68da9cf2的个人主页 - 老虎社区

68da9cf2

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

48关注

2粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-06-15

Thanks

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-12

G

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-12

Good

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-10

[Happy]

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-09

Win

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-09

我

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-07

Good

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-04

Good

Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？要考虑什么</blockquote>

2021-06-03

Fly to moon

AMC Stock Is Surging Again. How to Make Sense of the Move.<blockquote>AMC股价再次飙升。如何理解这一举动。</blockquote>

2021-05-31

Good

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-05-29

Dip

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-03-12

Nice

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-02-22

Good

Goldman Sachs is joining the robo-investing party — should you?<blockquote>高盛正在加入机器人投资行列——你应该加入吗？</blockquote>

2021-02-18

Good

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-02-16

Good

With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy<blockquote>随着拜登的崛起，华尔街经济学家越来越看好美国经济</blockquote>

2021-02-14

Good

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-02-14

Good

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-02-11

Cool

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-02-11

$BMO NASDAQ100(03086)$Good

2021-02-11

Good

抱歉，原内容已删除

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3571554572709564","uuid":"3571554572709564","gmtCreate":1608460989781,"gmtModify":1622685895399,"name":"68da9cf2","pinyin":"weehwa45","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":2,"headSize":48,"tweetSize":21,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d-2","templateUuid":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d","name":"投资总监虎","description":"证券账户累计交易金额达到30万美元","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d20b23f1b6335407f882bc5c2ad12c0","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ada3b4533518ace8404a3f6dd192bd29","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/177f283ba21d1c077054dac07f88f3bd","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"80.44%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.05.08","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37-1","templateUuid":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37","name":"博闻投资者","description":"累计交易超过10只正股","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-2","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"宗师交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到100次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ad22cfbe2d05aa393b18e9226e4b0307","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36702e6ff3ffe46acafee66cc85273ca","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d52eb88fa385cf5abe2616ed63781765","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"80.40%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":187780470,"gmtCreate":1623764471990,"gmtModify":1634028712634,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thanks&nbsp;","listText":"Thanks&nbsp;","text":"Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/187780470","repostId":"1146320033","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1345,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":188254672,"gmtCreate":1623451678196,"gmtModify":1634033123409,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;G","listText":"&nbsp;G","text":"G","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/188