Qlee10的个人主页 - 老虎社区

Qlee10

Qlee10

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

46关注

5粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-06-15

like and comment!

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-07-01

comment

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-07-01

like for like thanks

Why NIO Stock Is Moving Higher Today<blockquote>为什么蔚来股价今天走高</blockquote>

2021-07-05

oh no

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-26

wow

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-18

wow

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-15

I need a T

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-28

wow

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-25

cool

Albert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</blockquote>

2021-06-20

wow

抱歉，原内容已删除

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3559003590411925","uuid":"3559003590411925","gmtCreate":1595913139037,"gmtModify":1625042740235,"name":"Qlee10","pinyin":"qlee10","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":5,"headSize":46,"tweetSize":70,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.18","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":140894047,"gmtCreate":1625644662389,"gmtModify":1631890698455,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/140894047","repostId":"1120486332","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1680,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":154733416,"gmtCreate":1625544412035,"gmtModify":1631890698456,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"oh no&nbsp;","listText":"oh no&nbsp;","text":"oh no","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/154733416","repostId":"1155435134","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1155435134","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1625483300,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1155435134?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-05 19:08","market":"hk","language":"en","title":"What Does the End of the Quarter Mean for Portfolio Management?<blockquote>季度末对投资组合管理意味着什么？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1155435134","media":"investopedia","summary":"The \"end of the quarter\" refers to the conclusion of one of four specific three-month periods on the","content":"<p>The \"end of the quarter\" refers to the conclusion of one of four specific three-month periods on the financial calendar. Thefour quartersend in March, or Q1; June, or Q2; September, or Q3; and December, or Q4. These are considered important times for investors. Many businesses, analysts, government agencies, and theFederal Reserverelease critical new data about various markets or economic indicators at the end of a quarter.</p><p><blockquote>“季度末”是指财务日历上四个特定三个月期间之一的结束。四季度将于三月份结束，即第一季度；六月，或第二季度；九月，或第三季度；以及12月，或第四季度。对于投资者来说，这被认为是重要的时期。许多企业、分析师、政府机构和美联储在季度末发布有关各种市场或经济指标的重要新数据。</blockquote></p><p> There's a widely held belief in financial circles that hedge funds, pension funds, and insurance companies always rebalance their portfolios at the end of each quarter. While no proof or evidence has ever been put forward to confirm this practice or its prevalence, the very idea reinforces the concept that the end of a quarter is significant.</p><p><blockquote>金融界普遍认为，对冲基金、养老基金和保险公司总是在每个季度末重新平衡其投资组合。虽然从来没有证据或证据来证实这种做法或其普遍性，但这个想法强化了一个季度末意义重大的概念。</blockquote></p><p> Even if major financial players do not always rebalance at the end of quarters, many investors use this time to re-evaluate their ownportfolio management, changing which assets comprise the portfolio or setting new portfolio targets. Not only is it a good idea for investors to monitor their investments from time-to-time but rarely is so much new, actionable information released as during the end of a quarter.</p><p><blockquote>即使主要金融参与者并不总是在季度末重新平衡，许多投资者也会利用这段时间重新评估自己的投资组合管理，改变投资组合的资产或设定新的投资组合目标。对于投资者来说，不时监控他们的投资不仅是一个好主意，而且很少像在季度末那样发布如此多的新的、可操作的信息。</blockquote></p><p> Rebalancing a Portfolio</p><p><blockquote>重新平衡投资组合</blockquote></p><p> Rebalancinginvolves the periodic sale and purchase of assets within a portfolio to maintain a target ratio.2Consider an investor who wants his portfolio to be comprised of 50% growth stocks, 25% income stocks, and 25% bonds. If during Q1, the growth stocks outperform the other investments substantially, the investor may decide to sell some growth stocks or purchase more income stocks and bonds to bring the portfolio back to a 50-25-25 split.</p><p><blockquote>再平衡涉及定期出售和购买投资组合中的资产以维持目标比率。2考虑一位投资者，他希望自己的投资组合由50%的成长型股票、25%的收益型股票和25%的债券组成。如果在第一季度，成长型股票的表现大幅优于其他投资，投资者可能会决定出售一些成长型股票或购买更多收益型股票和债券，以使投资组合回到50-25-25的分割。</blockquote></p><p> KEY TAKEAWAYS</p><p><blockquote>关键要点</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>The end of the three-month period known as a financial quarter is considered an important time for investors.</li>  <li>Companies, financial analysts, and government agencies (including the Fed) all release reports and critical data at the end of a quarter.</li>  <li>Both retail and institutional investors often use the end of a quarter to re-evaluate and rebalance their portfolios.</li> </ul> Traditional rebalancing involves trading the gains of well-performing assets, by selling high, for more low-performing assets, by buying low, at the end of each quarter. Theoretically, this serves to protect a portfolio from being too exposed or straying too far from its original strategy. However, pegging rebalances to the end of quarters relies on arbitrary calendar events which may not coincide with market movements. Nevertheless, the confluence of new reports that emerge at the end of quarters usually causes market reactions and should be of concern to most participants.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>对于投资者来说，被称为财务季度的三个月结束被认为是一个重要的时间。</li><li>公司、金融分析师和政府机构（包括美联储）都会在季度末发布报告和关键数据。</li><li>散户和机构投资者经常利用季度末来重新评估和重新平衡他们的投资组合。</li></ul>传统的再平衡涉及在每个季度末通过高价卖出来交易表现良好资产的收益，以换取更多表现不佳的资产。从理论上讲，这有助于保护投资组合不会暴露太多或偏离其原始策略太远。然而，将再平衡与季度末挂钩依赖于任意的日历事件，这些事件可能与市场走势不一致。然而，季度末出现的新报告的汇合通常会引起市场反应，应该引起大多数参与者的关注。</blockquote></p><p> Institutional Investors and Rebalancing</p><p><blockquote>机构投资者与再平衡</blockquote></p><p> It is not just individual investors who consider making portfolio moves at the end of quarters. Portfolio management is also important for institutional investors, like mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, or ETFs.3</p><p><blockquote>考虑在季度末调整投资组合的不仅仅是个人投资者。投资组合管理对于机构投资者也很重要，例如共同基金和交易所交易基金(ETF)。3</blockquote></p><p> There are two forms of fund portfolio management: active and passive.4Passive funds generally peg their portfolios to market indexes and involve fewer changes in exchange for lower management fees. The end of a quarter is less significant for these types of funds, though if theirbenchmark indexeschange at this time, they will as well.</p><p><blockquote>基金投资组合管理有两种形式：主动型和被动型。4被动型基金通常将其投资组合与市场指数挂钩，涉及较少的变化，以换取较低的管理费。对于这些类型的基金来说，季度末并不那么重要，尽管如果它们的基准指数此时发生变化，它们也会发生变化。</blockquote></p><p> Active funds have a manager or team of managers who take a more proactive approach to beat market average returns. These funds can be quite active during the end of quarters, especially if their portfolios need to be adjusted to meet their previously stated goals and strategies.</p><p><blockquote>主动型基金有一位经理或经理团队，他们采取更积极的方法来击败市场平均回报。这些基金在季度末可能非常活跃，特别是如果他们的投资组合需要调整以满足他们之前制定的目标和策略。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1606203311635","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>What Does the End of the Quarter Mean for Portfolio Management?<blockquote>季度末对投资组合管理意味着什么？</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\">\nWhat Does the End of the Quarter Mean for Portfolio Management?<blockquote>季度末对投资组合管理意味着什么？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">investopedia</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-05 19:08</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The \"end of the quarter\" refers to the conclusion of one of four specific three-month periods on the financial calendar. Thefour quartersend in March, or Q1; June, or Q2; September, or Q3; and December, or Q4. These are considered important times for investors. Many businesses, analysts, government agencies, and theFederal Reserverelease critical new data about various markets or economic indicators at the end of a quarter.</p><p><blockquote>“季度末”是指财务日历上四个特定三个月期间之一的结束。四季度将于三月份结束，即第一季度；六月，或第二季度；九月，或第三季度；以及12月，或第四季度。对于投资者来说，这被认为是重要的时期。许多企业、分析师、政府机构和美联储在季度末发布有关各种市场或经济指标的重要新数据。</blockquote></p><p> There's a widely held belief in financial circles that hedge funds, pension funds, and insurance companies always rebalance their portfolios at the end of each quarter. While no proof or evidence has ever been put forward to confirm this practice or its prevalence, the very idea reinforces the concept that the end of a quarter is significant.</p><p><blockquote>金融界普遍认为，对冲基金、养老基金和保险公司总是在每个季度末重新平衡其投资组合。虽然从来没有证据或证据来证实这种做法或其普遍性，但这个想法强化了一个季度末意义重大的概念。</blockquote></p><p> Even if major financial players do not always rebalance at the end of quarters, many investors use this time to re-evaluate their ownportfolio management, changing which assets comprise the portfolio or setting new portfolio targets. Not only is it a good idea for investors to monitor their investments from time-to-time but rarely is so much new, actionable information released as during the end of a quarter.</p><p><blockquote>即使主要金融参与者并不总是在季度末重新平衡，许多投资者也会利用这段时间重新评估自己的投资组合管理，改变投资组合的资产或设定新的投资组合目标。对于投资者来说，不时监控他们的投资不仅是一个好主意，而且很少像在季度末那样发布如此多的新的、可操作的信息。</blockquote></p><p> Rebalancing a Portfolio</p><p><blockquote>重新平衡投资组合</blockquote></p><p> Rebalancinginvolves the periodic sale and purchase of assets within a portfolio to maintain a target ratio.2Consider an investor who wants his portfolio to be comprised of 50% growth stocks, 25% income stocks, and 25% bonds. If during Q1, the growth stocks outperform the other investments substantially, the investor may decide to sell some growth stocks or purchase more income stocks and bonds to bring the portfolio back to a 50-25-25 split.</p><p><blockquote>再平衡涉及定期出售和购买投资组合中的资产以维持目标比率。2考虑一位投资者，他希望自己的投资组合由50%的成长型股票、25%的收益型股票和25%的债券组成。如果在第一季度，成长型股票的表现大幅优于其他投资，投资者可能会决定出售一些成长型股票或购买更多收益型股票和债券，以使投资组合回到50-25-25的分割。</blockquote></p><p> KEY TAKEAWAYS</p><p><blockquote>关键要点</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>The end of the three-month period known as a financial quarter is considered an important time for investors.</li>  <li>Companies, financial analysts, and government agencies (including the Fed) all release reports and critical data at the end of a quarter.</li>  <li>Both retail and institutional investors often use the end of a quarter to re-evaluate and rebalance their portfolios.</li> </ul> Traditional rebalancing involves trading the gains of well-performing assets, by selling high, for more low-performing assets, by buying low, at the end of each quarter. Theoretically, this serves to protect a portfolio from being too exposed or straying too far from its original strategy. However, pegging rebalances to the end of quarters relies on arbitrary calendar events which may not coincide with market movements. Nevertheless, the confluence of new reports that emerge at the end of quarters usually causes market reactions and should be of concern to most participants.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>对于投资者来说，被称为财务季度的三个月结束被认为是一个重要的时间。</li><li>公司、金融分析师和政府机构（包括美联储）都会在季度末发布报告和关键数据。</li><li>散户和机构投资者经常利用季度末来重新评估和重新平衡他们的投资组合。</li></ul>传统的再平衡涉及在每个季度末通过高价卖出来交易表现良好资产的收益，以换取更多表现不佳的资产。从理论上讲，这有助于保护投资组合不会暴露太多或偏离其原始策略太远。然而，将再平衡与季度末挂钩依赖于任意的日历事件，这些事件可能与市场走势不一致。然而，季度末出现的新报告的汇合通常会引起市场反应，应该引起大多数参与者的关注。</blockquote></p><p> Institutional Investors and Rebalancing</p><p><blockquote>机构投资者与再平衡</blockquote></p><p> It is not just individual investors who consider making portfolio moves at the end of quarters. Portfolio management is also important for institutional investors, like mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, or ETFs.3</p><p><blockquote>考虑在季度末调整投资组合的不仅仅是个人投资者。投资组合管理对于机构投资者也很重要，例如共同基金和交易所交易基金(ETF)。3</blockquote></p><p> There are two forms of fund portfolio management: active and passive.4Passive funds generally peg their portfolios to market indexes and involve fewer changes in exchange for lower management fees. The end of a quarter is less significant for these types of funds, though if theirbenchmark indexeschange at this time, they will as well.</p><p><blockquote>基金投资组合管理有两种形式：主动型和被动型。4被动型基金通常将其投资组合与市场指数挂钩，涉及较少的变化，以换取较低的管理费。对于这些类型的基金来说，季度末并不那么重要，尽管如果它们的基准指数此时发生变化，它们也会发生变化。