社区
首页
集团介绍
社区
资讯
行情
学堂
TigerAI
登录
注册
文氏
IP属地：未知
+关注
帖子 · 24
帖子 · 24
关注 · 0
关注 · 0
粉丝 · 0
粉丝 · 0
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-14
Stuck
The Last Two Times This Hit, Stocks Dropped 20% and 50%, Respectively<blockquote>最近两次遭受这种打击，股票分别下跌了 20% 和 50%</blockquote>
In our last article, I outlined how the rise in inflation has slammed Tech stocks lower. By way of a
The Last Two Times This Hit, Stocks Dropped 20% and 50%, Respectively<blockquote>最近两次遭受这种打击，股票分别下跌了 20% 和 50%</blockquote>
看
1,784
回复
评论
点赞
1
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-14
Informative read
非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
看
1,641
回复
评论
点赞
2
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-12
Red.....
非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
看
3,370
回复
1
点赞
点赞
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-11
[流泪]
Should We Fear, Inflation Is Here<blockquote>如果我们害怕，通货膨胀就在这里</blockquote>
It’s becoming hard to ignore inflationary pressures, whether one is a central banker or not. Tech in
Should We Fear, Inflation Is Here<blockquote>如果我们害怕，通货膨胀就在这里</blockquote>
看
2,188
回复
评论
点赞
2
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-11
Oh mannnn..worrying
非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
看
2,130
回复
评论
点赞
1
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-05
Not surprising
非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
看
1,878
回复
评论
点赞
点赞
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-05
Omg
"It Could Get Weird": Stocks Puke As "Extreme" Negative Gamma Strikes<blockquote>“情况可能会变得奇怪”：股市因“极端”负伽马射线袭击而呕吐</blockquote>
Just like late February when we had the firstinflation scare-cum-Treasury tantrum,Tech is breaking d
"It Could Get Weird": Stocks Puke As "Extreme" Negative Gamma Strikes<blockquote>“情况可能会变得奇怪”：股市因“极端”负伽马射线袭击而呕吐</blockquote>
看
1,627
回复
评论
点赞
2
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-04
I'm not so sure
非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
看
1,960
回复
评论
点赞
点赞
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-04
Covid was no where near over but people forgot that ..
非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
看
3,082
回复
评论
点赞
2
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
文氏
文氏
·
2021-05-04
Ahhh..
Opinion: Why you should worry about the flood of new cash into U.S. stock funds<blockquote>观点：为什么你应该担心新现金涌入美国股票基金</blockquote>
With investments, popular is not better.U.S. stock funds now are riding a river of new cash from inv
Opinion: Why you should worry about the flood of new cash into U.S. stock funds<blockquote>观点：为什么你应该担心新现金涌入美国股票基金</blockquote>
看
2,100
回复
评论
点赞
1
编组 21备份 2
分享
举报
加载更多
热议股票
{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":"3576837088119232","uuid":"3576837088119232","gmtCreate":1613743291013,"gmtModify":1619000981432,"name":"文氏","pinyin":"wswenshi","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":2,"headSize":30,"tweetSize":24,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":2,"name":"无畏虎","nameTw":"無畏虎","represent":"初生牛犊","factor":"发布3条非转发主帖,1条获得他人回复或点赞","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-3","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"偶像虎友","description":"加入老虎社区1500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2026.04.22","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"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,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":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,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-1","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"精英交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到30次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ab0f87127c854ce3191a752d57b46edc","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9835ce48b8c8743566d344ac7a7ba8c","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76754b53ce7a90019f132c1d2fbc698f","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"60.11%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0}],"userBadgeCount":3,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":198319589,"gmtCreate":1620925209241,"gmtModify":1634195230163,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Stuck","listText":"Stuck","text":"Stuck","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/198319589","repostId":"1196862271","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1196862271","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1620919313,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1196862271?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-05-13 23:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Last Two Times This Hit, Stocks Dropped 20% and 50%, Respectively<blockquote>最近两次遭受这种打击，股票分别下跌了 20% 和 50%</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1196862271","media":"zerohedge","summary":"In our last article, I outlined how the rise in inflation has slammed Tech stocks lower.\nBy way of a","content":"<p>In our last article, I outlined how the rise in inflation has slammed Tech stocks lower.</p><p><blockquote>在我们的上一篇文章中，我概述了通胀上升如何导致科技股下跌。</blockquote></p><p> By way of a quick review, Tech, as represented by the NASDAQ is highly sensitive to inflation on an inverse relationship: when inflation rises, Tech stocks collapse and when inflation falls, Tech stocks erupt higher.</p><p><blockquote>快速回顾一下，以纳斯达克为代表的科技股对通货膨胀高度敏感，呈反比关系：当通货膨胀上升时，科技股崩溃，当通货膨胀下降时，科技股爆发走高。</blockquote></p><p> The reason for this is that much of Tech investing is based on growth rates. And if bond yields rise as a result of inflation, bonds become more attractive as an investment, taking away from the appeal of Tech.</p><p><blockquote>原因是大部分科技投资都是基于增长率的。如果债券收益率因通货膨胀而上升，债券作为投资就会变得更具吸引力，从而削弱科技的吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> As I noted yesterday. as inflation entered the financial system in 2020 and began to accelerate in 2021, Tech stocks have struggled. You can see this in the chart below (red rectangle).</p><p><blockquote>正如我昨天提到的。随着通货膨胀在2020年进入金融体系并在2021年开始加速，科技股一直在苦苦挣扎。您可以在下图（红色矩形）中看到这一点。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6366a605a86374ef9af9de07ae828fd4\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"606\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">So, we know that Tech is going to struggle going forward as inflation heats up. But what about the broader market like the S&P 500? Will it collapse too?</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们知道，随着通胀升温，科技将难以前进。但是像标普500这样更广泛的市场呢？它也会崩溃吗？</blockquote></p><p> To figure that out, let’s take a look at the last two inflationary scares in the U.S.</p><p><blockquote>为了弄清楚这一点，让我们来看看美国最近两次通胀恐慌。</blockquote></p><p> The most recent scare occurred in 2010-2011. At that time, the Fed was pretty quick on the uptake and decided to allow its QE 2 program (the cause of the inflationary spike) to end.</p><p><blockquote>最近一次恐慌发生在2010-2011年。当时，美联储很快就接受了，并决定允许其QE 2计划（通胀飙升的原因）结束。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed then waited several months before introducing any new monetary programs. And when it did introduce one, it didn’t involve money printing (instead the Fed used the proceeds from Treasury sales to buy long-date Treasuries through a process called Operation Twist). This was a kind of stealth tightening.</p><p><blockquote>随后，美联储等了几个月才推出任何新的货币计划。