...

网页链接

免责声明：本文观点仅代表作者个人观点，不构成本平台的投资建议，本平台不对文章信息准确性、完整性和及时性做出任何保证，亦不对因使用或信赖文章信息引发的任何损失承担责任。

精彩评论

SafetyFirst
2021-02-16
SafetyFirst
Interesting
- SafetyFirst:
  welcome to comment
Bolun
2021-02-11
Bolun
stronger!
NareshwG
2021-02-11
NareshwG
Interesting read!
Nisnivlek
2021-02-10
Nisnivlek
In the past was Trump stocks, now Biden stocks
Garylim
2021-02-10
Garylim
Nice
7c635f89
2021-02-10
7c635f89
Asking for trouble.

发表看法

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"isChannel":false,"data":{"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132830852?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-02-08 10:46","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"1132830852","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.","media":"Barrons","content":"<div>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says ...\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"lsy1601382232898","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 Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-08 10:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3>Barrons</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says ...\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":".SPX","symbol_name":"S&P 500 Index","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3","article_id":"1132830852","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132830852","pubTimestamp":1612752396,"columns":[],"sourceInfo":{"source_id":"lsy1601382232898","name":"Barrons"},"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who ha","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"barrons.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"translate_title":"拜登股市不会像特朗普市场那样。期待什么。","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9},"content_text":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.\nA double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.\nRead the following edited excerpts for more.\nBarron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?\nSavita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.\nYour market call is pretty tepid.\nI’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.\nHere’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.\nThe market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?\nWe’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.\nWhat would make you more bearish?\nIf we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.\nToday, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.\nThe similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.\nSo, what should investors do?\nFocus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.\nIn 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.\nWhat about the technology and megacap parts of the market?\nComing out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.\nWhat surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.\nMore immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.\nLet’s talk about ESG.\nWe’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.\nThere’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.\nYet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.\nRenewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.","kind":"news","is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"isVideo":false,"video":null,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":0,"need_auth":false,"need_login_tip":false,"code":"91000000","status":"200"},"commentList":[{"id":382614486,"gmtCreate":1613440995645,"gmtModify":1634553678024,"author":{"id":"3570965583958757","authorId":"3570965583958757","name":"SafetyFirst","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a6356c1a4c82b1755621f3b2631a6784","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"wearingBadges":[],"authorIdStr":"3570965583958757","idStr":"3570965583958757"},"htmlText":"Interesting&nbsp;","listText":"Interesting&nbsp;","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/382614486","repostId":1132830852,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1132830852","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612752396,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132830852?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-08 10:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132830852","media":"Barrons","summary":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who ha","content":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote></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 Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-02-08 10:46\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1132830852","content_text":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.\nA double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.\nRead the following edited excerpts for more.\nBarron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?\nSavita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.\nYour market call is pretty tepid.\nI’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.\nHere’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.\nThe market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?\nWe’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.\nWhat would make you more bearish?\nIf we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.\nToday, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.\nThe similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.\nSo, what should investors do?\nFocus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.\nIn 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.\nWhat about the technology and megacap parts of the market?\nComing out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.