</blockquote></p><p> Active funds have a manager or team of managers who take a more proactive approach to beat market average returns. These funds can be quite active during the end of quarters, especially if their portfolios need to be adjusted to meet their previously stated goals and strategies.</p><p><blockquote>主动型基金有一位经理或经理团队，他们采取更积极的方法来击败市场平均回报。这些基金在季度末可能非常活跃，特别是如果他们的投资组合需要调整以满足他们之前制定的目标和策略。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/122214/what-does-end-quarter-mean-portfolio-management.asp?utm_campaign=quote-yahoo&utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=referral\">investopedia</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/122214/what-does-end-quarter-mean-portfolio-management.asp?utm_campaign=quote-yahoo&utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=referral","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1155435134","content_text":"The \"end of the quarter\" refers to the conclusion of one of four specific three-month periods on the financial calendar. Thefour quartersend in March, or Q1; June, or Q2; September, or Q3; and December, or Q4. These are considered important times for investors. Many businesses, analysts, government agencies, and theFederal Reserverelease critical new data about various markets or economic indicators at the end of a quarter.\nThere's a widely held belief in financial circles that hedge funds, pension funds, and insurance companies always rebalance their portfolios at the end of each quarter. While no proof or evidence has ever been put forward to confirm this practice or its prevalence, the very idea reinforces the concept that the end of a quarter is significant.\nEven if major financial players do not always rebalance at the end of quarters, many investors use this time to re-evaluate their ownportfolio management, changing which assets comprise the portfolio or setting new portfolio targets. Not only is it a good idea for investors to monitor their investments from time-to-time but rarely is so much new, actionable information released as during the end of a quarter.\nRebalancing a Portfolio\nRebalancinginvolves the periodic sale and purchase of assets within a portfolio to maintain a target ratio.2Consider an investor who wants his portfolio to be comprised of 50% growth stocks, 25% income stocks, and 25% bonds. If during Q1, the growth stocks outperform the other investments substantially, the investor may decide to sell some growth stocks or purchase more income stocks and bonds to bring the portfolio back to a 50-25-25 split.\nKEY TAKEAWAYS\n\nThe end of the three-month period known as a financial quarter is considered an important time for investors.\nCompanies, financial analysts, and government agencies (including the Fed) all release reports and critical data at the end of a quarter.\nBoth retail and institutional investors often use the end of a quarter to re-evaluate and rebalance their portfolios.\n\nTraditional rebalancing involves trading the gains of well-performing assets, by selling high, for more low-performing assets, by buying low, at the end of each quarter. Theoretically, this serves to protect a portfolio from being too exposed or straying too far from its original strategy. However, pegging rebalances to the end of quarters relies on arbitrary calendar events which may not coincide with market movements. Nevertheless, the confluence of new reports that emerge at the end of quarters usually causes market reactions and should be of concern to most participants.\nInstitutional Investors and Rebalancing\nIt is not just individual investors who consider making portfolio moves at the end of quarters. Portfolio management is also important for institutional investors, like mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, or ETFs.3\nThere are two forms of fund portfolio management: active and passive.4Passive funds generally peg their portfolios to market indexes and involve fewer changes in exchange for lower management fees. The end of a quarter is less significant for these types of funds, though if theirbenchmark indexeschange at this time, they will as well.\nActive funds have a manager or team of managers who take a more proactive approach to beat market average returns. These funds can be quite active during the end of quarters, especially if their portfolios need to be adjusted to meet their previously stated goals and strategies.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1856,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":154739808,"gmtCreate":1625544344204,"gmtModify":1631890698454,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/154739808","repostId":"1190430616","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3305,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":155718480,"gmtCreate":1625453202940,"gmtModify":1631890698470,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/155718480","repostId":"1172720964","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3245,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":155711266,"gmtCreate":1625453110255,"gmtModify":1631890698481,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"oh no&nbsp;","listText":"oh no&nbsp;","text":"oh no","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/155711266","repostId":"1169840279","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2000,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158154091,"gmtCreate":1625139724513,"gmtModify":1631890698492,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"comment&nbsp;","listText":"comment&nbsp;","text":"comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/158154091","repostId":"1154991106","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3683,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158951638,"gmtCreate":1625125435424,"gmtModify":1631890698501,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"interesting&nbsp;","listText":"interesting&nbsp;","text":"interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/158951638","repostId":"2147146918","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3083,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158953123,"gmtCreate":1625125375562,"gmtModify":1631890698513,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"like for like thanks&nbsp;","listText":"like for like thanks&nbsp;","text":"like for like thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/158953123","repostId":"1121473384","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1121473384","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1625067394,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1121473384?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-30 23:36","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why NIO Stock Is Moving Higher Today<blockquote>为什么蔚来股价今天走高</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1121473384","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.Shares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker NIOwere moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.As of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.In a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $5","content":"<p>A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.</p><p><blockquote>在蔚来公布6月份销售报告之前，华尔街的一份看涨报告提高了人们的预期。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker&nbsp;<b>NIO</b>(NYSE:NIO)were moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车制造商的股票<b>蔚来</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）周三早盘走高，此前一位华尔街分析师在一份看涨报告中上调了该行对该股的目标价。</blockquote></p><p> As of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.</p><p><blockquote>截至美国东部时间上午11点35分，蔚来美国存托股票较周二收盘价上涨约5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> In a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $58.30, while reiterating his previous buy rating on the shares.</p><p><blockquote>在周二下午发布的一份报告中。花旗银行分析师Jeff Chung将该行对蔚来的目标股价从58.30美元上调至72美元，同时重申了此前对该股的买入评级。</blockquote></p><p> Chung wrote that he expects NIO to report \"robust shipment volume\" for June, which he thinks will be followed by sequential quarter-over-quarter growth in the third and fourth quarters of 2021. He now sees NIO delivering 93,000 vehicles in 2021, up from his earlier estimate of 90,000, and has raised his forecasts for 2022 and 2024 while also increasing his target&nbsp;price-to-earnings multiple&nbsp;for NIO's shares.</p><p><blockquote>Chung写道，他预计蔚来6月份将报告“强劲的出货量”，他认为随后将在2021年第三和第四季度实现环比增长。他现在预计蔚来将在2021年交付93,000辆汽车，高于他之前估计的90,000辆，并上调了对2022年和2024年的预测，同时还提高了蔚来股票的目标市盈率。</blockquote></p><p> NIO typically releases its monthly delivery totals shortly after month-end, meaning we could see NIO's results for June as soon as Thursday morning. The company's guidance, which it reiterated earlier this month, calls for a delivery total of&nbsp;between 21,000 and 22,000 vehicles&nbsp;for the second quarter. Through the end of May, it had&nbsp;delivered 13,183 vehicles&nbsp;despite production disruptions caused by shortages of computer chips.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来通常会在月底后不久发布每月交付总量，这意味着我们最早可以在周四上午看到蔚来6月份的业绩。该公司本月早些时候重申了评级第二季度总交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引。尽管计算机芯片短缺导致生产中断，截至5月底，该公司仍交付了13,183辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Will NIO outperform its own guidance? I think it's possible but unlikely, given the continued chip-shortage issues. I won't be surprised, however, if its June result puts its second-quarter total at the high end of its guidance range. We'll find out in a day or two.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来的表现会超过自己的指导吗？我认为这是可能的，但考虑到持续的芯片短缺问题，可能性不大。然而，如果其6月份的业绩使其第二季度的总额处于指导范围的高端，我不会感到惊讶。一两天后我们就会知道了。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why NIO Stock Is Moving Higher Today<blockquote>为什么蔚来股价今天走高</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\">\nWhy NIO Stock Is Moving Higher Today<blockquote>为什么蔚来股价今天走高</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-06-30 23:36</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.</p><p><blockquote>在蔚来公布6月份销售报告之前，华尔街的一份看涨报告提高了人们的预期。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker&nbsp;<b>NIO</b>(NYSE:NIO)were moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车制造商的股票<b>蔚来</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）周三早盘走高，此前一位华尔街分析师在一份看涨报告中上调了该行对该股的目标价。</blockquote></p><p> As of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.</p><p><blockquote>截至美国东部时间上午11点35分，蔚来美国存托股票较周二收盘价上涨约5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> In a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $58.30, while reiterating his previous buy rating on the shares.</p><p><blockquote>在周二下午发布的一份报告中。花旗银行分析师Jeff Chung将该行对蔚来的目标股价从58.30美元上调至72美元，同时重申了此前对该股的买入评级。</blockquote></p><p> Chung wrote that he expects NIO to report \"robust shipment volume\" for June, which he thinks will be followed by sequential quarter-over-quarter growth in the third and fourth quarters of 2021. He now sees NIO delivering 93,000 vehicles in 2021, up from his earlier estimate of 90,000, and has raised his forecasts for 2022 and 2024 while also increasing his target&nbsp;price-to-earnings multiple&nbsp;for NIO's shares.</p><p><blockquote>Chung写道，他预计蔚来6月份将报告“强劲的出货量”，他认为随后将在2021年第三和第四季度实现环比增长。他现在预计蔚来将在2021年交付93,000辆汽车，高于他之前估计的90,000辆，并上调了对2022年和2024年的预测，同时还提高了蔚来股票的目标市盈率。</blockquote></p><p> NIO typically releases its monthly delivery totals shortly after month-end, meaning we could see NIO's results for June as soon as Thursday morning. The company's guidance, which it reiterated earlier this month, calls for a delivery total of&nbsp;between 21,000 and 22,000 vehicles&nbsp;for the second quarter. Through the end of May, it had&nbsp;delivered 13,183 vehicles&nbsp;despite production disruptions caused by shortages of computer chips.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来通常会在月底后不久发布每月交付总量，这意味着我们最早可以在周四上午看到蔚来6月份的业绩。该公司本月早些时候重申了评级第二季度总交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引。尽管计算机芯片短缺导致生产中断，截至5月底，该公司仍交付了13,183辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Will NIO outperform its own guidance? I think it's possible but unlikely, given the continued chip-shortage issues. I won't be surprised, however, if its June result puts its second-quarter total at the high end of its guidance range. We'll find out in a day or two.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来的表现会超过自己的指导吗？我认为这是可能的，但考虑到持续的芯片短缺问题，可能性不大。然而，如果其6月份的业绩使其第二季度的总额处于指导范围的高端，我不会感到惊讶。一两天后我们就会知道了。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NIO":"蔚来"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1121473384","content_text":"A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.