Like and comment_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

2021-06-28

Like and comment

The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years<blockquote>股市多年来从未如此平静过</blockquote>

免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。

精彩评论

我们需要你的真知灼见来填补这片空白

发表看法

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"detailType":1,"isChannel":false,"data":{"magic":2,"id":127230517,"tweetId":"127230517","gmtCreate":1624850000239,"gmtModify":1633947984943,"author":{"id":4087537231786360,"idStr":"4087537231786360","authorId":4087537231786360,"authorIdStr":"4087537231786360","name":"76666aa1","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":21,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body>Like and comment&nbsp;</body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body>Like and comment&nbsp;</body></html>","text":"Like and comment","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127230517","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1177492181?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years<blockquote>股市多年来从未如此平静过</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.<blockquote>美国股市表面上非常平静，但地下却出现了几十年来最大的动荡。</blockquote> The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.<blockquote>标普500如此安静，几乎令人不安。自10月底以来，该指数尚未按收盘价调整5%；难怪开始在锁定状态下购买股票的新日内交易者认为市场只会上涨。S&amp;P上一次如此平静如此之久是在2017年，这段平静期随着2018年初的波动性崩盘而结束——尽管当时平静的时间更长。</blockquote> Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.<blockquote>然而，看看各类股票的表现，它们的波动幅度比平时大得多。投资者一直在以危机之外从未见过的速度在不同行业之间转换押注；3月份带来了自2002年以来表现最好和最差行业之间的最大差距。</blockquote> The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.<blockquote>以相关性衡量，成长型股票和廉价“价值”股票之间的联系是自1995年以来最弱的；投资者正在用它们作为押注支持或反对经济复苏的代理人。</blockquote> Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.<blockquote>与此同时，大小股上一次如此独立的走势是在2000年的互联网泡沫期间，这从来都不是一个令人放心的迹象。</blockquote> I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.<blockquote>我认为这是TINA的另一个方面：除了股票，没有其他选择。由于美国国债、公司债券和现金发行的回报微薄或为零，股票提供了最大的上涨希望。以前会将资金从股票转向债券或反之亦然的投资者现在只需从一种股票转向另一种股票，因此一种股票的下跌会被另一种股票的上涨所抵消。</blockquote> There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.<blockquote>当然，不能保证这种情况会继续下去。只要有足够的恐惧，无论现金收益率有多低，投资者都会蜂拥退出，就像去年3月所做的那样。但是，尽管形势看起来相当好，但很难证明购买收益率远低于通胀的长期债券是合理的。时代看起来确实很好。</blockquote> A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.<blockquote>持谨慎态度的人普遍认为，股市之所以持续上涨，是因为廉价资金和政府刺激措施吹大了巨大的泡沫。自2000年以来，股票从未如此昂贵，而时尚股票的疯狂过度交易明显存在泡沫心态。一批受散户交易者欢迎的小型股票经常出现在今年交易量最大的名单上，特别是GameStopandaMC Entertainment，但也有维珍银河和黑莓等最受欢迎的股票。</blockquote> It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.<blockquote>不可否认，股票远比平时贵。但泡沫在膨胀时通常会出现很大的波动，而不是表面平静和内部动荡，因为价格的每一次小幅下跌都会被担心泡沫即将破裂的其他人放大。1999年，标普500至少有9次跌幅超过5%，从7月的盘中峰值到10月的低点下跌了13%。</blockquote> This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.<blockquote>这次对股票最明显的威胁是美联储，而不是市场的高估。如果美联储加息，现金和债券突然看起来更具吸引力，TINA购买异常昂贵股票的理由就会被削弱。</blockquote> “You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”<blockquote>花旗集团首席全球股票策略师罗伯特·巴克兰表示：“市场波动很大，但市场波动不大。”“如果除了拥有该指数之外还有其他选择，情况可能会发生变化。”</blockquote> This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.<blockquote>本月的美联储恐慌表明，当事实证明有股票的替代品时，股价是多么敏感。美联储通过对其吸收现金的逆回购协议（一种隔夜担保存款）提供0.05%而不是0%的利率，小幅提高了利率，并立即额外吸收了2350亿美元。有关两年内而不是之前预测的三年内加息的讨论增加了股市的压力，标准普尔指数在三天内下跌了2%多一点，然后恢复了上行。