\nWhat surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.\nMore immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.\nLet’s talk about ESG.\nWe’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.\nThere’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.\nYet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.\nRenewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3577138,"gmtCreate":1613445411296,"gmtModify":1635764083288,"authorId":3570965583958757,"author":{"id":3570965583958757,"idStr":"3570965583958757","authorId":3570965583958757,"name":"SafetyFirst","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a6356c1a4c82b1755621f3b2631a6784","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"wearingBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":382614486,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"welcome to comment","text":"welcome to comment","html":"welcome to comment"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":388336142,"gmtCreate":1613019901186,"gmtModify":1703768447465,"author":{"id":"3558529187896911","authorId":"3558529187896911","name":"Bolun","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/89644570f191821abc5c8e1f9c6cf31d","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"wearingBadges":[],"authorIdStr":"3558529187896911","idStr":"3558529187896911"},"htmlText":"stronger!","listText":"stronger!","text":"stronger!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388336142","repostId":1132830852,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1132830852","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612752396,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132830852?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-08 10:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132830852","media":"Barrons","summary":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who ha","content":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote></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 Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-02-08 10:46\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1132830852","content_text":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.\nA double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.\nRead the following edited excerpts for more.\nBarron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?\nSavita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.\nYour market call is pretty tepid.\nI’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.\nHere’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.\nThe market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?\nWe’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.\nWhat would make you more bearish?\nIf we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.\nToday, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.\nThe similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.\nSo, what should investors do?\nFocus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.\nIn 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.\nWhat about the technology and megacap parts of the market?\nComing out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.\nWhat surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.\nMore immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.\nLet’s talk about ESG.\nWe’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.\nThere’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.\nYet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.\nRenewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":388927792,"gmtCreate":1613013524216,"gmtModify":1703768373056,"author":{"id":"3572945845916163","authorId":"3572945845916163","name":"NareshwG","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d6dc06165c1a0cc4f1a8169ea48573d","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"wearingBadges":[],"authorIdStr":"3572945845916163","idStr":"3572945845916163"},"htmlText":"Interesting read!&nbsp;","listText":"Interesting read!&nbsp;","text":"Interesting read!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388927792","repostId":1132830852,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1132830852","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612752396,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132830852?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-08 10:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132830852","media":"Barrons","summary":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who ha","content":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote></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 Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-02-08 10:46\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1132830852","content_text":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.\nA double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.\nRead the following edited excerpts for more.\nBarron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?\nSavita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.\nYour market call is pretty tepid.\nI’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.\nHere’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.\nThe market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?\nWe’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.\nWhat would make you more bearish?\nIf we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.\nToday, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.\nThe similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.\nSo, what should investors do?\nFocus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.\nIn 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.