\nShares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker NIO(NYSE:NIO)were moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.\nAs of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.\nIn a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $58.30, while reiterating his previous buy rating on the shares.\nChung wrote that he expects NIO to report \"robust shipment volume\" for June, which he thinks will be followed by sequential quarter-over-quarter growth in the third and fourth quarters of 2021. He now sees NIO delivering 93,000 vehicles in 2021, up from his earlier estimate of 90,000, and has raised his forecasts for 2022 and 2024 while also increasing his target price-to-earnings multiple for NIO's shares.\nNIO typically releases its monthly delivery totals shortly after month-end, meaning we could see NIO's results for June as soon as Thursday morning. The company's guidance, which it reiterated earlier this month, calls for a delivery total of between 21,000 and 22,000 vehicles for the second quarter. Through the end of May, it had delivered 13,183 vehicles despite production disruptions caused by shortages of computer chips.\nWill NIO outperform its own guidance? I think it's possible but unlikely, given the continued chip-shortage issues. I won't be surprised, however, if its June result puts its second-quarter total at the high end of its guidance range. We'll find out in a day or two.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"NIO":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2881,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":153434460,"gmtCreate":1625041754550,"gmtModify":1631890698528,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"like for like&nbsp;","listText":"like for like&nbsp;","text":"like for like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/153434460","repostId":"1140918239","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1140918239","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1625036743,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1140918239?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-30 15:05","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Can AMD Go on a Rally Like Nvidia and Hit All-Time Highs?<blockquote>AMD能否像英伟达一样上涨并创下历史新高？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1140918239","media":"TheStreet","summary":"AMD is breaking out to multi-month highs and clearing range resistance. Can it go on a run like Nvid","content":"<p>AMD is breaking out to multi-month highs and clearing range resistance. Can it go on a run like Nvidia has over the last few months?</p><p><blockquote>AMD正在突破数月高点并清除区间阻力。它能像Nvidia过去几个月那样继续运行吗？</blockquote></p><p> First it was Nvidia&nbsp;that enjoyed the big gains. It it now Advanced Micro Devices’&nbsp;turn?</p><p><blockquote>首先，英伟达获得了巨大收益。现在轮到先进微设备公司了吗？</blockquote></p><p> Shares have risen 2.8% on Tuesday as the stock ishitting its highest levels since February.</p><p><blockquote>周二，该股上涨2.8%，创2月份以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> The stock was flirting with a move over range resistance on Monday, but is really pushing higher on Tuesday. The rally comes on positive reports regarding U.K. regulators and AMD’s acquisition of Xilinx.</p><p><blockquote>该股周一曾一度突破区间阻力位，但周二确实走高。此次反弹是在有关英国监管机构和AMD收购Xilinx的积极报道之后出现的。</blockquote></p><p> For its part, Xilinx shares are also hitting the highest levels since February.</p><p><blockquote>就赛灵思而言，其股价也创下2月份以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> Nvidia and the VanEck Semiconductor ETF&nbsp;both hit new highs this week. With AMD stock continuing to consolidate and now making progresson its $35 billion acquisition, can it too break out to new highs?</p><p><blockquote>英伟达和VanEck半导体ETF本周双双创下新高。随着AMD股价继续盘整，现在350亿美元的收购取得进展，它也能突破新高吗？</blockquote></p><p> Let’s look at the chart.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看图表。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading AMD</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易AMD</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d5c985680e6c9aef976554f75490f55e\" tg-width=\"1240\" tg-height=\"760\"><span>Weekly chart of AMD stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AMD股票周线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> In July 2020, AMD stock exploded over $60 resistance, quickly climbing to a high of $87.29 in just a couple of weeks.</p><p><blockquote>2020年7月，AMD股价突破60美元阻力位，在短短几周内迅速攀升至87.29美元的高点。</blockquote></p><p> After that, the stock settled down, bouncing between $74 and $88. Eventually, AMD broke out to a new range, with $88 acting as<i>support</i>instead of resistance, and the $94 to $96 area acting as resistance.</p><p><blockquote>此后，该股稳定下来，在74美元至88美元之间反弹。最终，AMD突破了一个新的区间，88美元充当了<i>支持</i>而不是阻力，94美元至96美元区域作为阻力。</blockquote></p><p> Interestingly, support eventually gave way and AMD fell back into prior trading range.</p><p><blockquote>有趣的是，支撑最终消失，AMD回落至之前的交易区间。</blockquote></p><p> As I mentioned in the opening part of the story, AMD is breaking out over $87 to $88 range resistance again as the&nbsp;stock is pushing to multi-month highs. It’s also pushing through the 61.8% retracement.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在故事的开头部分提到的，随着AMD股价升至数月高点，AMD再次突破87美元至88美元区间阻力位。它还突破了61.8%的回撤位。</blockquote></p><p> From here, bulls are looking for the $87 to $88 area to again turn from resistance into support. If that happens, the $94 to $96 area is certainly within reach.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，多头正在寻找87美元至88美元区域，以再次从阻力位转变为支撑位。如果发生这种情况，94美元至96美元的区域肯定是触手可及的。</blockquote></p><p> If AMD can push through that zone, look for a test of the all-time high at $99.13 and then $100 above that.</p><p><blockquote>如果AMD能够突破该区域，请寻求测试99.13美元的历史高点，然后高于该高点100美元。</blockquote></p><p> Should shares really get moving -&nbsp;like Nvidia did&nbsp;- then the $115 level could be in play near the 161.8% extension.</p><p><blockquote>如果股价真的像英伟达那样上涨，那么115美元的水平可能会在161.8%的延伸附近发挥作用。</blockquote></p><p> On the downside, a move back below $87 needs to be met by support from the 50-day moving average. Otherwise, $80 could be on the table.</p><p><blockquote>下行方面，回落至87美元以下需要得到50日移动均线的支撑。否则，80美元可能会摆在桌面上。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Can AMD Go on a Rally Like Nvidia and Hit All-Time Highs?<blockquote>AMD能否像英伟达一样上涨并创下历史新高？</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\">\nCan AMD Go on a Rally Like Nvidia and Hit All-Time Highs?<blockquote>AMD能否像英伟达一样上涨并创下历史新高？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">TheStreet</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-30 15:05</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>AMD is breaking out to multi-month highs and clearing range resistance. Can it go on a run like Nvidia has over the last few months?</p><p><blockquote>AMD正在突破数月高点并清除区间阻力。它能像Nvidia过去几个月那样继续运行吗？</blockquote></p><p> First it was Nvidia&nbsp;that enjoyed the big gains. It it now Advanced Micro Devices’&nbsp;turn?</p><p><blockquote>首先，英伟达获得了巨大收益。现在轮到先进微设备公司了吗？</blockquote></p><p> Shares have risen 2.8% on Tuesday as the stock ishitting its highest levels since February.</p><p><blockquote>周二，该股上涨2.8%，创2月份以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> The stock was flirting with a move over range resistance on Monday, but is really pushing higher on Tuesday. The rally comes on positive reports regarding U.K. regulators and AMD’s acquisition of Xilinx.</p><p><blockquote>该股周一曾一度突破区间阻力位，但周二确实走高。此次反弹是在有关英国监管机构和AMD收购Xilinx的积极报道之后出现的。</blockquote></p><p> For its part, Xilinx shares are also hitting the highest levels since February.</p><p><blockquote>就赛灵思而言，其股价也创下2月份以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> Nvidia and the VanEck Semiconductor ETF&nbsp;both hit new highs this week. With AMD stock continuing to consolidate and now making progresson its $35 billion acquisition, can it too break out to new highs?</p><p><blockquote>英伟达和VanEck半导体ETF本周双双创下新高。随着AMD股价继续盘整，现在350亿美元的收购取得进展，它也能突破新高吗？</blockquote></p><p> Let’s look at the chart.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看图表。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading AMD</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易AMD</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d5c985680e6c9aef976554f75490f55e\" tg-width=\"1240\" tg-height=\"760\"><span>Weekly chart of AMD stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AMD股票周线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> In July 2020, AMD stock exploded over $60 resistance, quickly climbing to a high of $87.29 in just a couple of weeks.</p><p><blockquote>2020年7月，AMD股价突破60美元阻力位，在短短几周内迅速攀升至87.29美元的高点。</blockquote></p><p> After that, the stock settled down, bouncing between $74 and $88. Eventually, AMD broke out to a new range, with $88 acting as<i>support</i>instead of resistance, and the $94 to $96 area acting as resistance.</p><p><blockquote>此后，该股稳定下来，在74美元至88美元之间反弹。最终，AMD突破了一个新的区间，88美元充当了<i>支持</i>而不是阻力，94美元至96美元区域作为阻力。</blockquote></p><p> Interestingly, support eventually gave way and AMD fell back into prior trading range.</p><p><blockquote>有趣的是，支撑最终消失，AMD回落至之前的交易区间。</blockquote></p><p> As I mentioned in the opening part of the story, AMD is breaking out over $87 to $88 range resistance again as the&nbsp;stock is pushing to multi-month highs. It’s also pushing through the 61.8% retracement.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在故事的开头部分提到的，随着AMD股价升至数月高点，AMD再次突破87美元至88美元区间阻力位。它还突破了61.8%的回撤位。</blockquote></p><p> From here, bulls are looking for the $87 to $88 area to again turn from resistance into support. If that happens, the $94 to $96 area is certainly within reach.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，多头正在寻找87美元至88美元区域，以再次从阻力位转变为支撑位。如果发生这种情况，94美元至96美元的区域肯定是触手可及的。</blockquote></p><p> If AMD can push through that zone, look for a test of the all-time high at $99.13 and then $100 above that.</p><p><blockquote>如果AMD能够突破该区域，请寻求测试99.13美元的历史高点，然后高于该高点100美元。</blockquote></p><p> Should shares really get moving -&nbsp;like Nvidia did&nbsp;- then the $115 level could be in play near the 161.8% extension.</p><p><blockquote>如果股价真的像英伟达那样上涨，那么115美元的水平可能会在161.8%的延伸附近发挥作用。</blockquote></p><p> On the downside, a move back below $87 needs to be met by support from the 50-day moving average. Otherwise, $80 could be on the table.</p><p><blockquote>下行方面，回落至87美元以下需要得到50日移动均线的支撑。否则，80美元可能会摆在桌面上。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/advanced-micro-devices-amd-stock-nvda-record-highs\">TheStreet</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/advanced-micro-devices-amd-stock-nvda-record-highs","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1140918239","content_text":"AMD is breaking out to multi-month highs and clearing range resistance. Can it go on a run like Nvidia has over the last few months?\nFirst it was Nvidia that enjoyed the big gains. It it now Advanced Micro Devices’ turn?\nShares have risen 2.8% on Tuesday as the stock ishitting its highest levels since February.\nThe stock was flirting with a move over range resistance on Monday, but is really pushing higher on Tuesday. The rally comes on positive reports regarding U.K. regulators and AMD’s acquisition of Xilinx.\nFor its part, Xilinx shares are also hitting the highest levels since February.\nNvidia and the VanEck Semiconductor ETF both hit new highs this week. With AMD stock continuing to consolidate and now making progresson its $35 billion acquisition, can it too break out to new highs?\nLet’s look at the chart.\nTrading AMD\nWeekly chart of AMD stock.\nIn July 2020, AMD stock exploded over $60 resistance, quickly climbing to a high of $87.29 in just a couple of weeks.\nAfter that, the stock settled down, bouncing between $74 and $88. Eventually, AMD broke out to a new range, with $88 acting assupportinstead of resistance, and the $94 to $96 area acting as resistance.\nInterestingly, support eventually gave way and AMD fell back into prior trading range.\nAs I mentioned in the opening part of the story, AMD is breaking out over $87 to $88 range resistance again as the stock is pushing to multi-month highs. It’s also pushing through the 61.8% retracement.\nFrom here, bulls are looking for the $87 to $88 area to again turn from resistance into support. If that happens, the $94 to $96 area is certainly within reach.\nIf AMD can push through that zone, look for a test of the all-time high at $99.13 and then $100 above that.\nShould shares really get moving - like Nvidia did - then the $115 level could be in play near the 161.8% extension.