而当美联储推出这一政策时，并不涉及印钞（相反，美联储利用国债销售所得通过一个名为“扭曲行动”的过程购买长期国债）。这是一种秘密收紧。</blockquote></p><p> Stocks didn’t like this, collapsing nearly 20%.</p><p><blockquote>股市不喜欢这样，暴跌近 20%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1fdf95bc30276d330c4bd7a5f62b10d2\" tg-width=\"620\" tg-height=\"376\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Bear in mind, that was a relatively minor inflationary scare. During the last legitimate inflationary storm in the 1970s-1980s.</p><p><blockquote>请记住，这是一次相对轻微的通胀恐慌。在20世纪70年代至80年代最后一次合法的通货膨胀风暴期间。</blockquote></p><p> During that mess, the Fed was forced to be MUCH more aggressive with its tightening, embarking on two aggressive tightening schedules. It’s worth noting that this triggered two SEVERE recessions (shaded areas).</p><p><blockquote>在那场混乱中，美联储被迫采取更加激进的紧缩政策，开始了两项激进的紧缩计划。值得注意的是，这引发了两次严重的衰退（阴影区域）。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6f6ed1ada17beb2066d0017b576e64cc\" tg-width=\"1168\" tg-height=\"450\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> This IMPLODED the stock market, resulting in a roughly 50% decline over the course of 18 months.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3b38c35b81a872044b03ce49014d5e46\" tg-width=\"620\" tg-height=\"376\"></p><p><blockquote>这导致股市内爆，导致 18 个月内下跌约 50%。</blockquote></p><p> So, what will it be this time? Will the Fed engage in a stealth taper as was the case in 2011… or will it tighten monetary policy aggressively as it did in the 1970s and 1980s?</p><p><blockquote>那么，这次会是什么呢？美联储会像2011年那样秘密缩减货币政策吗……还是会像20世纪70年代和80年代那样积极收紧货币政策？</blockquote></p><p> We’ll address that in our next article.</p><p><blockquote>我们将在下一篇文章中讨论这个问题。</blockquote></p><p> in the meantime, we just published a Special Investment Report concerning FIVE secret investments you can use to make inflation <b>pay you</b> as it rips through the financial system in the months ahead.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，我们刚刚发布了一份特别投资报告，内容涉及您可以用来制造通货膨胀的五种秘密投资<b>付给你</b>随着它在未来几个月席卷金融体系。</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>The Last Two Times This Hit, Stocks Dropped 20% and 50%, Respectively<blockquote>最近两次遭受这种打击，股票分别下跌了 20% 和 50%</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Last Two Times This Hit, Stocks Dropped 20% and 50%, Respectively<blockquote>最近两次遭受这种打击，股票分别下跌了 20% 和 50%</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-05-13 23:21</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>In our last article, I outlined how the rise in inflation has slammed Tech stocks lower.</p><p><blockquote>在我们的上一篇文章中，我概述了通胀上升如何导致科技股下跌。</blockquote></p><p> By way of a quick review, Tech, as represented by the NASDAQ is highly sensitive to inflation on an inverse relationship: when inflation rises, Tech stocks collapse and when inflation falls, Tech stocks erupt higher.</p><p><blockquote>快速回顾一下，以纳斯达克为代表的科技股对通货膨胀高度敏感，呈反比关系：当通货膨胀上升时，科技股崩溃，当通货膨胀下降时，科技股爆发走高。</blockquote></p><p> The reason for this is that much of Tech investing is based on growth rates. And if bond yields rise as a result of inflation, bonds become more attractive as an investment, taking away from the appeal of Tech.</p><p><blockquote>原因是大部分科技投资都是基于增长率的。如果债券收益率因通货膨胀而上升，债券作为投资就会变得更具吸引力，从而削弱科技的吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> As I noted yesterday. as inflation entered the financial system in 2020 and began to accelerate in 2021, Tech stocks have struggled. You can see this in the chart below (red rectangle).</p><p><blockquote>正如我昨天提到的。随着通货膨胀在2020年进入金融体系并在2021年开始加速，科技股一直在苦苦挣扎。您可以在下图（红色矩形）中看到这一点。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6366a605a86374ef9af9de07ae828fd4\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"606\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">So, we know that Tech is going to struggle going forward as inflation heats up. But what about the broader market like the S&P 500? Will it collapse too?</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们知道，随着通胀升温，科技将难以前进。但是像标普500这样更广泛的市场呢？它也会崩溃吗？</blockquote></p><p> To figure that out, let’s take a look at the last two inflationary scares in the U.S.</p><p><blockquote>为了弄清楚这一点，让我们来看看美国最近两次通胀恐慌。</blockquote></p><p> The most recent scare occurred in 2010-2011. At that time, the Fed was pretty quick on the uptake and decided to allow its QE 2 program (the cause of the inflationary spike) to end.</p><p><blockquote>最近一次恐慌发生在2010-2011年。当时，美联储很快就接受了，并决定允许其QE 2计划（通胀飙升的原因）结束。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed then waited several months before introducing any new monetary programs. And when it did introduce one, it didn’t involve money printing (instead the Fed used the proceeds from Treasury sales to buy long-date Treasuries through a process called Operation Twist). This was a kind of stealth tightening.</p><p><blockquote>随后，美联储等了几个月才推出任何新的货币计划。而当美联储推出这一政策时，并不涉及印钞（相反，美联储利用国债销售所得通过一个名为“扭曲行动”的过程购买长期国债）。这是一种秘密收紧。</blockquote></p><p> Stocks didn’t like this, collapsing nearly 20%.</p><p><blockquote>股市不喜欢这样，暴跌近 20%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1fdf95bc30276d330c4bd7a5f62b10d2\" tg-width=\"620\" tg-height=\"376\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Bear in mind, that was a relatively minor inflationary scare. During the last legitimate inflationary storm in the 1970s-1980s.</p><p><blockquote>请记住，这是一次相对轻微的通胀恐慌。在20世纪70年代至80年代最后一次合法的通货膨胀风暴期间。</blockquote></p><p> During that mess, the Fed was forced to be MUCH more aggressive with its tightening, embarking on two aggressive tightening schedules. It’s worth noting that this triggered two SEVERE recessions (shaded areas).</p><p><blockquote>在那场混乱中，美联储被迫采取更加激进的紧缩政策，开始了两项激进的紧缩计划。值得注意的是，这引发了两次严重的衰退（阴影区域）。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6f6ed1ada17beb2066d0017b576e64cc\" tg-width=\"1168\" tg-height=\"450\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> This IMPLODED the stock market, resulting in a roughly 50% decline over the course of 18 months.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3b38c35b81a872044b03ce49014d5e46\" tg-width=\"620\" tg-height=\"376\"></p><p><blockquote>这导致股市内爆，导致 18 个月内下跌约 50%。</blockquote></p><p> So, what will it be this time? Will the Fed engage in a stealth taper as was the case in 2011… or will it tighten monetary policy aggressively as it did in the 1970s and 1980s?</p><p><blockquote>那么，这次会是什么呢？美联储会像2011年那样秘密缩减货币政策吗……还是会像20世纪70年代和80年代那样积极收紧货币政策？</blockquote></p><p> We’ll address that in our next article.</p><p><blockquote>我们将在下一篇文章中讨论这个问题。</blockquote></p><p> in the meantime, we just published a Special Investment Report concerning FIVE secret investments you can use to make inflation <b>pay you</b> as it rips through the financial system in the months ahead.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，我们刚刚发布了一份特别投资报告，内容涉及您可以用来制造通货膨胀的五种秘密投资<b>付给你</b>随着它在未来几个月席卷金融体系。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021-05-13/last-two-times-hit-stocks-dropped-20-and-50-respectively\">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":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021-05-13/last-two-times-hit-stocks-dropped-20-and-50-respectively","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1196862271","content_text":"In our last article, I outlined how the rise in inflation has slammed Tech stocks lower.