254672","repostId":"2142202150","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1158,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":188255695,"gmtCreate":1623451647217,"gmtModify":1634033124508,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/188255695","repostId":"2142202150","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1252,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":183278014,"gmtCreate":1623334250138,"gmtModify":1634034456391,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[Happy]&nbsp;","listText":"[Happy]&nbsp;","text":"[Happy]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":5,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/183278014","repostId":"1128810191","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1062,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":189186548,"gmtCreate":1623248043584,"gmtModify":1634035371898,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Win","listText":"Win","text":"Win","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/189186548","repostId":"1188697627","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2396,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":180956541,"gmtCreate":1623171635083,"gmtModify":1634036159865,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"我","listText":"我","text":"我","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/180956541","repostId":"1166056944","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1918,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":114632827,"gmtCreate":1623071667069,"gmtModify":1634037297019,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good&nbsp;","listText":"Good&nbsp;","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/114632827","repostId":"1126396501","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1189,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":116233606,"gmtCreate":1622801911505,"gmtModify":1634097876967,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/116233606","repostId":"1122373606","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1122373606","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1622793373,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1122373606?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-04 15:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？要考虑什么</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1122373606","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nApple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.</li>  <li>Apple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.</li>  <li>Shares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f2ea192ed76d9772c2c6a820098faf5\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Photo by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果在过去十年中是一项伟大的投资，但下一个十年可能会大不相同。</li><li>苹果的增长在过去十年中有所放缓，未来几年也可能不会成为增长怪物。</li><li>股价具有充足的长期上涨空间，但投资者在做出决定之前应考虑当前的估值。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>摄影：Paopano/iStock社论，来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.</p><p><blockquote>苹果（AAPL）是过去十年中最好的投资之一。然而，在接下来的十年里，它的增长可能会有所不同。然而，由于大规模的股东回报计划和向服务业的转变，苹果的股价在十年后仍可能大幅上涨——尽管目前的估值相当高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:</p><p><blockquote>在过去十年中，苹果公司一直是一项伟大的投资：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5d29aa34bdbc5bab7d0730a4095954e6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.</p><p><blockquote>在这十年中，扣除股息前，股票回报率为900%，复合年回报率约为26%，轻松击败了同期大盘的回报率。重要的是，该公司股价的涨幅远远超过了该公司的市值，而该公司的市值在过去十年中仅增长了550%。这种差异可以用该公司的大规模股票回购计划来解释，该计划在过去十年中大幅减少了股票数量。当然，过去十年对苹果来说是商业上非常成功的时期，因为该公司受益于智能手机的兴起，同时也在手表和平板电脑等新产品上取得了成功，苹果或多或少地将其作为一个新产品类别推出。目前，股价为125美元，过去12个月上涨57%，但2021年迄今下跌6%。继2020年强劲上涨之后，股价目前似乎处于盘整格局，这并不令人意外，因为苹果的估值最近已经扩大了很多，而且该公司的业务增长似乎必须赶上最近的股价上涨。