\nOn the downside, a move back below $87 needs to be met by support from the 50-day moving average. Otherwise, $80 could be on the table.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4081,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":153434807,"gmtCreate":1625041723709,"gmtModify":1631890698538,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow like for like&nbsp;","listText":"wow like for like&nbsp;","text":"wow like for like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/153434807","repostId":"2147614258","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3344,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":153435764,"gmtCreate":1625041683558,"gmtModify":1631892901477,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"like for like&nbsp;","listText":"like for like&nbsp;","text":"like for like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/153435764","repostId":"1195903421","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":447,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127934678,"gmtCreate":1624812160594,"gmtModify":1631892901484,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127934678","repostId":"2146073358","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":867,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125073300,"gmtCreate":1624638397100,"gmtModify":1631892901486,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/125073300","repostId":"2146079086","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":636,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122178659,"gmtCreate":1624608186071,"gmtModify":1631892901486,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"cool&nbsp;","listText":"cool&nbsp;","text":"cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122178659","repostId":"1119915886","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1119915886","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624606971,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1119915886?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-25 15:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Albert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1119915886","media":"zerohedge","summary":"One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plo","content":"<p>One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.</p><p><blockquote>一周前，我们解释了为什么美联储上周三犯了一个巨大的政策错误，当时其最新的点阵图显示了两次加息：简单来说，虽然市场对2023年和2024年加息的定价上升，但超过这一水平的收益率却下降了，因为市场表示美联储最多只能加息不到两年。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/553b5c9e65ffdc0b996916d81dcba85e\" tg-width=\"552\" tg-height=\"280\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Said otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -<b>the market is saying that&nbsp; it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,</b>pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.</p><p><blockquote>否则，如果美联储决定加息——正如鲍威尔首先暗示的那样，然后布拉德周五加倍加息，导致股市暴跌——<b>市场表示，在通胀和增长达到限速之前，它不会走得太远，</b>首次加息后压低收益率预期。</blockquote></p><p> This very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*<i>(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)</i>pushes US r* even lower.</p><p><blockquote>这种对r*的非常悲观的观点于2015年首次在这里提出，也符合债券市场以外的市场行为。首先，正如德意志银行（Deutsche Bank）外汇策略师乔治·萨拉维洛斯（George Saravelos）所说，这与我们所看到的美元对美联储立场哪怕是很小的转变的非常高的反应是一致的：全球投资者对收益率的巨大压抑需求迫使美元走强，通货紧缩的影响比预期的要快。换句话说，低全局r*<i>（请记住，世界其他地区仍然拥有巨额经常账户盈余或超额储蓄）</i>把我们的r*推得更低。</blockquote></p><p> Second, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2</u></b><b>.</b></p><p><blockquote>其次，低r*与持续的股票弹性是一致的，特别是在严重依赖低中期贴现率的成长型股票中。过去两天的股市走势是由从罗素指数到纳斯达克的巨大相对轮动带动的，这并不奇怪。正如德意志银行不祥警告的那样<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19长期停滞定价，第2版</u></b><b>.</b></blockquote></p><p> Here, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:<b>what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?</b>These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.</p><p><blockquote>在这里，另一个更大的问题出现了：如果没有每年数万亿美元的新刺激措施，美国还能维持GDP的正增长吗？更不祥的是：<b>如果美联储在通胀爆发消失之前被迫降息，通胀会发生什么？</b>这些都是市场在未来几个月必须回答的令人不安的问题。</blockquote></p><p> * * *</p><p><blockquote>***</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as<i>\"is inflation transitory or not\"</i>for the simple reason that<i><b>The Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>快进到今天，法国兴业银行的内部permagrouch艾伯特·爱德华兹(Albert Edwards)为美联储提出的所有这些关键问题提供了答案：根据爱德华兹的说法，市场不必太担心诸如<i>“通货膨胀是不是暂时的”</i>原因很简单<i><b>美联储利率正常化的雄心永远无法实现。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Picking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹根据德意志银行外汇主管的观察写道，虽然全球通货再膨胀交易已经在消退，但美联储上周在其令人惊讶的鹰派意向声明中驳斥了德意志银行外汇主管的观点，“撤退很快就变成了许多资产类别的溃败。”</blockquote></p><p> And while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:<i><b>Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?</b></i></p><p><blockquote>尽管这与伯南克2013年的“缩减恐慌”不太一样，但它清楚地表明了市场对美联储意图的敏感性，尽管这些意图可能变化无常。最大的惊喜：在最初的抛售之后，债券市场的多头反弹——与2013年的大幅抛售形成鲜明对比，或者正如爱德华兹呼应我们所说的：<i><b>也许市场现在意识到美联储紧缩周期是不可能的？</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Referencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹引用美联储前发言人aWSJ的文章写道，根据乔恩·希尔森拉斯的说法，有两种解释。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>First, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).</li>  <li>Secondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.</li> </ul> Edwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as<i><b>“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”</b></i>He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “<i><b>We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.</b></i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>首先，美联储这一次在传达其意图方面做得更好（我个人认为不是）。</li><li>其次，也是更令人担忧的是，希尔森拉斯写道，市场可能过于自满。</li></ul>爱德华兹接下来指出，根据2013年发脾气期间担任美联储理事的杰里米·斯坦(Jeremy Stein)的说法，市场不应该对潜在紧缩的程度抱有善意的看法。<i><b>“如果出现通胀意外，美联储将无法支持市场。”</b></i>他表示，他的前同事美联储主席鲍威尔善于在需要时改变立场。他表示，尽管今天市场平静，但鲍威尔在未来几个月可能需要这种灵活性。事实上，鲍威尔先生在6月16日的新闻发布会上说“<i><b>我们将尽我们所能避免市场反应。但最终，当我们实现宏观经济目标时，我们将酌情缩减规模”。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> The permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?<b>He is indeed nimble – in retreat!</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>一贯愤世嫉俗的爱德华兹随后爆发，并表示，当他读到这类声明时，他“真的笑出声来”，并问道：“这是同一个杰罗姆·鲍威尔吗？他在2018年底就美联储资产负债表的解除进行了几个月的强硬言论后，在当年年底市场开始低迷时，他的资产负债表处于“自动驾驶”状态，来了个180度大转弯？<b>他确实很敏捷——在撤退中！</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Perhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&amp;P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.</p><p><blockquote>也许爱德华兹不再是唯一一个持超级怀疑态度的人：毕竟，不是别人，正是美国银行最近表示，随着标准普尔指数下跌10%，每个人都知道美联储将立即停止缩减规模……对于鲍威尔的可信度来说，这不是一个好兆头。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> So why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"</p><p><blockquote>那么，为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场对其缩减恐慌冲击做出了相反的反应呢？“在我看来，债券市场上涨是因为他们知道美联储的宽松货币政策付出了沉重的代价。”</blockquote></p><p> It's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market<b>\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...</b></p><p><blockquote>不仅如此：随着美联储全力推动一切通货再膨胀，不仅是经济和股市，还有房地产市场，这三者中的任何一个崩溃都将导致立即的萧条。这就是为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场<b>“只是不相信美联储能够坚持其更强硬的言论。为什么？因为在制造了另一个巨大的实际房价泡沫后，他们被困住了”...</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da894f1f697890f14bbd7a2f9fd8e139\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"214\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>...</b>which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"</p><p><blockquote><b>...</b>这证实了我们自2009年以来所说的：“央行已经成为他们吹出的泡沫的奴隶——市场迅速迫使任何紧缩政策逆转。这一次也不会有什么不同。”</blockquote></p><p> And speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...</p><p><blockquote>谈到吹大房价泡沫，爱德华兹指出，“奖牌领奖台上甚至没有美联储的位置。指向下图...</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01eba2b10798b2941e9d408a94c428f5\" tg-width=\"800\" tg-height=\"475\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> ... Edwards concludes that '<b>this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>...爱德华兹的结论是“<b>现在，这是一场史无前例的全球房地产泡沫，它困住了更多的哥伦比亚广播公司，而不仅仅是美联储。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：任何正常化的尝试都将导致一个或多个资产泡沫立即破裂，这将立即将美联储拉回来，导致更大的泡沫，是的，这意味着美联储迟早会出现两个最令人讨厌的资产一旦世界意识到连美国银行都认为即将到来的恶性通货膨胀不是“暂时的”，加密货币和黄金的交易价格都将远高于10万美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Albert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</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\">\nAlbert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-25 15:42</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.</p><p><blockquote>一周前，我们解释了为什么美联储上周三犯了一个巨大的政策错误，当时其最新的点阵图显示了两次加息：简单来说，虽然市场对2023年和2024年加息的定价上升，但超过这一水平的收益率却下降了，因为市场表示美联储最多只能加息不到两年。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/553b5c9e65ffdc0b996916d81dcba85e\" tg-width=\"552\" tg-height=\"280\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Said otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -<b>the market is saying that&nbsp; it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,</b>pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.</p><p><blockquote>否则，如果美联储决定加息——正如鲍威尔首先暗示的那样，然后布拉德周五加倍加息，导致股市暴跌——<b>市场表示，在通胀和增长达到限速之前，它不会走得太远，</b>首次加息后压低收益率预期。</blockquote></p><p> This very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*<i>(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)</i>pushes US r* even lower.</p><p><blockquote>这种对r*的非常悲观的观点于2015年首次在这里提出，也符合债券市场以外的市场行为。首先，正如德意志银行（Deutsche Bank）外汇策略师乔治·萨拉维洛斯（George Saravelos）所说，这与我们所看到的美元对美联储立场哪怕是很小的转变的非常高的反应是一致的：全球投资者对收益率的巨大压抑需求迫使美元走强，通货紧缩的影响比预期的要快。换句话说，低全局r*<i>（请记住，世界其他地区仍然拥有巨额经常账户盈余或超额储蓄）</i>把我们的r*推得更低。</blockquote></p><p> Second, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2</u></b><b>.</b></p><p><blockquote>其次，低r*与持续的股票弹性是一致的，特别是在严重依赖低中期贴现率的成长型股票中。过去两天的股市走势是由从罗素指数到纳斯达克的巨大相对轮动带动的，这并不奇怪。正如德意志银行不祥警告的那样<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19长期停滞定价，第2版</u></b><b>.</b></blockquote></p><p> Here, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:<b>what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?</b>These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.</p><p><blockquote>在这里，另一个更大的问题出现了：如果没有每年数万亿美元的新刺激措施，美国还能维持GDP的正增长吗？更不祥的是：<b>如果美联储在通胀爆发消失之前被迫降息，通胀会发生什么？</b>这些都是市场在未来几个月必须回答的令人不安的问题。</blockquote></p><p> * * *</p><p><blockquote>***</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as<i>\"is inflation transitory or not\"</i>for the simple reason that<i><b>The Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>快进到今天，法国兴业银行的内部permagrouch艾伯特·爱德华兹(Albert Edwards)为美联储提出的所有这些关键问题提供了答案：根据爱德华兹的说法，市场不必太担心诸如<i>“通货膨胀是不是暂时的”</i>原因很简单<i><b>美联储利率正常化的雄心永远无法实现。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Picking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹根据德意志银行外汇主管的观察写道，虽然全球通货再膨胀交易已经在消退，但美联储上周在其令人惊讶的鹰派意向声明中驳斥了德意志银行外汇主管的观点，“撤退很快就变成了许多资产类别的溃败。”</blockquote></p><p> And while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:<i><b>Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?</b></i></p><p><blockquote>尽管这与伯南克2013年的“缩减恐慌”不太一样，但它清楚地表明了市场对美联储意图的敏感性，尽管这些意图可能变化无常。最大的惊喜：在最初的抛售之后，债券市场的多头反弹——与2013年的大幅抛售形成鲜明对比，或者正如爱德华兹呼应我们所说的：<i><b>也许市场现在意识到美联储紧缩周期是不可能的？</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Referencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹引用美联储前发言人aWSJ的文章写道，根据乔恩·希尔森拉斯的说法，有两种解释。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>First, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).</li>  <li>Secondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.</li> </ul> Edwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as<i><b>“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”</b></i>He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “<i><b>We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.</b></i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>首先，美联储这一次在传达其意图方面做得更好（我个人认为不是）。</li><li>其次，也是更令人担忧的是，希尔森拉斯写道，市场可能过于自满。</li></ul>爱德华兹接下来指出，根据2013年发脾气期间担任美联储理事的杰里米·斯坦(Jeremy Stein)的说法，市场不应该对潜在紧缩的程度抱有善意的看法。<i><b>“如果出现通胀意外，美联储将无法支持市场。”</b></i>他表示，他的前同事美联储主席鲍威尔善于在需要时改变立场。他表示，尽管今天市场平静，但鲍威尔在未来几个月可能需要这种灵活性。事实上，鲍威尔先生在6月16日的新闻发布会上说“<i><b>我们将尽我们所能避免市场反应。但最终，当我们实现宏观经济目标时，我们将酌情缩减规模”。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> The permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?<b>He is indeed nimble – in retreat!</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>一贯愤世嫉俗的爱德华兹随后爆发，并表示，当他读到这类声明时，他“真的笑出声来”，并问道：“这是同一个杰罗姆·鲍威尔吗？他在2018年底就美联储资产负债表的解除进行了几个月的强硬言论后，在当年年底市场开始低迷时，他的资产负债表处于“自动驾驶”状态，来了个180度大转弯？<b>他确实很敏捷——在撤退中！</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Perhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&amp;P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.</p><p><blockquote>也许爱德华兹不再是唯一一个持超级怀疑态度的人：毕竟，不是别人，正是美国银行最近表示，随着标准普尔指数下跌10%，每个人都知道美联储将立即停止缩减规模……对于鲍威尔的可信度来说，这不是一个好兆头。