\nBy way of a quick review, Tech, as represented by the NASDAQ is highly sensitive to inflation on an inverse relationship: when inflation rises, Tech stocks collapse and when inflation falls, Tech stocks erupt higher.\nThe reason for this is that much of Tech investing is based on growth rates. And if bond yields rise as a result of inflation, bonds become more attractive as an investment, taking away from the appeal of Tech.\nAs I noted yesterday. as inflation entered the financial system in 2020 and began to accelerate in 2021, Tech stocks have struggled. You can see this in the chart below (red rectangle).\nSo, we know that Tech is going to struggle going forward as inflation heats up. But what about the broader market like the S&P 500? Will it collapse too?\nTo figure that out, let’s take a look at the last two inflationary scares in the U.S.\nThe most recent scare occurred in 2010-2011. At that time, the Fed was pretty quick on the uptake and decided to allow its QE 2 program (the cause of the inflationary spike) to end.\nThe Fed then waited several months before introducing any new monetary programs. And when it did introduce one, it didn’t involve money printing (instead the Fed used the proceeds from Treasury sales to buy long-date Treasuries through a process called Operation Twist). This was a kind of stealth tightening.\nStocks didn’t like this, collapsing nearly 20%.\n\nBear in mind, that was a relatively minor inflationary scare. During the last legitimate inflationary storm in the 1970s-1980s.\nDuring that mess, the Fed was forced to be MUCH more aggressive with its tightening, embarking on two aggressive tightening schedules. It’s worth noting that this triggered two SEVERE recessions (shaded areas).\n\nThis IMPLODED the stock market, resulting in a roughly 50% decline over the course of 18 months.\nSo, what will it be this time? Will the Fed engage in a stealth taper as was the case in 2011… or will it tighten monetary policy aggressively as it did in the 1970s and 1980s?\nWe’ll address that in our next article.\nin the meantime, we just published a Special Investment Report concerning FIVE secret investments you can use to make inflation pay you as it rips through the financial system in the months ahead.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1784,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":198310782,"gmtCreate":1620925137746,"gmtModify":1634195230283,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Informative read","listText":"Informative read","text":"Informative read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/198310782","repostId":"1116555518","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1641,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":191915440,"gmtCreate":1620833123680,"gmtModify":1634195961583,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Red.....","listText":"Red.....","text":"Red.....","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/191915440","repostId":"1109603661","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3370,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":193940199,"gmtCreate":1620747860711,"gmtModify":1634196609527,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"[流泪] ","listText":"[流泪] ","text":"[流泪]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/193940199","repostId":"1171091038","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1171091038","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1620745886,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1171091038?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-05-11 23:11","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Should We Fear, Inflation Is Here<blockquote>如果我们害怕，通货膨胀就在这里</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1171091038","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It’s becoming hard to ignore inflationary pressures, whether one is a central banker or not. Tech in","content":"<p>It’s becoming hard to ignore inflationary pressures, whether one is a central banker or not. Tech investors are taking notice with Monday’s Nasdaq 100 slump the largest since mid-March, while China’s producer prices accelerated overnight. VIX futures are higher with broad risk aversion setting up for European equities to catch up to the late downbeat U.S. session.</p><p><blockquote>无论是否是央行行长，都很难忽视通胀压力。科技投资者正在关注周一纳斯达克 100 指数创下 3 月中旬以来的最大跌幅，而中国生产者价格隔夜加速上涨。VIX 期货走高，欧洲股市普遍避险情绪为追赶美国股市尾盘的低迷行情奠定了基础。</blockquote></p><p> At least investor jitters that rising inflation could lift bond yields, and sap equities’ appeal could take comfort from real yields. The 10-year U.S. inflation-adjusted benchmark tumbled to three-month lows, keeping nominal yields in check as breakevens jumped to multi-year highs.</p><p><blockquote>至少投资者担心通胀上升可能会推高债券收益率，而 sap 股票的吸引力可能会从实际收益率中得到安慰。美国10年期通胀调整基准跌至三个月低点，随着盈亏平衡点跃升至多年高点，名义收益率受到控制。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8047b97c104b947668ce19b34f7fd4a\" tg-width=\"1259\" tg-height=\"716\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Financial conditions reached another record, while evidence of stocks’ rotation remains: S&P 500 energy and financials advanced over the past 5 sessions, value is outperforming growth –- particularly in Europe -- and the RTY/NDX is well, steady –- much like 10-year nominal yields around 1.60%.</p><p><blockquote>金融状况再创新高，而股市轮动的证据依然存在： 标普500能源和金融股在过去 5 个交易日中上涨，价值跑赢增长--尤其是在欧洲--RTY/NDX 表现良好、稳定--与 1.60% 左右的 10 年期名义收益率非常相似。</blockquote></p><p> U.S. labor market frictions look to be adding to inflation fears, with JOLTs data, a leading indicator of hiring, likely to signal workers’ growing pricing power. And the NFIB small business optimism will be watched today for supply side constraints –- last month, job openings that were “hard to fill” reached at least a four-decade high. Of course, labor market dislocations remain and a handful of Fed speakers today will no doubt look to assuage inflation fears and discount near-term tapering risks. Not like Bill Dudley.</p><p><blockquote>美国劳动力市场的摩擦似乎加剧了对通胀的担忧，JOLTs 数据是招聘的领先指标，可能表明工人的定价权正在增强。由于供应方面的限制，NFIB 小企业的乐观情绪今天将受到关注--上个月，“难以填补 ”的职位空缺至少达到了四十年来的新高。当然，劳动力市场的混乱依然存在，今天的一些美联储发言人无疑会寻求缓解通胀担忧并淡化近期缩减规模的风险。不像比尔·达德利。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/98df6b5f32251d558127766afc21fad8\" tg-width=\"1257\" tg-height=\"710\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Whether the Fed falls too far behind the curve remains up for debate. Markets, on the other hand, aren’t as comfortable looking through transitory inflation as evidence builds and expectations climb -- that could become a self-fulfilling prophecy after all.</p><p><blockquote>美联储是否落后曲线太多仍有争议。另一方面，随着证据的积累和预期的攀升，市场对暂时性通胀并不满意--这毕竟可能成为一个自我实现的预言。</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>Should We Fear, Inflation Is Here<blockquote>如果我们害怕，通货膨胀就在这里</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\">\nShould We Fear, Inflation Is Here<blockquote>如果我们害怕，通货膨胀就在这里</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-05-11 23:11</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>It’s becoming hard to ignore inflationary pressures, whether one is a central banker or not. Tech investors are taking notice with Monday’s Nasdaq 100 slump the largest since mid-March, while China’s producer prices accelerated overnight. VIX futures are higher with broad risk aversion setting up for European equities to catch up to the late downbeat U.S. session.