\nWhat about the technology and megacap parts of the market?\nComing out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.\nWhat surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.\nMore immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.\nLet’s talk about ESG.\nWe’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.\nThere’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.\nYet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.\nRenewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":381811054,"gmtCreate":1612951846778,"gmtModify":1703767358478,"author":{"id":"3571992769878529","authorId":"3571992769878529","name":"Nisnivlek","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da7e63ae933a3a94693af3ca8b29c972","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"wearingBadges":[],"authorIdStr":"3571992769878529","idStr":"3571992769878529"},"htmlText":"In the past was Trump stocks, now Biden stocks","listText":"In the past was Trump stocks, now Biden stocks","text":"In the past was Trump stocks, now Biden stocks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/381811054","repostId":1132830852,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1132830852","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612752396,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132830852?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-08 10:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132830852","media":"Barrons","summary":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who ha","content":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote></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 Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-02-08 10:46\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1132830852","content_text":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.\nA double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.\nRead the following edited excerpts for more.\nBarron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?\nSavita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.\nYour market call is pretty tepid.\nI’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.\nHere’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.\nThe market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?\nWe’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.\nWhat would make you more bearish?\nIf we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.\nToday, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.\nThe similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.\nSo, what should investors do?\nFocus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.\nIn 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.\nWhat about the technology and megacap parts of the market?\nComing out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.\nWhat surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.\nMore immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.\nLet’s talk about ESG.\nWe’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.\nThere’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.\nYet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.\nRenewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":381953621,"gmtCreate":1612923706263,"gmtModify":1703766987824,"author":{"id":"3561160643943169","authorId":"3561160643943169","name":"Garylim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd59425788f704785560474bfb38a5ba","vip":1,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"wearingBadges":[],"authorIdStr":"3561160643943169","idStr":"3561160643943169"},"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/381953621","repostId":1132830852,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1132830852","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612752396,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132830852?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-08 10:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132830852","media":"Barrons","summary":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who ha","content":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote></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 Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-02-08 10:46\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1132830852","content_text":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.\nA double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.\nRead the following edited excerpts for more.\nBarron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?\nSavita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.\nYour market call is pretty tepid.\nI’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.\nHere’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.\nThe market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?\nWe’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.\nWhat would make you more bearish?\nIf we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.\nToday, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.\nThe similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.\nSo, what should investors do?\nFocus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.\nIn 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.\nWhat about the technology and megacap parts of the market?\nComing out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.\nWhat surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.\nMore immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.\nLet’s talk about ESG.\nWe’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.\nThere’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.\nYet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.\nRenewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":381953346,"gmtCreate":1612923666185,"gmtModify":1703766987652,"author":{"id":"3569320299762451","authorId":"3569320299762451","name":"7c635f89","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/default-avatar2.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"wearingBadges":[],"authorIdStr":"3569320299762451","idStr":"3569320299762451"},"htmlText":"Asking for trouble.&nbsp;","listText":"Asking for trouble.&nbsp;","text":"Asking for trouble.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/381953346","repostId":1132830852,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1132830852","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612752396,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132830852?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-08 10:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132830852","media":"Barrons","summary":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who ha","content":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote></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 Biden Stock Market Won’t Be Like the Trump Market. What to Expect.<blockquote>拜登股市不会像特朗普市场。期待什么。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-02-08 10:46\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nIt’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.<blockquote>是时候购买周期性股票和小盘股了。这是一个大胆的看涨期权，尤其是对于那些在过去10年被烧伤后获得了“热炉心态”的基金经理来说。但美国银行广受关注的策略师萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚(Savita Subramanian)表示，这一次，优异表现可能会持续数年，就像科技泡沫破裂后那样。如今，寻找有前途的投资变得更加重要，尤其是如果市场本身如她预期的那样回报低迷的话。</blockquote> A double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.<blockquote>Subramanian拥有加州大学伯克利分校数学和哲学双学位，在投资者情绪研究中大量使用量化数据，自2011年以来一直担任首席策略师。她最近和巴伦周刊关于拜登政府将如何实现经济增长，以及为什么——尽管她是该公司的ESG主管——她还是推荐能源股。</blockquote> Read the following edited excerpts for more.<blockquote>阅读以下编辑过的摘录了解更多信息。</blockquote> Barron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?<blockquote>《巴伦周刊》：拜登总统发布了数十项行政命令。投资者该如何消化这些？</blockquote> Savita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&amp;P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.<blockquote>萨维塔·萨勃拉曼尼亚：它们代表了一些主题变化以及与过去四年市场领导地位的重大突破。本届政府不太关注资产通胀，而是更关注实际通胀，创造就业机会和重振实体经济，而不仅仅是提振股市回报。从新政府的言论来看，他们并没有将标准普尔500指数或投资回报等晴雨表视为衡量成功或失败的指标。相反，他们专注于解决市场上一些更大的不平等，比如收入不平等。这意味着我们将看到不太好的市场回报，但整体经济的回报可能会更大。</blockquote> Your market call is pretty tepid.<blockquote>你们的市场看涨期权相当不温不火。</blockquote> I’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&amp;P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&amp;P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.<blockquote>我是华尔街预测最低的人之一。我们在标普500找3800人。这是一个非常注重技术增长的基准。我们预计标准普尔今年的盈利将增长约20%。显然，我们期待看到一些多重压缩。我们预计会看到非常强劲的经济复苏。我们的经济学家米歇尔·迈耶和伊森·哈里斯预计美国国内生产总值将增长6%。随着我们看到疫苗的广泛传播和更加协调一致的重新开放，大部分复苏应该会在今年下半年发生。考虑到所有的刺激措施，很难看跌。</blockquote> Here’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.<blockquote>这就是我们不看跌的原因：利率超低，相对于债券，美国大盘股提供了很高的收益率，而且拜登政府非常关注经济。很难看到经济衰退驱动的熊市。</blockquote> The market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?<blockquote>市场被美元的惊人上涨所吸引游戏驿站[股票代码：GME]。这是什么意思？</blockquote> We’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&amp;P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.<blockquote>我们看到越来越多的基本面与业绩脱钩。看着总是很麻烦，有点投机的味道。有几件事：所有的行动似乎都集中在小盘股领域。对标普500持有高空头兴趣的公司表现正常，但罗素2000指数中的公司表现非常不典型。好消息是，这似乎仅限于小市值股票，因此影响不那么极端，而且它象征着市场中更具投机性的戏剧，而不是更基本面的投资。</blockquote> What would make you more bearish?<blockquote>什么会让你更加看跌？</blockquote> If we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&amp;P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.<blockquote>如果我们看到利率从这里大幅上升。如今，投资者群体的很大一部分是寻求收入的退休人员，被迫购买标普500。我们的市场非常紧张，你可能会看到通胀飙升。两年前，我们对所有股票分析师进行了调查，询问他们在哪里看到了投入成本压力和定价权，他们唯一提到的两个行业是公用事业和医疗保健。几个月前我们做了同样的报告，几乎每个分析师都提到了通胀压力。</blockquote> Today, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.<blockquote>如今，近70%的股票支付的股息高于10年期国债，非常接近历史新高。[10年期国债目前收益率为1.12%。]如果利率升至我们的经济学家预期的1.75%，这一比例将降至44%。突然间，这个故事消失了。这就是摇摆因素。这是我们对股市不太乐观的原因之一，更不用说我们看到的所有猜测了。</blockquote> The similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.<blockquote>今天和2000年的相似之处是民主化和散户参与市场，基本面与价格脱钩。正如我们现在所看到的，上一次盈利意外遭遇负面反应是在2000年3月。另一个相似之处是我们的卖方指标，这是一个非常好的市场时机模型，可以查看华尔街对平衡基金中股票的平均推荐。该模型现在的收益率接近60%，这将是一个卖出信号，接近2007年，几乎与2000年3月的水平完全相同。所有这些鸭子都在排队。</blockquote> So, what should investors do?<blockquote>那么，投资者应该怎么做呢？</blockquote> Focus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.<blockquote>关注市场中对GDP敏感的领域，这些领域近十年来表现不佳。我们增持的行业包括金融、能源、工业和医疗保健。我们发现制造业和服务业经济前所未有的瘫痪带来了一些被压抑的制造业需求。我们更看好商业投资，而不是耐用品消费。在消费领域，我们更看好消费服务的回升，而不是消费品的回升。根据我们2020年的信用卡数据，与通常的经济衰退不同，支出趋势仍然强劲。我们经历了最快的熊市。美联储、财政政策和美国企业界基本上都采取了行动，避免了可能更严重的衰退。消费发生在家居用品和市场的高端消费领域。这些地区可能在2021年面临风险。我们减持的行业是通信服务，它是一半增长、一半债券的代表；房地产；还有订书钉。</blockquote> In 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.<blockquote>在过去14次衰退中，有14次复苏是由价值和周期性主导的。因此，我们将看到一个价值周期。成长型股票过度低估了这种低利率、低增长的环境。比价值更容易制造的看涨期权是另一个没人想触及的领域——小公司，因为流动性，因为寡头垄断市场。我们可能正处于一个更长的小盘股周期的开始，这个周期往往会持续八到十年。</blockquote> What about the technology and megacap parts of the market?<blockquote>市场的技术和大型股部分呢？</blockquote> Coming out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.<blockquote>走出科技泡沫后，价值至少在七年内跑赢了增长。有些周期会持续一段时间。</blockquote> What surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.<blockquote>令我惊讶的是，当我们处于经济和政治环境的转折点时，基金经理或机构投资者是多么不愿意放弃对过去领导层的接触。这是一种热火朝天的心态，因为自2008年以来，每年，当有人押注利率和通胀上升时，他们基本上都会被击倒。</blockquote> More immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.<blockquote>更直接的是，特朗普时代的企业减税政策的任何潜在逆转都将打击通信服务和信息技术：基金经理增持最多的两个领先行业。</blockquote> Let’s talk about ESG.<blockquote>再说ESG。</blockquote> We’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.<blockquote>我们确实看到了美国企业界在如何取悦他人方面的明显且清晰的支点。他们已经从股东回报转向利益相关者回报。那是巨大的。他们清楚地向我们承诺，他们关心他们经营所在的社区、他们的员工以及底线之外的客户满意度。