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> So why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"</p><p><blockquote>那么，为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场对其缩减恐慌冲击做出了相反的反应呢？“在我看来，债券市场上涨是因为他们知道美联储的宽松货币政策付出了沉重的代价。”</blockquote></p><p> It's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market<b>\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...</b></p><p><blockquote>不仅如此：随着美联储全力推动一切通货再膨胀，不仅是经济和股市，还有房地产市场，这三者中的任何一个崩溃都将导致立即的萧条。这就是为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场<b>“只是不相信美联储能够坚持其更强硬的言论。为什么？因为在制造了另一个巨大的实际房价泡沫后，他们被困住了”...</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da894f1f697890f14bbd7a2f9fd8e139\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"214\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>...</b>which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"</p><p><blockquote><b>...</b>这证实了我们自2009年以来所说的：“央行已经成为他们吹出的泡沫的奴隶——市场迅速迫使任何紧缩政策逆转。这一次也不会有什么不同。”</blockquote></p><p> And speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...</p><p><blockquote>谈到吹大房价泡沫，爱德华兹指出，“奖牌领奖台上甚至没有美联储的位置。指向下图...</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01eba2b10798b2941e9d408a94c428f5\" tg-width=\"800\" tg-height=\"475\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> ... Edwards concludes that '<b>this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>...爱德华兹的结论是“<b>现在，这是一场史无前例的全球房地产泡沫，它困住了更多的哥伦比亚广播公司，而不仅仅是美联储。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：任何正常化的尝试都将导致一个或多个资产泡沫立即破裂，这将立即将美联储拉回来，导致更大的泡沫，是的，这意味着美联储迟早会出现两个最令人讨厌的资产一旦世界意识到连美国银行都认为即将到来的恶性通货膨胀不是“暂时的”，加密货币和黄金的交易价格都将远高于10万美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/albert-edwards-fed-trapped-epic-bubble-it-can-never-normalize-rates-again\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/albert-edwards-fed-trapped-epic-bubble-it-can-never-normalize-rates-again","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1119915886","content_text":"One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.\n\nSaid otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -the market is saying that  it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.\nThis very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)pushes US r* even lower.\nSecond, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns,is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2.\nHere, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.\n* * *\nFast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as\"is inflation transitory or not\"for the simple reason thatThe Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.\nPicking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"\nAnd while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?\nReferencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.\n\nFirst, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).\nSecondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.\n\nEdwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.\nThe permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?He is indeed nimble – in retreat!\"\nPerhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.\nSo why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"\nIt's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...\n\n...which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"\nAnd speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...\n\n... Edwards concludes that 'this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.\"\nBottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":666,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122171120,"gmtCreate":1624608102860,"gmtModify":1631892901490,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122171120","repostId":"1119915886","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1119915886","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624606971,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1119915886?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-25 15:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Albert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1119915886","media":"zerohedge","summary":"One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plo","content":"<p>One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.</p><p><blockquote>一周前，我们解释了为什么美联储上周三犯了一个巨大的政策错误，当时其最新的点阵图显示了两次加息：简单来说，虽然市场对2023年和2024年加息的定价上升，但超过这一水平的收益率却下降了，因为市场表示美联储最多只能加息不到两年。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/553b5c9e65ffdc0b996916d81dcba85e\" tg-width=\"552\" tg-height=\"280\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Said otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -<b>the market is saying that&nbsp; it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,</b>pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.</p><p><blockquote>否则，如果美联储决定加息——正如鲍威尔首先暗示的那样，然后布拉德周五加倍加息，导致股市暴跌——<b>市场表示，在通胀和增长达到限速之前，它不会走得太远，</b>首次加息后压低收益率预期。</blockquote></p><p> This very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*<i>(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)</i>pushes US r* even lower.</p><p><blockquote>这种对r*的非常悲观的观点于2015年首次在这里提出，也符合债券市场以外的市场行为。首先，正如德意志银行（Deutsche Bank）外汇策略师乔治·萨拉维洛斯（George Saravelos）所说，这与我们所看到的美元对美联储立场哪怕是很小的转变的非常高的反应是一致的：全球投资者对收益率的巨大压抑需求迫使美元走强，通货紧缩的影响比预期的要快。换句话说，低全局r*<i>（请记住，世界其他地区仍然拥有巨额经常账户盈余或超额储蓄）</i>把我们的r*推得更低。</blockquote></p><p> Second, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2</u></b><b>.</b></p><p><blockquote>其次，低r*与持续的股票弹性是一致的，特别是在严重依赖低中期贴现率的成长型股票中。过去两天的股市走势是由从罗素指数到纳斯达克的巨大相对轮动带动的，这并不奇怪。正如德意志银行不祥警告的那样<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19长期停滞定价，第2版</u></b><b>.</b></blockquote></p><p> Here, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:<b>what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?</b>These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.</p><p><blockquote>在这里，另一个更大的问题出现了：如果没有每年数万亿美元的新刺激措施，美国还能维持GDP的正增长吗？更不祥的是：<b>如果美联储在通胀爆发消失之前被迫降息，通胀会发生什么？</b>这些都是市场在未来几个月必须回答的令人不安的问题。</blockquote></p><p> * * *</p><p><blockquote>***</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as<i>\"is inflation transitory or not\"</i>for the simple reason that<i><b>The Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>快进到今天，法国兴业银行的内部permagrouch艾伯特·爱德华兹(Albert Edwards)为美联储提出的所有这些关键问题提供了答案：根据爱德华兹的说法，市场不必太担心诸如<i>“通货膨胀是不是暂时的”</i>原因很简单<i><b>美联储利率正常化的雄心永远无法实现。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Picking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹根据德意志银行外汇主管的观察写道，虽然全球通货再膨胀交易已经在消退，但美联储上周在其令人惊讶的鹰派意向声明中驳斥了德意志银行外汇主管的观点，“撤退很快就变成了许多资产类别的溃败。”</blockquote></p><p> And while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:<i><b>Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?</b></i></p><p><blockquote>尽管这与伯南克2013年的“缩减恐慌”不太一样，但它清楚地表明了市场对美联储意图的敏感性，尽管这些意图可能变化无常。最大的惊喜：在最初的抛售之后，债券市场的多头反弹——与2013年的大幅抛售形成鲜明对比，或者正如爱德华兹呼应我们所说的：<i><b>也许市场现在意识到美联储紧缩周期是不可能的？</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Referencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹引用美联储前发言人aWSJ的文章写道，根据乔恩·希尔森拉斯的说法，有两种解释。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>First, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).</li>  <li>Secondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.</li> </ul> Edwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as<i><b>“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”</b></i>He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “<i><b>We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.</b></i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>首先，美联储这一次在传达其意图方面做得更好（我个人认为不是）。</li><li>其次，也是更令人担忧的是，希尔森拉斯写道，市场可能过于自满。</li></ul>爱德华兹接下来指出，根据2013年发脾气期间担任美联储理事的杰里米·斯坦(Jeremy Stein)的说法，市场不应该对潜在紧缩的程度抱有善意的看法。<i><b>“如果出现通胀意外，美联储将无法支持市场。”</b></i>他表示，他的前同事美联储主席鲍威尔善于在需要时改变立场。他表示，尽管今天市场平静，但鲍威尔在未来几个月可能需要这种灵活性。事实上，鲍威尔先生在6月16日的新闻发布会上说“<i><b>我们将尽我们所能避免市场反应。但最终，当我们实现宏观经济目标时，我们将酌情缩减规模”。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> The permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?<b>He is indeed nimble – in retreat!</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>一贯愤世嫉俗的爱德华兹随后爆发，并表示，当他读到这类声明时，他“真的笑出声来”，并问道：“这是同一个杰罗姆·鲍威尔吗？他在2018年底就美联储资产负债表的解除进行了几个月的强硬言论后，在当年年底市场开始低迷时，他的资产负债表处于“自动驾驶”状态，来了个180度大转弯？<b>他确实很敏捷——在撤退中！</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Perhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&amp;P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.</p><p><blockquote>也许爱德华兹不再是唯一一个持超级怀疑态度的人：毕竟，不是别人，正是美国银行最近表示，随着标准普尔指数下跌10%，每个人都知道美联储将立即停止缩减规模……对于鲍威尔的可信度来说，这不是一个好兆头。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> So why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"</p><p><blockquote>那么，为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场对其缩减恐慌冲击做出了相反的反应呢？“在我看来，债券市场上涨是因为他们知道美联储的宽松货币政策付出了沉重的代价。”</blockquote></p><p> It's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market<b>\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...</b></p><p><blockquote>不仅如此：随着美联储全力推动一切通货再膨胀，不仅是经济和股市，还有房地产市场，这三者中的任何一个崩溃都将导致立即的萧条。这就是为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场<b>“只是不相信美联储能够坚持其更强硬的言论。为什么？因为在制造了另一个巨大的实际房价泡沫后，他们被困住了”...</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da894f1f697890f14bbd7a2f9fd8e139\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"214\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>...</b>which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"</p><p><blockquote><b>...</b>这证实了我们自2009年以来所说的：“央行已经成为他们吹出的泡沫的奴隶——市场迅速迫使任何紧缩政策逆转。这一次也不会有什么不同。”</blockquote></p><p> And speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...</p><p><blockquote>谈到吹大房价泡沫，爱德华兹指出，“奖牌领奖台上甚至没有美联储的位置。指向下图...</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01eba2b10798b2941e9d408a94c428f5\" tg-width=\"800\" tg-height=\"475\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> ... Edwards concludes that '<b>this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>...爱德华兹的结论是“<b>现在，这是一场史无前例的全球房地产泡沫，它困住了更多的哥伦比亚广播公司，而不仅仅是美联储。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：任何正常化的尝试都将导致一个或多个资产泡沫立即破裂，这将立即将美联储拉回来，导致更大的泡沫，是的，这意味着美联储迟早会出现两个最令人讨厌的资产一旦世界意识到连美国银行都认为即将到来的恶性通货膨胀不是“暂时的”，加密货币和黄金的交易价格都将远高于10万美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Albert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</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\">\nAlbert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-25 15:42</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.</p><p><blockquote>一周前，我们解释了为什么美联储上周三犯了一个巨大的政策错误，当时其最新的点阵图显示了两次加息：简单来说，虽然市场对2023年和2024年加息的定价上升，但超过这一水平的收益率却下降了，因为市场表示美联储最多只能加息不到两年。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/553b5c9e65ffdc0b996916d81dcba85e\" tg-width=\"552\" tg-height=\"280\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Said otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -<b>the market is saying that&nbsp; it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,</b>pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.</p><p><blockquote>否则，如果美联储决定加息——正如鲍威尔首先暗示的那样，然后布拉德周五加倍加息，导致股市暴跌——<b>市场表示，在通胀和增长达到限速之前，它不会走得太远，</b>首次加息后压低收益率预期。</blockquote></p><p> This very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*<i>(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)</i>pushes US r* even lower.</p><p><blockquote>这种对r*的非常悲观的观点于2015年首次在这里提出，也符合债券市场以外的市场行为。首先，正如德意志银行（Deutsche Bank）外汇策略师乔治·萨拉维洛斯（George Saravelos）所说，这与我们所看到的美元对美联储立场哪怕是很小的转变的非常高的反应是一致的：全球投资者对收益率的巨大压抑需求迫使美元走强，通货紧缩的影响比预期的要快。换句话说，低全局r*<i>（请记住，世界其他地区仍然拥有巨额经常账户盈余或超额储蓄）</i>把我们的r*推得更低。</blockquote></p><p> Second, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2</u></b><b>.</b></p><p><blockquote>其次，低r*与持续的股票弹性是一致的，特别是在严重依赖低中期贴现率的成长型股票中。过去两天的股市走势是由从罗素指数到纳斯达克的巨大相对轮动带动的，这并不奇怪。正如德意志银行不祥警告的那样<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19长期停滞定价，第2版</u></b><b>.</b></blockquote></p><p> Here, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:<b>what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?</b>These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.</p><p><blockquote>在这里，另一个更大的问题出现了：如果没有每年数万亿美元的新刺激措施，美国还能维持GDP的正增长吗？更不祥的是：<b>如果美联储在通胀爆发消失之前被迫降息，通胀会发生什么？</b>这些都是市场在未来几个月必须回答的令人不安的问题。</blockquote></p><p> * * *</p><p><blockquote>***</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as<i>\"is inflation transitory or not\"</i>for the simple reason that<i><b>The Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>快进到今天，法国兴业银行的内部permagrouch艾伯特·爱德华兹(Albert Edwards)为美联储提出的所有这些关键问题提供了答案：根据爱德华兹的说法，市场不必太担心诸如<i>“通货膨胀是不是暂时的”</i>原因很简单<i><b>美联储利率正常化的雄心永远无法实现。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Picking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹根据德意志银行外汇主管的观察写道，虽然全球通货再膨胀交易已经在消退，但美联储上周在其令人惊讶的鹰派意向声明中驳斥了德意志银行外汇主管的观点，“撤退很快就变成了许多资产类别的溃败。”</blockquote></p><p> And while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:<i><b>Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?