</p><p><blockquote>无论是否是央行行长，都很难忽视通胀压力。科技投资者正在关注周一纳斯达克 100 指数创下 3 月中旬以来的最大跌幅，而中国生产者价格隔夜加速上涨。VIX 期货走高，欧洲股市普遍避险情绪为追赶美国股市尾盘的低迷行情奠定了基础。</blockquote></p><p> At least investor jitters that rising inflation could lift bond yields, and sap equities’ appeal could take comfort from real yields. The 10-year U.S. inflation-adjusted benchmark tumbled to three-month lows, keeping nominal yields in check as breakevens jumped to multi-year highs.</p><p><blockquote>至少投资者担心通胀上升可能会推高债券收益率，而 sap 股票的吸引力可能会从实际收益率中得到安慰。美国10年期通胀调整基准跌至三个月低点，随着盈亏平衡点跃升至多年高点，名义收益率受到控制。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8047b97c104b947668ce19b34f7fd4a\" tg-width=\"1259\" tg-height=\"716\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Financial conditions reached another record, while evidence of stocks’ rotation remains: S&P 500 energy and financials advanced over the past 5 sessions, value is outperforming growth –- particularly in Europe -- and the RTY/NDX is well, steady –- much like 10-year nominal yields around 1.60%.</p><p><blockquote>金融状况再创新高，而股市轮动的证据依然存在： 标普500能源和金融股在过去 5 个交易日中上涨，价值跑赢增长--尤其是在欧洲--RTY/NDX 表现良好、稳定--与 1.60% 左右的 10 年期名义收益率非常相似。</blockquote></p><p> U.S. labor market frictions look to be adding to inflation fears, with JOLTs data, a leading indicator of hiring, likely to signal workers’ growing pricing power. And the NFIB small business optimism will be watched today for supply side constraints –- last month, job openings that were “hard to fill” reached at least a four-decade high. Of course, labor market dislocations remain and a handful of Fed speakers today will no doubt look to assuage inflation fears and discount near-term tapering risks. Not like Bill Dudley.</p><p><blockquote>美国劳动力市场的摩擦似乎加剧了对通胀的担忧，JOLTs 数据是招聘的领先指标，可能表明工人的定价权正在增强。由于供应方面的限制，NFIB 小企业的乐观情绪今天将受到关注--上个月，“难以填补 ”的职位空缺至少达到了四十年来的新高。当然，劳动力市场的混乱依然存在，今天的一些美联储发言人无疑会寻求缓解通胀担忧并淡化近期缩减规模的风险。不像比尔·达德利。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/98df6b5f32251d558127766afc21fad8\" tg-width=\"1257\" tg-height=\"710\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Whether the Fed falls too far behind the curve remains up for debate. Markets, on the other hand, aren’t as comfortable looking through transitory inflation as evidence builds and expectations climb -- that could become a self-fulfilling prophecy after all.</p><p><blockquote>美联储是否落后曲线太多仍有争议。另一方面，随着证据的积累和预期的攀升，市场对暂时性通胀并不满意--这毕竟可能成为一个自我实现的预言。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/should-we-fear-inflation-here\">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":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/should-we-fear-inflation-here","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1171091038","content_text":"It’s becoming hard to ignore inflationary pressures, whether one is a central banker or not. Tech investors are taking notice with Monday’s Nasdaq 100 slump the largest since mid-March, while China’s producer prices accelerated overnight. VIX futures are higher with broad risk aversion setting up for European equities to catch up to the late downbeat U.S. session.\nAt least investor jitters that rising inflation could lift bond yields, and sap equities’ appeal could take comfort from real yields. The 10-year U.S. inflation-adjusted benchmark tumbled to three-month lows, keeping nominal yields in check as breakevens jumped to multi-year highs.\n\nFinancial conditions reached another record, while evidence of stocks’ rotation remains: S&P 500 energy and financials advanced over the past 5 sessions, value is outperforming growth –- particularly in Europe -- and the RTY/NDX is well, steady –- much like 10-year nominal yields around 1.60%.\nU.S. labor market frictions look to be adding to inflation fears, with JOLTs data, a leading indicator of hiring, likely to signal workers’ growing pricing power. And the NFIB small business optimism will be watched today for supply side constraints –- last month, job openings that were “hard to fill” reached at least a four-decade high. Of course, labor market dislocations remain and a handful of Fed speakers today will no doubt look to assuage inflation fears and discount near-term tapering risks. Not like Bill Dudley.\n\nWhether the Fed falls too far behind the curve remains up for debate. Markets, on the other hand, aren’t as comfortable looking through transitory inflation as evidence builds and expectations climb -- that could become a self-fulfilling prophecy after all.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2188,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":193954396,"gmtCreate":1620747711515,"gmtModify":1634196610941,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Oh mannnn..worrying ","listText":"Oh mannnn..worrying ","text":"Oh mannnn..worrying","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/193954396","repostId":"1185197052","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2130,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":106713766,"gmtCreate":1620144803055,"gmtModify":1634207457329,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Not surprising","listText":"Not surprising","text":"Not surprising","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/106713766","repostId":"1174922086","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1878,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":106713370,"gmtCreate":1620144731590,"gmtModify":1634207457908,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Omg ","listText":"Omg ","text":"Omg","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/106713370","repostId":"1195636027","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1195636027","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1620137110,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1195636027?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-05-04 22:05","market":"us","language":"en","title":"\"It Could Get Weird\": Stocks Puke As \"Extreme\" Negative Gamma Strikes<blockquote>“情况可能会变得奇怪”：股市因“极端”负伽马射线袭击而呕吐</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1195636027","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Just like late February when we had the firstinflation scare-cum-Treasury tantrum,Tech is breaking d","content":"<p>Just like late February when we had the first<i>inflation scare-cum-Treasury tantrum,</i>Tech is breaking down, and look no further than Amazon for the evidence.</p><p><blockquote>就像二月底我们第一次<i>通货膨胀恐慌和财政部发脾气，</i>科技正在崩溃，亚马逊就是最好的证明。</blockquote></p><p> In just the three days since reporting blowout Q1 earnings which sent its stock to a new all time high, AMZN stock is down over 9% and is on the verge of a correction. Other FAAMGs, most notably Apple which had a just as impressive quarter, are not faring any better.</p><p><blockquote>在公布第一季度财报并将其股价推至历史新高后的短短三天内，AMZN 股价已下跌超过 9%，濒临回调。其他 FAAMG，尤其是苹果，其季度业绩同样令人印象深刻，但情况也好不到哪里去。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c89d66b1ced8ac68b5fb3ff40b54f134\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"240\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> However, unlike late February when tech was monkeyhammered mostly as a result of sharply surging yields, this time there is the double whammy of deeply negative gamma.</p><p><blockquote>然而，与 2 月下旬科技股主要因收益率急剧飙升而遭受重创不同，这一次出现了深度负伽马的双重打击。</blockquote></p><p> AsSpotGamma wrote overnight, \"both SPY & QQQ remain in negative gamma territory which implies higher relative volatility.