我不认为这是反资本主义的。但我认为这是一种思考资本主义的新方式。Covid-19期间的企业刺激规模相当大，在某种程度上相当于财政和美联储的刺激。这是来自美国企业界至少1万亿美元的支持。公司重新利用制造业来制造呼吸机，为消费者提供贷款延期，并进行捐款。我自己的公司开始冻结裁员。它平息了许多消费者的担忧。</blockquote> There’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.<blockquote>投资者在区分真实与洗绿方面采用了一条学习曲线。我们还看到投资者获得的有关公司的信息发生了巨大变化。公司已经意识到，如果他们不发布企业可持续发展报告，他们的交易价格将低于发布的同行。因此，从投资者的角度来看，数据的透明度和爆炸式增长是巨大的。突然之间，你可以将所有这些我们曾经只想到的因素编纂成文。但ESG永远是一个混乱的过程。总会有这种解释的元素。</blockquote> Yet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.<blockquote>然而，尽管您是贵公司ESG的全球主管，但您却是能源行业的跑赢大盘。</blockquote> Renewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.<blockquote>可再生能源公司做得很好，尽管事实上我们的政府在四年里并没有关注这些主题。如今，ESG投资者在白宫有一个盟友，这真是太好了。然而，你不需要华盛顿政客的授权就能开始行动。投资者意识到未来是可再生能源，并正在慢慢淘汰传统大宗商品。但我们仍然需要让灯亮着，让事情继续下去，以实现碳中和。有机会购买传统能源公司，这些公司正在设定更积极的环境合规目标，但也提供急需的燃料来保持和重新整合经济，因为我们还没有到可以做所有事情的地步风能和太阳能。所以，我们实际上是跑赢大盘能源公司，这引起了很多人的关注。我对此感到完全满意，因为能源公司本质上是在重塑自己。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/the-biden-stock-market-wont-be-like-the-trump-market-what-to-expect-51612535400?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1132830852","content_text":"It’s time to buycyclicalsandsmall-caps. That’s been a bold call, especially for fund managers who have acquired a “hot-stove mentality” after being burned over the past 10 years. But this time, says Savita Subramanian,Bank of America’swidely followed strategist, outperformance could last for years, as it did after the tech bubble burst. Finding promising investments is even more important today, especially if the market itself delivers lackluster returns, as she expects.\nA double major in math and philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, Subramanian is a heavy user of quant data in her studies of investor sentiment, and has been chief strategist since 2011. She recently chatted withBarron’sabout howthe Biden administrationwill achieve economic growth, and why—despite being the firm’s head of ESG—she’s recommending energy stocks.\nRead the following edited excerpts for more.\nBarron’s: President Biden has issued dozens of executive orders. How should investors digest these?\nSavita Subramanian:They represent a few thematic changes and a big break from the market leadership of the past four years. This administration is less focused on asset inflation and more on real inflation, in creating jobs and reinvigorating the real economy, rather than just bolstering stock market returns. From listening to this new administration’s rhetoric, they’re not looking at barometers like theS&P 500index or investment returns as a metric of success or failure. Instead, they’re focused on addressing some of the bigger inequities in the market, like income inequality. That means we’re going to see less-great market returns, but probably a bigger return in the economy overall.\nYour market call is pretty tepid.\nI’m one of the lowest forecasts on Wall Street. We’re looking for 3,800 on the S&P 500. It’s a very tech-growth-heavy benchmark. We’re looking for S&P earnings to grow by about 20% this year. Obviously, we’re expecting to see some multiple compression. We’re expecting to see a very strong economic recovery. Our economists Michelle Meyer and Ethan Harris are looking for 6% growth on U.S. gross domestic product. Most of that recovery should take place in the second half of this year as we see broad dispersal of vaccines and a more concerted, coordinated reopening. It’s hard to be bearish, given all the stimulus.\nHere’s why we’re not bearish: Interest rates are superlow, U.S. large-caps offer great yields, relative to bonds, and the Biden administration is laser-focused on the economy. It’s hard to see a recession-driven bear market.\nThe market was gripped by the spectacular rise ofGameStop[ticker: GME]. What does it mean?\nWe’re seeing more and more of the decoupling of fundamentals from performance. It’s always troubling to see, and it smacks of speculation. A couple of things: All of the action seemed to be focused on the small-cap space. Companies with high short interest in the S&P 500 behaved normally, but those in theRussell 2000behaved very atypically. The good news is this seems to be localized in smaller-market-cap stocks, so the impact is less extreme, and it’s emblematic of more speculative drama in the market, rather than in more fundamental investing.\nWhat would make you more bearish?\nIf we saw interest rates rise meaningfully from here. A big portion of the investor base today is retirees looking for income, forced to buy the S&P 500. We’ve got really tight pockets of the market where you could potentially see an inflation spike. Two years ago, we polled all of our stock analysts to ask where they were seeing input cost pressure and pricing power, and the only two sectors they cited were utilities and health care. We did the same report a couple of months ago, and almost every analyst cited inflationary pressure.\nToday, close to 70% of stocks pay a dividend that’s higher than the 10-year Treasury, which is very close to a record high. [The 10-year currently yields 1.12%.] If rates rise to 1.75%, which our economist is expecting, that proportion drops to 44%. And all of a sudden, that story vaporizes. That’s the swing factor. And that’s one reason we’re less optimistic about equities, not to mention all of the speculations we see.\nThe similarities between today and 2000 is democratization and retail participation in the market, the decoupling of fundamentals from price. The last time we’ve seen earnings surprises met with negative reactions, as we’re seeing now, was in March 2000. The other similarity is our sell-side indicator, a very good market-timing model that looks at Wall Street’s average recommendation to stocks in a balanced fund. That model is now spitting out close to 60%, which would be a sell signal, close to 2007 and almost exactly at the same level as March 2000. All of these ducks are lining up.