</b></i></p><p><blockquote>尽管这与伯南克2013年的“缩减恐慌”不太一样，但它清楚地表明了市场对美联储意图的敏感性，尽管这些意图可能变化无常。最大的惊喜：在最初的抛售之后，债券市场的多头反弹——与2013年的大幅抛售形成鲜明对比，或者正如爱德华兹呼应我们所说的：<i><b>也许市场现在意识到美联储紧缩周期是不可能的？</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Referencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹引用美联储前发言人aWSJ的文章写道，根据乔恩·希尔森拉斯的说法，有两种解释。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>First, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).</li>  <li>Secondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.</li> </ul> Edwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as<i><b>“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”</b></i>He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “<i><b>We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.</b></i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>首先，美联储这一次在传达其意图方面做得更好（我个人认为不是）。</li><li>其次，也是更令人担忧的是，希尔森拉斯写道，市场可能过于自满。</li></ul>爱德华兹接下来指出，根据2013年发脾气期间担任美联储理事的杰里米·斯坦(Jeremy Stein)的说法，市场不应该对潜在紧缩的程度抱有善意的看法。<i><b>“如果出现通胀意外，美联储将无法支持市场。”</b></i>他表示，他的前同事美联储主席鲍威尔善于在需要时改变立场。他表示，尽管今天市场平静，但鲍威尔在未来几个月可能需要这种灵活性。事实上，鲍威尔先生在6月16日的新闻发布会上说“<i><b>我们将尽我们所能避免市场反应。但最终，当我们实现宏观经济目标时，我们将酌情缩减规模”。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> The permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?<b>He is indeed nimble – in retreat!</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>一贯愤世嫉俗的爱德华兹随后爆发，并表示，当他读到这类声明时，他“真的笑出声来”，并问道：“这是同一个杰罗姆·鲍威尔吗？他在2018年底就美联储资产负债表的解除进行了几个月的强硬言论后，在当年年底市场开始低迷时，他的资产负债表处于“自动驾驶”状态，来了个180度大转弯？<b>他确实很敏捷——在撤退中！</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Perhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&amp;P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.</p><p><blockquote>也许爱德华兹不再是唯一一个持超级怀疑态度的人：毕竟，不是别人，正是美国银行最近表示，随着标准普尔指数下跌10%，每个人都知道美联储将立即停止缩减规模……对于鲍威尔的可信度来说，这不是一个好兆头。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> So why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"</p><p><blockquote>那么，为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场对其缩减恐慌冲击做出了相反的反应呢？“在我看来，债券市场上涨是因为他们知道美联储的宽松货币政策付出了沉重的代价。”</blockquote></p><p> It's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market<b>\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...</b></p><p><blockquote>不仅如此：随着美联储全力推动一切通货再膨胀，不仅是经济和股市，还有房地产市场，这三者中的任何一个崩溃都将导致立即的萧条。这就是为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场<b>“只是不相信美联储能够坚持其更强硬的言论。为什么？因为在制造了另一个巨大的实际房价泡沫后，他们被困住了”...</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da894f1f697890f14bbd7a2f9fd8e139\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"214\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>...</b>which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"</p><p><blockquote><b>...</b>这证实了我们自2009年以来所说的：“央行已经成为他们吹出的泡沫的奴隶——市场迅速迫使任何紧缩政策逆转。这一次也不会有什么不同。”</blockquote></p><p> And speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...</p><p><blockquote>谈到吹大房价泡沫，爱德华兹指出，“奖牌领奖台上甚至没有美联储的位置。指向下图...</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01eba2b10798b2941e9d408a94c428f5\" tg-width=\"800\" tg-height=\"475\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> ... Edwards concludes that '<b>this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>...爱德华兹的结论是“<b>现在，这是一场史无前例的全球房地产泡沫，它困住了更多的哥伦比亚广播公司，而不仅仅是美联储。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：任何正常化的尝试都将导致一个或多个资产泡沫立即破裂，这将立即将美联储拉回来，导致更大的泡沫，是的，这意味着美联储迟早会出现两个最令人讨厌的资产一旦世界意识到连美国银行都认为即将到来的恶性通货膨胀不是“暂时的”，加密货币和黄金的交易价格都将远高于10万美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/albert-edwards-fed-trapped-epic-bubble-it-can-never-normalize-rates-again\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/albert-edwards-fed-trapped-epic-bubble-it-can-never-normalize-rates-again","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1119915886","content_text":"One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.\n\nSaid otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -the market is saying that  it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.\nThis very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)pushes US r* even lower.\nSecond, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns,is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2.\nHere, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.\n* * *\nFast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as\"is inflation transitory or not\"for the simple reason thatThe Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.\nPicking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"\nAnd while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?\nReferencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.\n\nFirst, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).\nSecondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.\n\nEdwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.\nThe permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?He is indeed nimble – in retreat!\"\nPerhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.\nSo why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"\nIt's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...\n\n...which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"\nAnd speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...\n\n... Edwards concludes that 'this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.\"\nBottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":827,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128328519,"gmtCreate":1624502658831,"gmtModify":1631892901494,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"comment&nbsp;","listText":"comment&nbsp;","text":"comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/128328519","repostId":"2145018574","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":821,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128321646,"gmtCreate":1624502620785,"gmtModify":1631892901494,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"scary&nbsp;","listText":"scary&nbsp;","text":"scary","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/128321646","repostId":"2145016997","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":576,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128323789,"gmtCreate":1624502593841,"gmtModify":1631892901497,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"woww","listText":"woww","text":"woww","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/128323789","repostId":"1193698944","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":620,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128323126,"gmtCreate":1624502575465,"gmtModify":1631892901500,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"cool","listText":"cool","text":"cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/128323126","repostId":"1115102727","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":670,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128329562,"gmtCreate":1624502557456,"gmtModify":1631892901509,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/128329562","repostId":"2145097284","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":587,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":187232417,"gmtCreate":1623754973939,"gmtModify":1634028977287,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"like and comment!&nbsp;","listText":"like and comment!&nbsp;","text":"like and comment!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":5,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/187232417","repostId":"1142697857","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":383,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158154091,"gmtCreate":1625139724513,"gmtModify":1631890698492,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"comment&nbsp;","listText":"comment&nbsp;","text":"comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/158154091","repostId":"1154991106","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3683,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158953123,"gmtCreate":1625125375562,"gmtModify":1631890698513,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"like for like thanks&nbsp;","listText":"like for like thanks&nbsp;","text":"like for like thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/158953123","repostId":"1121473384","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1121473384","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1625067394,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1121473384?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-30 23:36","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why NIO Stock Is Moving Higher Today<blockquote>为什么蔚来股价今天走高</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1121473384","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.Shares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker NIOwere moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.As of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.In a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $5","content":"<p>A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.</p><p><blockquote>在蔚来公布6月份销售报告之前，华尔街的一份看涨报告提高了人们的预期。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker&nbsp;<b>NIO</b>(NYSE:NIO)were moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车制造商的股票<b>蔚来</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）周三早盘走高，此前一位华尔街分析师在一份看涨报告中上调了该行对该股的目标价。</blockquote></p><p> As of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.</p><p><blockquote>截至美国东部时间上午11点35分，蔚来美国存托股票较周二收盘价上涨约5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> In a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $58.30, while reiterating his previous buy rating on the shares.</p><p><blockquote>在周二下午发布的一份报告中。花旗银行分析师Jeff Chung将该行对蔚来的目标股价从58.30美元上调至72美元，同时重申了此前对该股的买入评级。</blockquote></p><p> Chung wrote that he expects NIO to report \"robust shipment volume\" for June, which he thinks will be followed by sequential quarter-over-quarter growth in the third and fourth quarters of 2021. He now sees NIO delivering 93,000 vehicles in 2021, up from his earlier estimate of 90,000, and has raised his forecasts for 2022 and 2024 while also increasing his target&nbsp;price-to-earnings multiple&nbsp;for NIO's shares.</p><p><blockquote>Chung写道，他预计蔚来6月份将报告“强劲的出货量”，他认为随后将在2021年第三和第四季度实现环比增长。他现在预计蔚来将在2021年交付93,000辆汽车，高于他之前估计的90,000辆，并上调了对2022年和2024年的预测，同时还提高了蔚来股票的目标市盈率。</blockquote></p><p> NIO typically releases its monthly delivery totals shortly after month-end, meaning we could see NIO's results for June as soon as Thursday morning. The company's guidance, which it reiterated earlier this month, calls for a delivery total of&nbsp;between 21,000 and 22,000 vehicles&nbsp;for the second quarter. Through the end of May, it had&nbsp;delivered 13,183 vehicles&nbsp;despite production disruptions caused by shortages of computer chips.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来通常会在月底后不久发布每月交付总量，这意味着我们最早可以在周四上午看到蔚来6月份的业绩。该公司本月早些时候重申了评级第二季度总交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引。尽管计算机芯片短缺导致生产中断，截至5月底，该公司仍交付了13,183辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Will NIO outperform its own guidance? I think it's possible but unlikely, given the continued chip-shortage issues. I won't be surprised, however, if its June result puts its second-quarter total at the high end of its guidance range. We'll find out in a day or two.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来的表现会超过自己的指导吗？我认为这是可能的，但考虑到持续的芯片短缺问题，可能性不大。然而，如果其6月份的业绩使其第二季度的总额处于指导范围的高端，我不会感到惊讶。一两天后我们就会知道了。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why NIO Stock Is Moving Higher Today<blockquote>为什么蔚来股价今天走高</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\">\nWhy NIO Stock Is Moving Higher Today<blockquote>为什么蔚来股价今天走高</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-06-30 23:36</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.</p><p><blockquote>在蔚来公布6月份销售报告之前，华尔街的一份看涨报告提高了人们的预期。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker&nbsp;<b>NIO</b>(NYSE:NIO)were moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车制造商的股票<b>蔚来</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）周三早盘走高，此前一位华尔街分析师在一份看涨报告中上调了该行对该股的目标价。</blockquote></p><p> As of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.</p><p><blockquote>截至美国东部时间上午11点35分，蔚来美国存托股票较周二收盘价上涨约5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> In a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $58.30, while reiterating his previous buy rating on the shares.</p><p><blockquote>在周二下午发布的一份报告中。花旗银行分析师Jeff Chung将该行对蔚来的目标股价从58.30美元上调至72美元，同时重申了此前对该股的买入评级。