\"</p><p><blockquote>AsSpotGamma 隔夜写道，“SPDR标普500指数ETF和 QQQ 均仍处于负伽马区域，这意味着相对波动性较高。”</blockquote></p><p> Nomura's resident x-asset expert, Chalie McElligott, picks on this and in a note this morning writes that while \"there is nothing exceedingly bulky or “whale-like” by itself\", there has<b>\"been a pick-up with broad Vol / Gamma selling from clients in recent weeks.\"</b>The details:</p><p><blockquote>野村证券的常驻 x-asset 专家 Chalie McElligott 对此进行了评论，他在今天上午的一份报告中写道，虽然 “本身并没有什么特别笨重或‘鲸鱼般的’东西”，但<b>“最近几周，客户的销量/伽马销量很高，这是一个回升。”</b>详情：</blockquote></p><p> <ul> <li>This has show via standard overwriter flows in singles and index, but also to the systematic strangle-selling mentioned in the press last week (which looks like the odd-lottish flows in ratios that trade ~3-4x’s a week, while there too is a separate daily overwriter program in one month straddles for example)…<b>all of which has contributed to what has been a very “long gamma” dynamic for Dealers—and thus the “stuck” S&P for about three weeks, pinging around the gravity of the big strikes at 4150-4200</b></li> <li>The %ile rank of the overall $Gamma magnitude across US Equities index has come-off after recent expirations (SPX / SPY consolidated now a middling 56.6%ile $Gamma / IWM 35.9%ile; EEM 37.4%ile); however,<b>Nasdaq / QQQ’s continue to be the epicenter for how broad index movement could get weird, with -$435.8mm $Gamma which is extremely negative at just 3.8%ile</b></li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0dbb4e73ce8bc66785a7aa43170b3dc3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"648\">Needless to say, negative QQQ gamma + tech selloff = explosive combination, and as McElligott summarizes, \"with this “extreme” negative $Gamma in QQQ,<b>we see Dealers increasingly moving into “short Gamma vs spot” territory as well</b>(Gamma “neutral line” at 339.36 vs spot 333.55); similarly, we currently see Dealers “short Gamma vs spot” too in both IWM (226.19 “neutral line” vs 224.79 spot) and EEM (54.29 “neutral line” vs spot 53.59)\"</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>这既体现在单只和指数中的标准超卖流量上，也体现在上周媒体提到的系统性扼杀式抛售上（这看起来像是每周交易约 3-4 倍的奇数流量，同时还有一个单独的每日超卖计划，例如，一个月跨度）..<b>所有这些都导致了交易商非常 “长伽马 ”的动态--因此标普指数在大约三周的时间里 “停滞不前”，在 4150-4200 点的重大震荡中徘徊。</b></li><li>美国股票指数整体 $Gamma 幅度的 %ile 排名在最近到期后有所下降（SPX / SPDR标普500指数ETF目前盘整为 56.6%，$Gamma / IWM 35.9%；EEM 37.4%）；然而，<b>纳斯达克 / QQQ 仍然是指数波动可能变得怪异的中心，-4.358 亿美元的 $Gamma 指数仅为 3.8%，极其负值。</b></li></ul>不用说，负QQQ伽马+科技抛售=爆炸性组合，正如McElligott总结的那样，“在QQQ中出现这种‘极端’的负$Gamma，<b>我们看到经销商也越来越多地进入 “短伽马与现货 ”领域</b>（伽马“中性线”在339.36对点333.55）；同样，我们目前在 IWM（226.19 “中性线”对 224.79 现货）和 EEM（54.29 “中性线”对 53.59 现货）中也看到庄家“短伽马对现货”。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7be1b134edacd8fc5831a10f026c1d2\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"311\">Tech's inability to breakout higher has crippled sentiment, and as the Nomura quant concludes, following what had been a strong recovery in April for the Tech sector and “Secular Growth” (aided by the stabilization in USTs and relative “bull-flattening” off the extremes of the March Rates selloff / “bear-steepening”) \"our Nomura Sector Sentiment analysis shows that WoW, we have seen Tech sector sentiment collapse (again)--with an 85.1%ile score a week ago, but today printing down at 53.9%\"</p><p><blockquote>科技股无法突破走高削弱了市场情绪，正如野村证券的量化分析师总结的那样，在4月份科技板块强劲复苏和“长期增长”（得益于USTs的企稳以及3月份利率抛售/“熊市陡峭化”的极端情况下相对“牛市趋平”）之后，“我们的野村证券行业情绪分析表明，哇，我们看到科技行业情绪（再次）崩溃了——一周前ile得分为85.1%，但今天跌至53.9%”。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/938a77b986fc7fbbd0450254e29b7dce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"277\">And as the tech revulsion spreads, dragging Nasdaq lower...</p><p><blockquote>随着对科技的厌恶蔓延，拖累纳斯达克走低……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35406354f6f369f0aa382d819a26ea4e\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"260\">... it is starting to hit broader indexesm such as the S&P and Russell...</p><p><blockquote>...它开始打击更广泛的指数，如标准普尔和罗素……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d50bd11171fa55adf45caf3cf0ab389\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"285\">... which just dipped below its 50dma.</p><p><blockquote>...刚刚跌破 50dma。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5b8200d703a1c2d305811eadd35af3c3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"227\"></p><p><blockquote></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>\"It Could Get Weird\": Stocks Puke As \"Extreme\" Negative Gamma Strikes<blockquote>“情况可能会变得奇怪”：股市因“极端”负伽马射线袭击而呕吐</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\">\n\"It Could Get Weird\": Stocks Puke As \"Extreme\" Negative Gamma Strikes<blockquote>“情况可能会变得奇怪”：股市因“极端”负伽马射线袭击而呕吐</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-05-04 22:05</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Just like late February when we had the first<i>inflation scare-cum-Treasury tantrum,</i>Tech is breaking down, and look no further than Amazon for the evidence.</p><p><blockquote>就像二月底我们第一次<i>通货膨胀恐慌和财政部发脾气，</i>科技正在崩溃，亚马逊就是最好的证明。</blockquote></p><p> In just the three days since reporting blowout Q1 earnings which sent its stock to a new all time high, AMZN stock is down over 9% and is on the verge of a correction. Other FAAMGs, most notably Apple which had a just as impressive quarter, are not faring any better.</p><p><blockquote>在公布第一季度财报并将其股价推至历史新高后的短短三天内，AMZN 股价已下跌超过 9%，濒临回调。其他 FAAMG，尤其是苹果，其季度业绩同样令人印象深刻，但情况也好不到哪里去。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c89d66b1ced8ac68b5fb3ff40b54f134\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"240\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> However, unlike late February when tech was monkeyhammered mostly as a result of sharply surging yields, this time there is the double whammy of deeply negative gamma.</p><p><blockquote>然而，与 2 月下旬科技股主要因收益率急剧飙升而遭受重创不同，这一次出现了深度负伽马的双重打击。</blockquote></p><p> AsSpotGamma wrote overnight, \"both SPY & QQQ remain in negative gamma territory which implies higher relative volatility.\"</p><p><blockquote>AsSpotGamma 隔夜写道，“SPDR标普500指数ETF和 QQQ 均仍处于负伽马区域，这意味着相对波动性较高。”</blockquote></p><p> Nomura's resident x-asset expert, Chalie McElligott, picks on this and in a note this morning writes that while \"there is nothing exceedingly bulky or “whale-like” by itself\", there has<b>\"been a pick-up with broad Vol / Gamma selling from clients in recent weeks.\"</b>The details:</p><p><blockquote>野村证券的常驻 x-asset 专家 Chalie McElligott 对此进行了评论，他在今天上午的一份报告中写道，虽然 “本身并没有什么特别笨重或‘鲸鱼般的’东西”，但<b>“最近几周，客户的销量/伽马销量很高，这是一个回升。”