\nSo, what should investors do?\nFocus on GDP-sensitive areas of the market that haven’t done well for almost a decade. Our sector overweights include financials, energy, industrials, and health care. We find some pent-up manufacturing demand from an unprecedented paralysis in the manufacturing and services economy. We’re more bullish on business investment than on consumption of durable goods. Within consumption, we’re more bullish on a pickup in consumer services than a pickup in consumer goods. Based on our credit-card data for 2020, unlike in the usual economic recession, spending trends remain strong. We had the fastest bear market. The Fed, fiscal policy, and Corporate America basically stepped up and staved off what could have been a deeper recession. Spending took place in home goods and the higher-end consumption areas of the market. Those areas could be at risk in 2021. Our sector underweights are communication services, which are half-growth, half-bond proxies; real estate; and staples.\nIn 14 of the past 14 recessions, the recovery was led by value and cyclical. So, we’re going to see a value cycle. Growth stocks are overly discounting this low-rate, low-growth environment. An easier call to make than value is another area nobody wants to touch—smaller companies, because of liquidity, because of the oligopolistic market. We could be at the start of a longer-lived small-cap cycle, which tends to last eight to 10 years.\nWhat about the technology and megacap parts of the market?\nComing out of the tech bubble, value outperformed growth for at least seven years. Some cycles last awhile.\nWhat surprises me is how reluctant fund managers or institutional investors are to shed exposure to that past leadership when we’re at what looks like a break point in terms of the economy and the political environment. It’s the hot-stove mentality, because every year since 2008, where anyone has bet on rising interest rates and inflation, they’ve basically been smacked down.\nMore immediately, any potential reversal in Trump-era corporate tax cuts, which would make sense to fund all of the growth, would hit communication services and information technology: the two leadership sectors most overweighted by fund managers.\nLet’s talk about ESG.\nWe’ve really seen a demonstrable and well-articulated pivot of Corporate America in terms of how they’re aiming to please. They’ve gone from shareholder to stakeholder returns. That’s huge. They’re articulating and essentially promising us they care about the communities in which they operate, their employees, and customer satisfaction beyond the bottom line. I don’t think it’s anticapitalist. But I think it’s a new way of thinking about capitalism. The corporate stimulus during Covid-19 was sizable, equivalent on some level to fiscal and Fed stimulus. It was at least $1 trillion of support from Corporate America. Companies repurposed manufacturing to create ventilators, engaged in loan forbearance for consumers, made monetary donations. My own company initiated layoff freezes. It quelled a lot of consumer fears.\nThere’s a learning curve that has been adopted by investors in terms of separating the real from the greenwashing. We’re also seeing big changes in the information that investors are being given about companies. Companies have realized that if they don’t publish a corporate sustainability report, they’re going to trade at a discount to their peer that does. So, that transparency and explosion in data is huge from an investor perspective. All of a sudden, you can codify all of these factors we once only thought about. But ESG is always going to be a messy process. There’s always going to be this interpretive element to it.\nYet despite being the global head of ESG for your firm, you’re overweight the energy sector.\nRenewables companies have done well, despite the fact that we had four years under an administration that wasn’t focused on these themes. It’s really great that ESG investors today have an ally in the White House. Yet you don’t need mandates from Washington politicians to get going. Investors realized that the future is renewables and are slowly phasing out traditional commodities. But we still need to keep the lights on, and things going, to get to carbon neutrality. There’s an opportunity to buy traditional energy companies that are setting more-aggressive goals of environmental compliance, but are also providing much-needed fuels to keep, to reintegrate, the economy, because we aren’t at the point where we can do everything on wind and solar. So, we’re actually overweight energy, which draws a lot of raised eyebrows. I feel totally comfortable with that because energy companies are essentially reinventing themselves.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"}],"isCommentEnd":false,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":84,"commentSize":21,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false},"APP":{"userAgent":"Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com)","isDev":false,"isTTM":false,"tenantId":"TBCN","deviceId":"web-server-community-laohu8-v3","version":"4.42.2","shortVersion":"4.42.2","platform":"web","vendor":"web","appName":"laohu8","isIOS":false,"isAndroid":false,"isTiger":false,"isTHS":false,"isWeiXin":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"isWeiBo":false,"isQQ":false,"isBaiduSwan":false,"isBaiduBox":false,"isDingTalk":false,"isToutiao":false,"isOnePlus":false,"isHuaWei":false,"isXiaomi":false,"isXiaomiWebView":false,"isOppo":false,"isVivo":false,"isSamsung":false,"isMobile":false},"href":"/m/news/1132830852","isCrawlerRequest":true}