</blockquote></p><p> Chung wrote that he expects NIO to report \"robust shipment volume\" for June, which he thinks will be followed by sequential quarter-over-quarter growth in the third and fourth quarters of 2021. He now sees NIO delivering 93,000 vehicles in 2021, up from his earlier estimate of 90,000, and has raised his forecasts for 2022 and 2024 while also increasing his target&nbsp;price-to-earnings multiple&nbsp;for NIO's shares.</p><p><blockquote>Chung写道，他预计蔚来6月份将报告“强劲的出货量”，他认为随后将在2021年第三和第四季度实现环比增长。他现在预计蔚来将在2021年交付93,000辆汽车，高于他之前估计的90,000辆，并上调了对2022年和2024年的预测，同时还提高了蔚来股票的目标市盈率。</blockquote></p><p> NIO typically releases its monthly delivery totals shortly after month-end, meaning we could see NIO's results for June as soon as Thursday morning. The company's guidance, which it reiterated earlier this month, calls for a delivery total of&nbsp;between 21,000 and 22,000 vehicles&nbsp;for the second quarter. Through the end of May, it had&nbsp;delivered 13,183 vehicles&nbsp;despite production disruptions caused by shortages of computer chips.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来通常会在月底后不久发布每月交付总量，这意味着我们最早可以在周四上午看到蔚来6月份的业绩。该公司本月早些时候重申了评级第二季度总交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引。尽管计算机芯片短缺导致生产中断，截至5月底，该公司仍交付了13,183辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Will NIO outperform its own guidance? I think it's possible but unlikely, given the continued chip-shortage issues. I won't be surprised, however, if its June result puts its second-quarter total at the high end of its guidance range. We'll find out in a day or two.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来的表现会超过自己的指导吗？我认为这是可能的，但考虑到持续的芯片短缺问题，可能性不大。然而，如果其6月份的业绩使其第二季度的总额处于指导范围的高端，我不会感到惊讶。一两天后我们就会知道了。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NIO":"蔚来"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1121473384","content_text":"A bullish note from Wall Street is raising expectations ahead of NIO's June sales report.\nShares of Chinese electric-vehicle maker NIO(NYSE:NIO)were moving higher in early trading on Wednesday, after a Wall Street analyst raised his bank's price target for the shares in a bullish note.\nAs of 11:35 a.m. EDT, NIO's American depositary shares were up about 5.9% from Tuesday's closing price.\nIn a note released on Tuesday afternoon. Citibank analyst Jeff Chung raised the bank's price target on NIO to $72, from $58.30, while reiterating his previous buy rating on the shares.\nChung wrote that he expects NIO to report \"robust shipment volume\" for June, which he thinks will be followed by sequential quarter-over-quarter growth in the third and fourth quarters of 2021. He now sees NIO delivering 93,000 vehicles in 2021, up from his earlier estimate of 90,000, and has raised his forecasts for 2022 and 2024 while also increasing his target price-to-earnings multiple for NIO's shares.\nNIO typically releases its monthly delivery totals shortly after month-end, meaning we could see NIO's results for June as soon as Thursday morning. The company's guidance, which it reiterated earlier this month, calls for a delivery total of between 21,000 and 22,000 vehicles for the second quarter. Through the end of May, it had delivered 13,183 vehicles despite production disruptions caused by shortages of computer chips.\nWill NIO outperform its own guidance? I think it's possible but unlikely, given the continued chip-shortage issues. I won't be surprised, however, if its June result puts its second-quarter total at the high end of its guidance range. We'll find out in a day or two.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"NIO":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2881,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":155711266,"gmtCreate":1625453110255,"gmtModify":1631890698481,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"oh no&nbsp;","listText":"oh no&nbsp;","text":"oh no","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/155711266","repostId":"1169840279","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2000,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125073300,"gmtCreate":1624638397100,"gmtModify":1631892901486,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/125073300","repostId":"2146079086","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":636,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":168927115,"gmtCreate":1623947528437,"gmtModify":1634025379094,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/168927115","repostId":"1181813338","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":468,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":187234577,"gmtCreate":1623755020099,"gmtModify":1634028975730,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"I need a T&nbsp;","listText":"I need a T&nbsp;","text":"I need a T","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/187234577","repostId":"2143581857","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":321,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127934678,"gmtCreate":1624812160594,"gmtModify":1631892901484,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127934678","repostId":"2146073358","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":867,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122178659,"gmtCreate":1624608186071,"gmtModify":1631892901486,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"cool&nbsp;","listText":"cool&nbsp;","text":"cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122178659","repostId":"1119915886","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1119915886","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624606971,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1119915886?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-25 15:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Albert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1119915886","media":"zerohedge","summary":"One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plo","content":"<p>One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.</p><p><blockquote>一周前，我们解释了为什么美联储上周三犯了一个巨大的政策错误，当时其最新的点阵图显示了两次加息：简单来说，虽然市场对2023年和2024年加息的定价上升，但超过这一水平的收益率却下降了，因为市场表示美联储最多只能加息不到两年。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/553b5c9e65ffdc0b996916d81dcba85e\" tg-width=\"552\" tg-height=\"280\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Said otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -<b>the market is saying that&nbsp; it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,</b>pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.</p><p><blockquote>否则，如果美联储决定加息——正如鲍威尔首先暗示的那样，然后布拉德周五加倍加息，导致股市暴跌——<b>市场表示，在通胀和增长达到限速之前，它不会走得太远，</b>首次加息后压低收益率预期。</blockquote></p><p> This very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*<i>(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)</i>pushes US r* even lower.</p><p><blockquote>这种对r*的非常悲观的观点于2015年首次在这里提出，也符合债券市场以外的市场行为。首先，正如德意志银行（Deutsche Bank）外汇策略师乔治·萨拉维洛斯（George Saravelos）所说，这与我们所看到的美元对美联储立场哪怕是很小的转变的非常高的反应是一致的：全球投资者对收益率的巨大压抑需求迫使美元走强，通货紧缩的影响比预期的要快。换句话说，低全局r*<i>（请记住，世界其他地区仍然拥有巨额经常账户盈余或超额储蓄）</i>把我们的r*推得更低。</blockquote></p><p> Second, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2</u></b><b>.</b></p><p><blockquote>其次，低r*与持续的股票弹性是一致的，特别是在严重依赖低中期贴现率的成长型股票中。过去两天的股市走势是由从罗素指数到纳斯达克的巨大相对轮动带动的，这并不奇怪。正如德意志银行不祥警告的那样<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19长期停滞定价，第2版</u></b><b>.</b></blockquote></p><p> Here, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:<b>what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?</b>These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.</p><p><blockquote>在这里，另一个更大的问题出现了：如果没有每年数万亿美元的新刺激措施，美国还能维持GDP的正增长吗？更不祥的是：<b>如果美联储在通胀爆发消失之前被迫降息，通胀会发生什么？</b>这些都是市场在未来几个月必须回答的令人不安的问题。</blockquote></p><p> * * *</p><p><blockquote>***</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as<i>\"is inflation transitory or not\"</i>for the simple reason that<i><b>The Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>快进到今天，法国兴业银行的内部permagrouch艾伯特·爱德华兹(Albert Edwards)为美联储提出的所有这些关键问题提供了答案：根据爱德华兹的说法，市场不必太担心诸如<i>“通货膨胀是不是暂时的”</i>原因很简单<i><b>美联储利率正常化的雄心永远无法实现。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Picking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹根据德意志银行外汇主管的观察写道，虽然全球通货再膨胀交易已经在消退，但美联储上周在其令人惊讶的鹰派意向声明中驳斥了德意志银行外汇主管的观点，“撤退很快就变成了许多资产类别的溃败。”</blockquote></p><p> And while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:<i><b>Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?</b></i></p><p><blockquote>尽管这与伯南克2013年的“缩减恐慌”不太一样，但它清楚地表明了市场对美联储意图的敏感性，尽管这些意图可能变化无常。最大的惊喜：在最初的抛售之后，债券市场的多头反弹——与2013年的大幅抛售形成鲜明对比，或者正如爱德华兹呼应我们所说的：<i><b>也许市场现在意识到美联储紧缩周期是不可能的？</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Referencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹引用美联储前发言人aWSJ的文章写道，根据乔恩·希尔森拉斯的说法，有两种解释。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>First, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).</li>  <li>Secondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.</li> </ul> Edwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as<i><b>“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”</b></i>He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “<i><b>We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.</b></i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>首先，美联储这一次在传达其意图方面做得更好（我个人认为不是）。</li><li>其次，也是更令人担忧的是，希尔森拉斯写道，市场可能过于自满。</li></ul>爱德华兹接下来指出，根据2013年发脾气期间担任美联储理事的杰里米·斯坦(Jeremy Stein)的说法，市场不应该对潜在紧缩的程度抱有善意的看法。<i><b>“如果出现通胀意外，美联储将无法支持市场。”</b></i>他表示，他的前同事美联储主席鲍威尔善于在需要时改变立场。他表示，尽管今天市场平静，但鲍威尔在未来几个月可能需要这种灵活性。事实上，鲍威尔先生在6月16日的新闻发布会上说“<i><b>我们将尽我们所能避免市场反应。但最终，当我们实现宏观经济目标时，我们将酌情缩减规模”。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> The permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?<b>He is indeed nimble – in retreat!</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>一贯愤世嫉俗的爱德华兹随后爆发，并表示，当他读到这类声明时，他“真的笑出声来”，并问道：“这是同一个杰罗姆·鲍威尔吗？他在2018年底就美联储资产负债表的解除进行了几个月的强硬言论后，在当年年底市场开始低迷时，他的资产负债表处于“自动驾驶”状态，来了个180度大转弯？<b>他确实很敏捷——在撤退中！</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Perhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&amp;P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.</p><p><blockquote>也许爱德华兹不再是唯一一个持超级怀疑态度的人：毕竟，不是别人，正是美国银行最近表示，随着标准普尔指数下跌10%，每个人都知道美联储将立即停止缩减规模……对于鲍威尔的可信度来说，这不是一个好兆头。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> So why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"</p><p><blockquote>那么，为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场对其缩减恐慌冲击做出了相反的反应呢？“在我看来，债券市场上涨是因为他们知道美联储的宽松货币政策付出了沉重的代价。”</blockquote></p><p> It's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market<b>\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...</b></p><p><blockquote>不仅如此：随着美联储全力推动一切通货再膨胀，不仅是经济和股市，还有房地产市场，这三者中的任何一个崩溃都将导致立即的萧条。这就是为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场<b>“只是不相信美联储能够坚持其更强硬的言论。为什么？因为在制造了另一个巨大的实际房价泡沫后，他们被困住了”...</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da894f1f697890f14bbd7a2f9fd8e139\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"214\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>...</b>which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"</p><p><blockquote><b>...</b>这证实了我们自2009年以来所说的：“央行已经成为他们吹出的泡沫的奴隶——市场迅速迫使任何紧缩政策逆转。这一次也不会有什么不同。”</blockquote></p><p> And speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...</p><p><blockquote>谈到吹大房价泡沫，爱德华兹指出，“奖牌领奖台上甚至没有美联储的位置。指向下图...</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01eba2b10798b2941e9d408a94c428f5\" tg-width=\"800\" tg-height=\"475\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> ... Edwards concludes that '<b>this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>...爱德华兹的结论是“<b>现在，这是一场史无前例的全球房地产泡沫，它困住了更多的哥伦比亚广播公司，而不仅仅是美联储。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：任何正常化的尝试都将导致一个或多个资产泡沫立即破裂，这将立即将美联储拉回来，导致更大的泡沫，是的，这意味着美联储迟早会出现两个最令人讨厌的资产一旦世界意识到连美国银行都认为即将到来的恶性通货膨胀不是“暂时的”，加密货币和黄金的交易价格都将远高于10万美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Albert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</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\">\nAlbert Edwards: The Fed Is Trapped In An Epic Bubble, It Can Never Normalize Rates Again<blockquote>艾伯特·爱德华兹：美联储陷入史诗般的泡沫，永远无法再次实现利率正常化</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-25 15:42</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.</p><p><blockquote>一周前，我们解释了为什么美联储上周三犯了一个巨大的政策错误，当时其最新的点阵图显示了两次加息：简单来说，虽然市场对2023年和2024年加息的定价上升，但超过这一水平的收益率却下降了，因为市场表示美联储最多只能加息不到两年。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/553b5c9e65ffdc0b996916d81dcba85e\" tg-width=\"552\" tg-height=\"280\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Said otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -<b>the market is saying that&nbsp; it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,</b>pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.