</b>详情：</blockquote></p><p> <ul> <li>This has show via standard overwriter flows in singles and index, but also to the systematic strangle-selling mentioned in the press last week (which looks like the odd-lottish flows in ratios that trade ~3-4x’s a week, while there too is a separate daily overwriter program in one month straddles for example)…<b>all of which has contributed to what has been a very “long gamma” dynamic for Dealers—and thus the “stuck” S&P for about three weeks, pinging around the gravity of the big strikes at 4150-4200</b></li> <li>The %ile rank of the overall $Gamma magnitude across US Equities index has come-off after recent expirations (SPX / SPY consolidated now a middling 56.6%ile $Gamma / IWM 35.9%ile; EEM 37.4%ile); however,<b>Nasdaq / QQQ’s continue to be the epicenter for how broad index movement could get weird, with -$435.8mm $Gamma which is extremely negative at just 3.8%ile</b></li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0dbb4e73ce8bc66785a7aa43170b3dc3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"648\">Needless to say, negative QQQ gamma + tech selloff = explosive combination, and as McElligott summarizes, \"with this “extreme” negative $Gamma in QQQ,<b>we see Dealers increasingly moving into “short Gamma vs spot” territory as well</b>(Gamma “neutral line” at 339.36 vs spot 333.55); similarly, we currently see Dealers “short Gamma vs spot” too in both IWM (226.19 “neutral line” vs 224.79 spot) and EEM (54.29 “neutral line” vs spot 53.59)\"</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>这既体现在单只和指数中的标准超卖流量上，也体现在上周媒体提到的系统性扼杀式抛售上（这看起来像是每周交易约 3-4 倍的奇数流量，同时还有一个单独的每日超卖计划，例如，一个月跨度）..<b>所有这些都导致了交易商非常 “长伽马 ”的动态--因此标普指数在大约三周的时间里 “停滞不前”，在 4150-4200 点的重大震荡中徘徊。</b></li><li>美国股票指数整体 $Gamma 幅度的 %ile 排名在最近到期后有所下降（SPX / SPDR标普500指数ETF目前盘整为 56.6%，$Gamma / IWM 35.9%；EEM 37.4%）；然而，<b>纳斯达克 / QQQ 仍然是指数波动可能变得怪异的中心，-4.358 亿美元的 $Gamma 指数仅为 3.8%，极其负值。</b></li></ul>不用说，负QQQ伽马+科技抛售=爆炸性组合，正如McElligott总结的那样，“在QQQ中出现这种‘极端’的负$Gamma，<b>我们看到经销商也越来越多地进入 “短伽马与现货 ”领域</b>（伽马“中性线”在339.36对点333.55）；同样，我们目前在 IWM（226.19 “中性线”对 224.79 现货）和 EEM（54.29 “中性线”对 53.59 现货）中也看到庄家“短伽马对现货”。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7be1b134edacd8fc5831a10f026c1d2\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"311\">Tech's inability to breakout higher has crippled sentiment, and as the Nomura quant concludes, following what had been a strong recovery in April for the Tech sector and “Secular Growth” (aided by the stabilization in USTs and relative “bull-flattening” off the extremes of the March Rates selloff / “bear-steepening”) \"our Nomura Sector Sentiment analysis shows that WoW, we have seen Tech sector sentiment collapse (again)--with an 85.1%ile score a week ago, but today printing down at 53.9%\"</p><p><blockquote>科技股无法突破走高削弱了市场情绪，正如野村证券的量化分析师总结的那样，在4月份科技板块强劲复苏和“长期增长”（得益于USTs的企稳以及3月份利率抛售/“熊市陡峭化”的极端情况下相对“牛市趋平”）之后，“我们的野村证券行业情绪分析表明，哇，我们看到科技行业情绪（再次）崩溃了——一周前ile得分为85.1%，但今天跌至53.9%”。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/938a77b986fc7fbbd0450254e29b7dce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"277\">And as the tech revulsion spreads, dragging Nasdaq lower...</p><p><blockquote>随着对科技的厌恶蔓延，拖累纳斯达克走低……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35406354f6f369f0aa382d819a26ea4e\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"260\">... it is starting to hit broader indexesm such as the S&P and Russell...</p><p><blockquote>...它开始打击更广泛的指数，如标准普尔和罗素……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d50bd11171fa55adf45caf3cf0ab389\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"285\">... which just dipped below its 50dma.</p><p><blockquote>...刚刚跌破 50dma。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5b8200d703a1c2d305811eadd35af3c3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"227\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/it-could-get-weird-stocks-puke-extreme-negative-gamma-strikes?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">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":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/it-could-get-weird-stocks-puke-extreme-negative-gamma-strikes?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1195636027","content_text":"Just like late February when we had the firstinflation scare-cum-Treasury tantrum,Tech is breaking down, and look no further than Amazon for the evidence.\nIn just the three days since reporting blowout Q1 earnings which sent its stock to a new all time high, AMZN stock is down over 9% and is on the verge of a correction. Other FAAMGs, most notably Apple which had a just as impressive quarter, are not faring any better.\n\nHowever, unlike late February when tech was monkeyhammered mostly as a result of sharply surging yields, this time there is the double whammy of deeply negative gamma.\nAsSpotGamma wrote overnight, \"both SPY & QQQ remain in negative gamma territory which implies higher relative volatility.\"\nNomura's resident x-asset expert, Chalie McElligott, picks on this and in a note this morning writes that while \"there is nothing exceedingly bulky or “whale-like” by itself\", there has\"been a pick-up with broad Vol / Gamma selling from clients in recent weeks.\"The details:\n\nThis has show via standard overwriter flows in singles and index, but also to the systematic strangle-selling mentioned in the press last week (which looks like the odd-lottish flows in ratios that trade ~3-4x’s a week, while there too is a separate daily overwriter program in one month straddles for example)…all of which has contributed to what has been a very “long gamma” dynamic for Dealers—and thus the “stuck” S&P for about three weeks, pinging around the gravity of the big strikes at 4150-4200\nThe %ile rank of the overall $Gamma magnitude across US Equities index has come-off after recent expirations (SPX / SPY consolidated now a middling 56.6%ile $Gamma / IWM 35.9%ile; EEM 37.4%ile); however,Nasdaq / QQQ’s continue to be the epicenter for how broad index movement could get weird, with -$435.8mm $Gamma which is extremely negative at just 3.8%ile\n\nNeedless to say, negative QQQ gamma + tech selloff = explosive combination, and as McElligott summarizes, \"with this “extreme” negative $Gamma in QQQ,we see Dealers increasingly moving into “short Gamma vs spot” territory as well(Gamma “neutral line” at 339.36 vs spot 333.55); similarly, we currently see Dealers “short Gamma vs spot” too in both IWM (226.19 “neutral line” vs 224.79 spot) and EEM (54.29 “neutral line” vs spot 53.59)\"\nTech's inability to breakout higher has crippled sentiment, and as the Nomura quant concludes, following what had been a strong recovery in April for the Tech sector and “Secular Growth” (aided by the stabilization in USTs and relative “bull-flattening” off the extremes of the March Rates selloff / “bear-steepening”) \"our Nomura Sector Sentiment analysis shows that WoW, we have seen Tech sector sentiment collapse (again)--with an 85.1%ile score a week ago, but today printing down at 53.9%\"\nAnd as the tech revulsion spreads, dragging Nasdaq lower...\n... it is starting to hit broader indexesm such as the S&P and Russell...\n... which just dipped below its 50dma.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1627,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":106706972,"gmtCreate":1620142856796,"gmtModify":1634207477613,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"I'm not so sure","listText":"I'm not so sure","text":"I'm not so sure","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/106706972","repostId":"2132178325","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1960,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":106708147,"gmtCreate":1620142797889,"gmtModify":1634207478322,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Covid was no where near over but people forgot that .. ","listText":"Covid was no where near over but people forgot that .. ","text":"Covid was no where near over but people forgot that ..