目前的一致目标价为156美元，这意味着25%的上涨潜力。由于目前没有迹象表明股价会离开当前的交易区间，我个人认为苹果短期内不会突破150美元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years</b></p><p><blockquote><b>10年后苹果股票会在哪里</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.</p><p><blockquote>当然，苹果2031年的股价是无法准确预测的。正如历史一次又一次地表明的那样，甚至不可能在更短的时间内准确预测股价。然而，可以设计情景来了解在某些条件下未来股价的走势，从而了解对未来的合理预期。</blockquote></p><p> To craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.</p><p><blockquote>为了构建这样的场景，我们必须考虑苹果的业务增长、苹果的股东回报计划以及股票未来可能交易的估值倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's business growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的业务增长</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去曾经历过多年的强劲增长和多年的疲软增长。这主要可以用新产品推出等因素来解释，例如。手表或iPad，以及各自当前iPhone型号的强度，这些型号的需求因年份而异。其他因素，如经济增长或贸易问题，也发挥了作用。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5b8bd8ef6cdaa13850c1380e870554c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Overall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，过去十年收入增长了154%，但正如我们在上图中看到的，收入增长相对不均衡。2010年代初，苹果凭借iPhone的“胜利之路”实现了巨大增长，而在接下来的几年里，收入增长速度放缓。甚至有一些年份的收入同比下降，例如2016年。过去十年的平均年收入增长率为10%，但当我们考虑到2011年和2012年的强劲增长推动了这一增长率时，假设苹果将增长10%可能不太合理。未来一年也是如此。投资者还应该考虑到，公司规模越大，保持高增长率就变得越困难。然而，这并不意味着苹果的收入增长将放缓至零。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> On the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in&nbsp;high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.</p><p><blockquote>在其产品价格上涨以及中国等高增长国家市场份额增长的潜力（越来越多的人将能够购买苹果价格较高的产品）的背景下，似乎有理由假设苹果将至少从其核心业务中产生一些增长。再加上服务领域的增长——人们越来越多地使用手机，这应该会导致更高的应用支出——并考虑新产品发布的潜力（尽管我认为没有一款产品会像iPhone那样庞大），苹果应该能够以稳健的速度发展其业务。我个人认为5%-7%的收入增长率可能是未来几年的现实估计，尽管一些读者当然会有不同的意见。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's shareholder returns</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的股东回报</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.</p><p><blockquote>如上所示，苹果过去曾大幅减少其股票数量，我相信，有理由假设未来也会发生同样的情况。过去十年，苹果回购了36%的股份。如果未来十年发生同样的情况，每股剩余股票在公司价值中的份额将上涨56%，即年化4.6%。不过，由于苹果目前的估值明显高于其历史估值，回购在未来的影响可能会较小。例如，苹果去年的股票数量仅减少了2.6%。</blockquote></p><p> This is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么我相信未来十年股票数量不会再下降36%。当我们将其向下调整至25%时，当我们考虑每股指标时，这将为苹果的增长带来约3%的年度推动力，而每股指标是苹果股价增长的决定性因素。结合我5%-7%的业务增长预测，我因此假设苹果的每股长期增长将达到8%-10%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's future valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的未来估值</b></blockquote></p><p> AAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去的估值范围很广，其股票在某些时候的市盈率非常低，而投资者在其他时候愿意支付更高的价格：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be5cb8bbc04ff0e0a13ee64f6f2bd90a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"470\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.</p><p><blockquote>五年前，可以以非常低的10倍净利润购买股票，这自然是进入或扩大头寸的好时机。然而，2020年底，该公司的股价高达该公司净利润的40倍，这似乎是一个相当高的估值。目前，AAPL的往绩市盈率为28倍，远期利润约为24倍。在上图中，我们还看到了过去3年、5年、7年和10年的市盈率中位数。很明显，苹果的估值多年来一直在扩大，这就是为什么在较短的“回顾”期内中值较高。我不认为AAPL的市盈率会达到过去十年平均市盈率的15.5倍，因为对于像苹果这样拥有强大品牌、庞大规模的优质公司来说，这似乎是一个相当低的估值。、巨大的利润和堡垒般的资产负债表。另一方面，我也不相信苹果的市盈率会永远保持在24-28倍——对于一家业务增长稳健但不引人注目的中个位数的公司来说，这似乎相当昂贵。当我们考虑到十年后利率可能会更高时，尤其如此，在其他条件相同的情况下，这应该会给所有股票的估值带来压力。因此，我认为2031年净利润20倍左右的估值可能是合理的估计，这或多或少与3年市盈率中位数一致。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Is AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AAPL现在是买入还是卖出</b></blockquote></p><p> Starting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>从2021年每股收益估计为5.15美元开始计算，并假设到2031年每年增长7%-10%，我们的每股收益范围为10.10美元至13.40美元。将市盈率定为20倍，目标价约为每股200-270美元。因此，在235美元左右的中点，股价将较当前水平上涨约90%，年化涨幅约为6.5%。这肯定是一个不错的回报，当我们加上股息时，我们将获得大约7%的年化回报率。另一方面，我相信这也不是一个惊人的回报。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，苹果公司在未来十年具有巨大的上涨潜力，但这并不令人意外——许多公司将在这么长的时间内实现显着增长。我个人对7%的预期长期回报率不太兴奋。当我们考虑到，如果苹果的估值下降，例如由于利率上升，股价在未来1-3年内确实存在相当大的下行风险，目前保持观望可能是更好的选择。长期投资者在当前水平购买股票时可能不会表现不佳，但也可能不会表现出色。