</p><p><blockquote>否则，如果美联储决定加息——正如鲍威尔首先暗示的那样，然后布拉德周五加倍加息，导致股市暴跌——<b>市场表示，在通胀和增长达到限速之前，它不会走得太远，</b>首次加息后压低收益率预期。</blockquote></p><p> This very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*<i>(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)</i>pushes US r* even lower.</p><p><blockquote>这种对r*的非常悲观的观点于2015年首次在这里提出，也符合债券市场以外的市场行为。首先，正如德意志银行（Deutsche Bank）外汇策略师乔治·萨拉维洛斯（George Saravelos）所说，这与我们所看到的美元对美联储立场哪怕是很小的转变的非常高的反应是一致的：全球投资者对收益率的巨大压抑需求迫使美元走强，通货紧缩的影响比预期的要快。换句话说，低全局r*<i>（请记住，世界其他地区仍然拥有巨额经常账户盈余或超额储蓄）</i>把我们的r*推得更低。</blockquote></p><p> Second, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2</u></b><b>.</b></p><p><blockquote>其次，低r*与持续的股票弹性是一致的，特别是在严重依赖低中期贴现率的成长型股票中。过去两天的股市走势是由从罗素指数到纳斯达克的巨大相对轮动带动的，这并不奇怪。正如德意志银行不祥警告的那样<u>,</u><b><u>is 2010-19长期停滞定价，第2版</u></b><b>.</b></blockquote></p><p> Here, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:<b>what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?</b>These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.</p><p><blockquote>在这里，另一个更大的问题出现了：如果没有每年数万亿美元的新刺激措施，美国还能维持GDP的正增长吗？更不祥的是：<b>如果美联储在通胀爆发消失之前被迫降息，通胀会发生什么？</b>这些都是市场在未来几个月必须回答的令人不安的问题。</blockquote></p><p> * * *</p><p><blockquote>***</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as<i>\"is inflation transitory or not\"</i>for the simple reason that<i><b>The Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>快进到今天，法国兴业银行的内部permagrouch艾伯特·爱德华兹(Albert Edwards)为美联储提出的所有这些关键问题提供了答案：根据爱德华兹的说法，市场不必太担心诸如<i>“通货膨胀是不是暂时的”</i>原因很简单<i><b>美联储利率正常化的雄心永远无法实现。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Picking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹根据德意志银行外汇主管的观察写道，虽然全球通货再膨胀交易已经在消退，但美联储上周在其令人惊讶的鹰派意向声明中驳斥了德意志银行外汇主管的观点，“撤退很快就变成了许多资产类别的溃败。”</blockquote></p><p> And while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:<i><b>Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?</b></i></p><p><blockquote>尽管这与伯南克2013年的“缩减恐慌”不太一样，但它清楚地表明了市场对美联储意图的敏感性，尽管这些意图可能变化无常。最大的惊喜：在最初的抛售之后，债券市场的多头反弹——与2013年的大幅抛售形成鲜明对比，或者正如爱德华兹呼应我们所说的：<i><b>也许市场现在意识到美联储紧缩周期是不可能的？</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Referencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.</p><p><blockquote>爱德华兹引用美联储前发言人aWSJ的文章写道，根据乔恩·希尔森拉斯的说法，有两种解释。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>First, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).</li>  <li>Secondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.</li> </ul> Edwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as<i><b>“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”</b></i>He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “<i><b>We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.</b></i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>首先，美联储这一次在传达其意图方面做得更好（我个人认为不是）。</li><li>其次，也是更令人担忧的是，希尔森拉斯写道，市场可能过于自满。</li></ul>爱德华兹接下来指出，根据2013年发脾气期间担任美联储理事的杰里米·斯坦(Jeremy Stein)的说法，市场不应该对潜在紧缩的程度抱有善意的看法。<i><b>“如果出现通胀意外，美联储将无法支持市场。”</b></i>他表示，他的前同事美联储主席鲍威尔善于在需要时改变立场。他表示，尽管今天市场平静，但鲍威尔在未来几个月可能需要这种灵活性。事实上，鲍威尔先生在6月16日的新闻发布会上说“<i><b>我们将尽我们所能避免市场反应。但最终，当我们实现宏观经济目标时，我们将酌情缩减规模”。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> The permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?<b>He is indeed nimble – in retreat!</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>一贯愤世嫉俗的爱德华兹随后爆发，并表示，当他读到这类声明时，他“真的笑出声来”，并问道：“这是同一个杰罗姆·鲍威尔吗？他在2018年底就美联储资产负债表的解除进行了几个月的强硬言论后，在当年年底市场开始低迷时，他的资产负债表处于“自动驾驶”状态，来了个180度大转弯？<b>他确实很敏捷——在撤退中！</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Perhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&amp;P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.</p><p><blockquote>也许爱德华兹不再是唯一一个持超级怀疑态度的人：毕竟，不是别人，正是美国银行最近表示，随着标准普尔指数下跌10%，每个人都知道美联储将立即停止缩减规模……对于鲍威尔的可信度来说，这不是一个好兆头。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> So why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"</p><p><blockquote>那么，为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场对其缩减恐慌冲击做出了相反的反应呢？“在我看来，债券市场上涨是因为他们知道美联储的宽松货币政策付出了沉重的代价。”</blockquote></p><p> It's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market<b>\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...</b></p><p><blockquote>不仅如此：随着美联储全力推动一切通货再膨胀，不仅是经济和股市，还有房地产市场，这三者中的任何一个崩溃都将导致立即的萧条。这就是为什么爱德华兹认为债券市场<b>“只是不相信美联储能够坚持其更强硬的言论。为什么？因为在制造了另一个巨大的实际房价泡沫后，他们被困住了”...</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/da894f1f697890f14bbd7a2f9fd8e139\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"214\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>...</b>which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"</p><p><blockquote><b>...</b>这证实了我们自2009年以来所说的：“央行已经成为他们吹出的泡沫的奴隶——市场迅速迫使任何紧缩政策逆转。这一次也不会有什么不同。”</blockquote></p><p> And speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...</p><p><blockquote>谈到吹大房价泡沫，爱德华兹指出，“奖牌领奖台上甚至没有美联储的位置。指向下图...</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01eba2b10798b2941e9d408a94c428f5\" tg-width=\"800\" tg-height=\"475\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> ... Edwards concludes that '<b>this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote>...爱德华兹的结论是“<b>现在，这是一场史无前例的全球房地产泡沫，它困住了更多的哥伦比亚广播公司，而不仅仅是美联储。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：任何正常化的尝试都将导致一个或多个资产泡沫立即破裂，这将立即将美联储拉回来，导致更大的泡沫，是的，这意味着美联储迟早会出现两个最令人讨厌的资产一旦世界意识到连美国银行都认为即将到来的恶性通货膨胀不是“暂时的”，加密货币和黄金的交易价格都将远高于10万美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/albert-edwards-fed-trapped-epic-bubble-it-can-never-normalize-rates-again\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/albert-edwards-fed-trapped-epic-bubble-it-can-never-normalize-rates-again","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1119915886","content_text":"One week ago,we explained whythe Fed made a huge policy error last Wednesday when its latest dot plot showed two rate hikes: in simple terms, while market pricing for hikes in 2023 and 2024 went up, yields beyond that dropped as the market said that the best the Fed can do is less than 2-years of rate hikes.\n\nSaid otherwise, if the Fed decides to hike - as first Powell hinted and then Bullard doubled down on Friday sending stocks plunging -the market is saying that  it won’t be able to go very far before inflation and growth hit a speed limit,pushing yield expectations after the initial hike lower.\nThis very pessimistic view on r*,first laid out here in 2015, is also in line with market behavior beyond the bond market. First, as Deutsche Bank's FX strategist George Saravelos said, it is aligned with the very high dollar responsiveness we have seen to even small shifts in Fed stance: huge pent-up demand for yield from investors across the planet forces a stronger dollar and a bigger disinflationary impact quicker than assumed. In other words, a low global r*(remember the rest of the world still has massive current account surpluses, or excess savings)pushes US r* even lower.\nSecond, a low r* is consistent with continued equity resilience, especially in growth stocks heavily reliant on a low medium-term discount rate. That the equity moves in the past two days were led by huge relative rotation from the Russell to the NASDAQ should not be a surprise. This, as Deutsche Bank ominously warns,is 2010-19 secular stagnation pricing, version 2.\nHere, another, even bigger question emerged: will the US even be able to sustain positive GDP growth absent trillions in new stimulus each and every year? And even more ominous:what happens to inflation if the Fed is forced to cut rates well before the inflationary burst is extinguished?These are among uncomfortable questions markets will have to answer in the coming months.\n* * *\nFast forward to today when SocGen's in-house permagrouch, Albert Edwards, offered an answer to all of these critical questions posed by the Fed: according to Edwards, the market does not have to worry much about such trivial questions as\"is inflation transitory or not\"for the simple reason thatThe Fed’s ambition to normalize rates can never be achieved.\nPicking up on the observations made by Deutsche Bank's head of FX, Edwards writes that while the global reflation trade was already in retreat, its head of lobbed off by the Fed in its surprisingly hawkish statement of intent last week, a \"retreat which quickly turned into a rout across many asset classes.\"\nAnd while it was not quite in the same league as Bernanke's 2013 \"Taper Tantrum\" it clearly demonstrated the market’s sensitivity to the Fed’s intentions, fickle as they may be. The biggest surprise: after an initial selloff, the long end of the bond market rallied - in contrast to the sharp sell-off in 2013, or as Edwards echoes what we said:Maybe the market now realizes that a Fed tightening cycle is impossible?\nReferencing aWSJ articleby the Fed's former mouthpiece, Edwards writes that according to Jon Hilsenrath there are two explanations.\n\nFirst, the Fed has done a better job communicating its intentions this time round (personally I think not).\nSecondly and more worryingly, Hilsenrath writes that the markets could be too complacent.\n\nEdwards next notes that according to Jeremy Stein who was a Fed Governor during the 2013 tantrum, the markets shouldn’t take a benign view of the extent of potential tightening as“The Fed cannot support markets if there’s an inflation surprise.”He said that Fed Chair Powell, his former colleague, has been adept at shifting his stance when needed. Despite the market’s tranquillity today, he said, Powell may need that nimbleness in the months ahead. Indeed, Mr. Powell said in a June 16 news conference “We will do what we can to avoid a market reaction. But ultimately, when we achieve our macroeconomic goal, we will taper as appropriate”.\nThe permacynical Edwards then explodes, and says that when he reads those sorts of statements, he \"literally laughs out loud\" and asks \"is this the same Jerome Powell who at the end of 2018, after talking tough for months about the unwinding of the Fed balance sheet being on “auto-pilot” did a 180 degree about turn when markets began to swoon at the end of that year?He is indeed nimble – in retreat!\"\nPerhaps Edwards is no longer alone in his uber skepticism: after all none other than Bank of America recently said that everyone knows the Fed will stop tapering assoon as the S&P drops 10%...which isn't a good sign when it comes to Powell's credibility.\nSo why does Edwards think the bond market reacted inversely to its Taper Tantrum shock? \"In my opinion the bond market rallied because they know that Fed easy money comes at a heavy price.\"\nIt's not just that: with the Fed having gone all in on reflating everything, not just the economy and stock market but the housing market too, a crash in any of the three would result in an immediate depression. That's why Edwards thinks that the bond market\"just doesn’t believe the Fed can follow through on its tougher talk. Why? Because having created another huge, real-terms house price bubble, they are trapped\"...\n\n...which confirms what we have said since 2009: that \"central banks have become slaves to the bubbles that they blow – the markets quickly forcing a reversal of any tightening. This time around will be no different.\"\nAnd speaking of blowing house price bubbles, Edwards points out that \"there isn’t even room for the Fed on the medal podium. Pointing to the chart below...\n\n... Edwards concludes that 'this is now a global property bubble of epic proportions never before seen by man or beast and it has entrapped more CBs than just the Fed.\"\nBottom line: any attempt to normalize will leads to an immediate bursting of one or more asset bubbles, which will immediately draw the Fed right back in, resulting in an even bigger bubble, and yes- it means that sooner or later the Fed's two most hated assets, cryptos and gold, will both trade far above $100,000 once the world realizes that thehyperinflation that even BofA sees comingis not \"transitory.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":666,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":164982692,"gmtCreate":1624165780616,"gmtModify":1634009906008,"author":{"id":"3559003590411925","authorId":"3559003590411925","name":"Qlee10","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/044cc5835b2fd80d79e0c6674a31d0c1","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3559003590411925","idStr":"3559003590411925"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"wow&nbsp;","listText":"wow&nbsp;","text":"wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/164982692","repostId":"1126454279","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":314,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}