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/106708147","repostId":"1142616846","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3082,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":106703402,"gmtCreate":1620142691606,"gmtModify":1634207479528,"author":{"id":"3576837088119232","authorId":"3576837088119232","name":"文氏","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13ab58f27225c31b03dde6b684f98f7e","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576837088119232","authorIdStr":"3576837088119232"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Ahhh..","listText":"Ahhh..","text":"Ahhh..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/106703402","repostId":"1107772617","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107772617","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1620139709,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1107772617?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-05-04 22:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Opinion: Why you should worry about the flood of new cash into U.S. stock funds<blockquote>观点：为什么你应该担心新现金涌入美国股票基金</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107772617","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"With investments, popular is not better.U.S. stock funds now are riding a river of new cash from inv","content":"<p><b>With investments, popular is not better.</b>U.S. stock funds now are riding a river of new cash from investors — and that is not a bullish sign.</p><p><blockquote><b>有了投资，受欢迎并没有更好。</b>美国股票基金现在正从投资者那里获得大量新现金——这并不是一个看涨的迹象。</blockquote></p><p>Many investors might see this differently — that a huge influx of cash is positive. In fact, fund flows are a contrarian indicator: the U.S. stock market in the past has performed better when there is a net outflow of cash.</p><p><blockquote>许多投资者可能会有不同的看法——大量现金流入是积极的。事实上，资金流动是一个逆向指标：美国股市过去在现金净流出时表现更好。</blockquote></p><p>The evidence is summarized in the chart below, which plots net inflows of cash to U.S. stock funds (both open-end and exchange-traded funds) by year over the past decade. Notice that in all but two of the years since 2010 there have been net outflows.</p><p><blockquote>下图总结了证据，该图绘制了过去十年美国股票基金（开放式基金和交易所交易基金）每年的现金净流入情况。请注意，自2010年以来，除两年外，所有年份都出现了净流出。</blockquote></p><p><b>Reversal</b></p><p><blockquote><b>逆转</b></blockquote></p><p>Net flows into U.S. equity (open-endded funds and ETF), in billions</p><p><blockquote>流入美国股票（开放式基金和 ETF）的净流量，单位：十亿</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c9c4ef1e3533acd3d248af32cdf728f\" tg-width=\"780\" tg-height=\"308\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>This 2010-2020 period was extremely strong for U.S. stocks. Yet over this time U.S. stock funds experienced a net outflow of $741 billion. (Data are from TrimTabs, a part of EPFR, a division of Informa Financial Intelligence.)</p><p><blockquote>2010年至2020年期间美国股市极其强劲。然而，在此期间，美国股票基金经历了 7,410 亿美元的净流出。（数据来自 TrimTabs，TrimTabs 是 Informa Financial Intelligence 旗下 EPFR 的一部分。）</blockquote></p><p>This year so far is seeing a major reversal of this longer-term trend. For the first four months of this year, according to TrimTabs, U.S. equity funds have received net inflows of $142.3 billion. If this pace were to continue for the full year, there would be $427 billion of net inflows in 2021 — retracing more than half the total outflow from 2010 through 2020.</p><p><blockquote>今年到目前为止，这一长期趋势出现了重大逆转。根据TrimTabs的数据，今年前四个月，美国股票基金净流入1423亿美元。如果这一速度持续到全年，2021 年将有 4,270 亿美元的净流入，相当于 2010 年至 2020 年总流出的一半以上。</blockquote></p><p>One study that puts this huge year-to-date inflow in a bearish light appeared last December in the Review of Finance. Entitled “ETF Arbitrage, Non-Fundamental Demand, and Return Predictability,” the study was conducted by David Brown of the University of Arizona, Shaun William Davies of the University of Colorado Boulder and Matthew Ringgenberg of the University of Utah. The researchers found that, on average, the ETFs with the biggest outflows outperformed the ETFs with the biggest inflows for up to a year after these extreme flows.</p><p><blockquote>去年 12 月发表在《金融评论》上的一项研究对今年迄今为止的巨额资金流入持悲观态度。这项题为 “ETF 套利、非基本面需求和回报可预测性 ”的研究由亚利桑那大学的大卫-布朗（David Brown）、科罗拉多大学博尔德分校的肖恩-威廉-戴维斯（Shaun William Davies）和犹他大学的马修-林根伯格（Matthew Ringgenberg）进行。研究人员发现，平均而言，在这些极端资金流出之后的一年内，资金流出最大的 ETF 的表现优于资金流入最大的 ETF。</blockquote></p><p>Another academic study that reached a similar conclusion has been circulating since January. Entitled “Competition for Attention in the ETF Space,” the study was conducted by Itzhak Ben-David and Byungwook Kim of Ohio State University, Francesco Franzoni of the University of Lugano in Switzerland and Rabih Moussawi of Villanova University. The researchers focused on the specialized ETFs that are created to capitalize on investor fads and market trends, and which typically receive a big influx of cash soon after launch. They found that these ETFs over their first five years after launch lag the market on a risk-adjusted basis by 5% per year on average.</p><p><blockquote>另一项得出类似结论的学术研究自1月份以来一直在流传。这项题为 “ETF 领域的注意力竞争 ”的研究由俄亥俄州立大学的 Itzhak Ben-David 和 Byungwook Kim、瑞士卢加诺大学的 Francesco Franzoni 和维拉诺瓦大学的 Rabih Moussawi 进行。研究人员重点关注专门的 ETF，这些 ETF 是为了利用投资者时尚和市场趋势而创建的，并且通常在推出后不久就会获得大量现金流入。他们发现，这些 ETF 在推出后的前五年内，经风险调整后，平均每年落后市场 5%。</blockquote></p><p>The tenuous relationship between performance and fund flows is evident also in the accompanying tables. The first lists the 10 ETFs with the best year-to-date returns. The second table lists the 10 ETFs with the largest net inflows. (Return data are from FactSet; flow data are from CFRA Research).</p><p><blockquote>业绩和资金流之间的微妙关系在随附的表格中也很明显。第一个列出了今年迄今为止回报最好的 10 只 ETF。第二张表列出了净流入最大的 10 只 ETF。（返回数据来自FactSet；流量数据来自CFRA Research）。</blockquote></p><p>Notice that none of the funds in the first table appears in the second.</p><p><blockquote>请注意，第一个表中的基金都没有出现在第二个表中。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a2e0354f1f5c9cfd5611c3f6e03c3cee\" tg-width=\"887\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5cd98cfa89435ba9ae4a0bfdedd3891\" tg-width=\"830\" tg-height=\"447\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1603348471595","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>Opinion: Why you should worry about the flood of new cash into U.S. stock funds<blockquote>观点：为什么你应该担心新现金涌入美国股票基金</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\">\nOpinion: Why you should worry about the flood of new cash into U.S. stock funds<blockquote>观点：为什么你应该担心新现金涌入美国股票基金</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">MarketWatch</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-05-04 22:48</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>With investments, popular is not better.</b>U.S. stock funds now are riding a river of new cash from investors — and that is not a bullish sign.</p><p><blockquote><b>有了投资，受欢迎并没有更好。</b>美国股票基金现在正从投资者那里获得大量新现金——这并不是一个看涨的迹象。</blockquote></p><p>Many investors might see this differently — that a huge influx of cash is positive. In fact, fund flows are a contrarian indicator: the U.S. stock market in the past has performed better when there is a net outflow of cash.</p><p><blockquote>许多投资者可能会有不同的看法——大量现金流入是积极的。事实上，资金流动是一个逆向指标：美国股市过去在现金净流出时表现更好。</blockquote></p><p>The evidence is summarized in the chart below, which plots net inflows of cash to U.S. stock funds (both open-end and exchange-traded funds) by year over the past decade. Notice that in all but two of the years since 2010 there have been net outflows.