</blockquote> If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.<blockquote>如果这是对美联储几乎什么都不做的反应，想象一下，如果美联储开始正常的加息周期并让现金再次变得有吸引力，市场会有多害怕。我认为这不太可能很快发生，但可能将动荡从市场深处带到表面的头号威胁是美联储。</blockquote>","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 Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years<blockquote>股市多年来从未如此平静过</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 Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years<blockquote>股市多年来从未如此平静过</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nWSJ2021-06-28 11:08\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nThe U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.<blockquote>美国股市表面上非常平静，但地下却出现了几十年来最大的动荡。</blockquote> The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.<blockquote>标普500如此安静，几乎令人不安。自10月底以来，该指数尚未按收盘价调整5%；难怪开始在锁定状态下购买股票的新日内交易者认为市场只会上涨。S&amp;P上一次如此平静如此之久是在2017年，这段平静期随着2018年初的波动性崩盘而结束——尽管当时平静的时间更长。</blockquote> Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.<blockquote>然而，看看各类股票的表现，它们的波动幅度比平时大得多。投资者一直在以危机之外从未见过的速度在不同行业之间转换押注；3月份带来了自2002年以来表现最好和最差行业之间的最大差距。</blockquote> The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.<blockquote>以相关性衡量，成长型股票和廉价“价值”股票之间的联系是自1995年以来最弱的；投资者正在用它们作为押注支持或反对经济复苏的代理人。</blockquote> Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.<blockquote>与此同时，大小股上一次如此独立的走势是在2000年的互联网泡沫期间，这从来都不是一个令人放心的迹象。</blockquote> I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.<blockquote>我认为这是TINA的另一个方面：除了股票，没有其他选择。由于美国国债、公司债券和现金发行的回报微薄或为零，股票提供了最大的上涨希望。以前会将资金从股票转向债券或反之亦然的投资者现在只需从一种股票转向另一种股票，因此一种股票的下跌会被另一种股票的上涨所抵消。</blockquote> There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.<blockquote>当然，不能保证这种情况会继续下去。只要有足够的恐惧，无论现金收益率有多低，投资者都会蜂拥退出，就像去年3月所做的那样。但是，尽管形势看起来相当好，但很难证明购买收益率远低于通胀的长期债券是合理的。时代看起来确实很好。</blockquote> A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.<blockquote>持谨慎态度的人普遍认为，股市之所以持续上涨，是因为廉价资金和政府刺激措施吹大了巨大的泡沫。自2000年以来，股票从未如此昂贵，而时尚股票的疯狂过度交易明显存在泡沫心态。一批受散户交易者欢迎的小型股票经常出现在今年交易量最大的名单上，特别是GameStopandaMC Entertainment，但也有维珍银河和黑莓等最受欢迎的股票。</blockquote> It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.<blockquote>不可否认，股票远比平时贵。但泡沫在膨胀时通常会出现很大的波动，而不是表面平静和内部动荡，因为价格的每一次小幅下跌都会被担心泡沫即将破裂的其他人放大。1999年，标普500至少有9次跌幅超过5%，从7月的盘中峰值到10月的低点下跌了13%。</blockquote> This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.<blockquote>这次对股票最明显的威胁是美联储，而不是市场的高估。如果美联储加息，现金和债券突然看起来更具吸引力，TINA购买异常昂贵股票的理由就会被削弱。</blockquote> “You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”<blockquote>花旗集团首席全球股票策略师罗伯特·巴克兰表示：“市场波动很大，但市场波动不大。”“如果除了拥有该指数之外还有其他选择，情况可能会发生变化。”</blockquote> This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.<blockquote>本月的美联储恐慌表明，当事实证明有股票的替代品时，股价是多么敏感。美联储通过对其吸收现金的逆回购协议（一种隔夜担保存款）提供0.05%而不是0%的利率，小幅提高了利率，并立即额外吸收了2350亿美元。有关两年内而不是之前预测的三年内加息的讨论增加了股市的压力，标准普尔指数在三天内下跌了2%多一点，然后恢复了上行。</blockquote> If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.<blockquote>如果这是对美联储几乎什么都不做的反应，想象一下，如果美联储开始正常的加息周期并让现金再次变得有吸引力，市场会有多害怕。我认为这不太可能很快发生，但可能将动荡从市场深处带到表面的头号威胁是美联储。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">WSJ</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":403,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":14,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"isCommentEnd":true,"isTiger":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"url":"/m/post/127230517"}