</p><p><blockquote>下图总结了证据，该图绘制了过去十年美国股票基金（开放式基金和交易所交易基金）每年的现金净流入情况。请注意，自2010年以来，除两年外，所有年份都出现了净流出。</blockquote></p><p><b>Reversal</b></p><p><blockquote><b>逆转</b></blockquote></p><p>Net flows into U.S. equity (open-endded funds and ETF), in billions</p><p><blockquote>流入美国股票（开放式基金和 ETF）的净流量，单位：十亿</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c9c4ef1e3533acd3d248af32cdf728f\" tg-width=\"780\" tg-height=\"308\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>This 2010-2020 period was extremely strong for U.S. stocks. Yet over this time U.S. stock funds experienced a net outflow of $741 billion. (Data are from TrimTabs, a part of EPFR, a division of Informa Financial Intelligence.)</p><p><blockquote>2010年至2020年期间美国股市极其强劲。然而，在此期间，美国股票基金经历了 7,410 亿美元的净流出。（数据来自 TrimTabs，TrimTabs 是 Informa Financial Intelligence 旗下 EPFR 的一部分。）</blockquote></p><p>This year so far is seeing a major reversal of this longer-term trend. For the first four months of this year, according to TrimTabs, U.S. equity funds have received net inflows of $142.3 billion. If this pace were to continue for the full year, there would be $427 billion of net inflows in 2021 — retracing more than half the total outflow from 2010 through 2020.</p><p><blockquote>今年到目前为止，这一长期趋势出现了重大逆转。根据TrimTabs的数据，今年前四个月，美国股票基金净流入1423亿美元。如果这一速度持续到全年，2021 年将有 4,270 亿美元的净流入，相当于 2010 年至 2020 年总流出的一半以上。</blockquote></p><p>One study that puts this huge year-to-date inflow in a bearish light appeared last December in the Review of Finance. Entitled “ETF Arbitrage, Non-Fundamental Demand, and Return Predictability,” the study was conducted by David Brown of the University of Arizona, Shaun William Davies of the University of Colorado Boulder and Matthew Ringgenberg of the University of Utah. The researchers found that, on average, the ETFs with the biggest outflows outperformed the ETFs with the biggest inflows for up to a year after these extreme flows.</p><p><blockquote>去年 12 月发表在《金融评论》上的一项研究对今年迄今为止的巨额资金流入持悲观态度。这项题为 “ETF 套利、非基本面需求和回报可预测性 ”的研究由亚利桑那大学的大卫-布朗（David Brown）、科罗拉多大学博尔德分校的肖恩-威廉-戴维斯（Shaun William Davies）和犹他大学的马修-林根伯格（Matthew Ringgenberg）进行。研究人员发现，平均而言，在这些极端资金流出之后的一年内，资金流出最大的 ETF 的表现优于资金流入最大的 ETF。</blockquote></p><p>Another academic study that reached a similar conclusion has been circulating since January. Entitled “Competition for Attention in the ETF Space,” the study was conducted by Itzhak Ben-David and Byungwook Kim of Ohio State University, Francesco Franzoni of the University of Lugano in Switzerland and Rabih Moussawi of Villanova University. The researchers focused on the specialized ETFs that are created to capitalize on investor fads and market trends, and which typically receive a big influx of cash soon after launch. They found that these ETFs over their first five years after launch lag the market on a risk-adjusted basis by 5% per year on average.</p><p><blockquote>另一项得出类似结论的学术研究自1月份以来一直在流传。这项题为 “ETF 领域的注意力竞争 ”的研究由俄亥俄州立大学的 Itzhak Ben-David 和 Byungwook Kim、瑞士卢加诺大学的 Francesco Franzoni 和维拉诺瓦大学的 Rabih Moussawi 进行。研究人员重点关注专门的 ETF，这些 ETF 是为了利用投资者时尚和市场趋势而创建的，并且通常在推出后不久就会获得大量现金流入。他们发现，这些 ETF 在推出后的前五年内，经风险调整后，平均每年落后市场 5%。</blockquote></p><p>The tenuous relationship between performance and fund flows is evident also in the accompanying tables. The first lists the 10 ETFs with the best year-to-date returns. The second table lists the 10 ETFs with the largest net inflows. (Return data are from FactSet; flow data are from CFRA Research).</p><p><blockquote>业绩和资金流之间的微妙关系在随附的表格中也很明显。第一个列出了今年迄今为止回报最好的 10 只 ETF。第二张表列出了净流入最大的 10 只 ETF。（返回数据来自FactSet；流量数据来自CFRA Research）。</blockquote></p><p>Notice that none of the funds in the first table appears in the second.</p><p><blockquote>请注意，第一个表中的基金都没有出现在第二个表中。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a2e0354f1f5c9cfd5611c3f6e03c3cee\" tg-width=\"887\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5cd98cfa89435ba9ae4a0bfdedd3891\" tg-width=\"830\" tg-height=\"447\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-you-should-worry-about-the-flood-of-new-cash-into-u-s-stock-funds-11620102925?mod=home-page\">MarketWatch</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":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-you-should-worry-about-the-flood-of-new-cash-into-u-s-stock-funds-11620102925?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107772617","content_text":"With investments, popular is not better.U.S. stock funds now are riding a river of new cash from investors — and that is not a bullish sign.Many investors might see this differently — that a huge influx of cash is positive. In fact, fund flows are a contrarian indicator: the U.S. stock market in the past has performed better when there is a net outflow of cash.The evidence is summarized in the chart below, which plots net inflows of cash to U.S. stock funds (both open-end and exchange-traded funds) by year over the past decade. Notice that in all but two of the years since 2010 there have been net outflows.ReversalNet flows into U.S. equity (open-endded funds and ETF), in billionsThis 2010-2020 period was extremely strong for U.S. stocks. Yet over this time U.S. stock funds experienced a net outflow of $741 billion. (Data are from TrimTabs, a part of EPFR, a division of Informa Financial Intelligence.)This year so far is seeing a major reversal of this longer-term trend. For the first four months of this year, according to TrimTabs, U.S. equity funds have received net inflows of $142.3 billion. If this pace were to continue for the full year, there would be $427 billion of net inflows in 2021 — retracing more than half the total outflow from 2010 through 2020.One study that puts this huge year-to-date inflow in a bearish light appeared last December in the Review of Finance. Entitled “ETF Arbitrage, Non-Fundamental Demand, and Return Predictability,” the study was conducted by David Brown of the University of Arizona, Shaun William Davies of the University of Colorado Boulder and Matthew Ringgenberg of the University of Utah. The researchers found that, on average, the ETFs with the biggest outflows outperformed the ETFs with the biggest inflows for up to a year after these extreme flows.Another academic study that reached a similar conclusion has been circulating since January. Entitled “Competition for Attention in the ETF Space,” the study was conducted by Itzhak Ben-David and Byungwook Kim of Ohio State University, Francesco Franzoni of the University of Lugano in Switzerland and Rabih Moussawi of Villanova University. The researchers focused on the specialized ETFs that are created to capitalize on investor fads and market trends, and which typically receive a big influx of cash soon after launch. They found that these ETFs over their first five years after launch lag the market on a risk-adjusted basis by 5% per year on average.The tenuous relationship between performance and fund flows is evident also in the accompanying tables. The first lists the 10 ETFs with the best year-to-date returns. The second table lists the 10 ETFs with the largest net inflows. (Return data are from FactSet; flow data are from CFRA Research).Notice that none of the funds in the first table appears in the second.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2100,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"posts","isTTM":false}