目前，我对苹果的评级为持有，如果其估值接近长期平均水平，则可能买入。那些对新产品发布更乐观的人可能不同意并倾向于在这里购买，但事实证明，等待更好的机会是这里的最佳选择。</blockquote></p><p> Summing it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.</p><p><blockquote>总而言之，我想说，该股在未来十年确实有巨大的上涨潜力，但上涨潜力还不足以让我以当前较高的估值购买股票。</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>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？要考虑什么</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhere Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？要考虑什么</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-04 15:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.</li>  <li>Apple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.</li>  <li>Shares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f2ea192ed76d9772c2c6a820098faf5\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Photo by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果在过去十年中是一项伟大的投资，但下一个十年可能会大不相同。</li><li>苹果的增长在过去十年中有所放缓，未来几年也可能不会成为增长怪物。</li><li>股价具有充足的长期上涨空间，但投资者在做出决定之前应考虑当前的估值。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>摄影：Paopano/iStock社论，来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.</p><p><blockquote>苹果（AAPL）是过去十年中最好的投资之一。然而，在接下来的十年里，它的增长可能会有所不同。然而，由于大规模的股东回报计划和向服务业的转变，苹果的股价在十年后仍可能大幅上涨——尽管目前的估值相当高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:</p><p><blockquote>在过去十年中，苹果公司一直是一项伟大的投资：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5d29aa34bdbc5bab7d0730a4095954e6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.</p><p><blockquote>在这十年中，扣除股息前，股票回报率为900%，复合年回报率约为26%，轻松击败了同期大盘的回报率。重要的是，该公司股价的涨幅远远超过了该公司的市值，而该公司的市值在过去十年中仅增长了550%。这种差异可以用该公司的大规模股票回购计划来解释，该计划在过去十年中大幅减少了股票数量。当然，过去十年对苹果来说是商业上非常成功的时期，因为该公司受益于智能手机的兴起，同时也在手表和平板电脑等新产品上取得了成功，苹果或多或少地将其作为一个新产品类别推出。目前，股价为125美元，过去12个月上涨57%，但2021年迄今下跌6%。继2020年强劲上涨之后，股价目前似乎处于盘整格局，这并不令人意外，因为苹果的估值最近已经扩大了很多，而且该公司的业务增长似乎必须赶上最近的股价上涨。目前的一致目标价为156美元，这意味着25%的上涨潜力。由于目前没有迹象表明股价会离开当前的交易区间，我个人认为苹果短期内不会突破150美元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years</b></p><p><blockquote><b>10年后苹果股票会在哪里</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.</p><p><blockquote>当然，苹果2031年的股价是无法准确预测的。正如历史一次又一次地表明的那样，甚至不可能在更短的时间内准确预测股价。然而，可以设计情景来了解在某些条件下未来股价的走势，从而了解对未来的合理预期。</blockquote></p><p> To craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.</p><p><blockquote>为了构建这样的场景，我们必须考虑苹果的业务增长、苹果的股东回报计划以及股票未来可能交易的估值倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's business growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的业务增长</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去曾经历过多年的强劲增长和多年的疲软增长。这主要可以用新产品推出等因素来解释，例如。手表或iPad，以及各自当前iPhone型号的强度，这些型号的需求因年份而异。其他因素，如经济增长或贸易问题，也发挥了作用。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5b8bd8ef6cdaa13850c1380e870554c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Overall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，过去十年收入增长了154%，但正如我们在上图中看到的，收入增长相对不均衡。2010年代初，苹果凭借iPhone的“胜利之路”实现了巨大增长，而在接下来的几年里，收入增长速度放缓。甚至有一些年份的收入同比下降，例如2016年。过去十年的平均年收入增长率为10%，但当我们考虑到2011年和2012年的强劲增长推动了这一增长率时，假设苹果将增长10%可能不太合理。未来一年也是如此。投资者还应该考虑到，公司规模越大，保持高增长率就变得越困难。然而，这并不意味着苹果的收入增长将放缓至零。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> On the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in&nbsp;high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.</p><p><blockquote>在其产品价格上涨以及中国等高增长国家市场份额增长的潜力（越来越多的人将能够购买苹果价格较高的产品）的背景下，似乎有理由假设苹果将至少从其核心业务中产生一些增长。再加上服务领域的增长——人们越来越多地使用手机，这应该会导致更高的应用支出——并考虑新产品发布的潜力（尽管我认为没有一款产品会像iPhone那样庞大），苹果应该能够以稳健的速度发展其业务。我个人认为5%-7%的收入增长率可能是未来几年的现实估计，尽管一些读者当然会有不同的意见。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's shareholder returns</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的股东回报</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.</p><p><blockquote>如上所示，苹果过去曾大幅减少其股票数量，我相信，有理由假设未来也会发生同样的情况。过去十年，苹果回购了36%的股份。如果未来十年发生同样的情况，每股剩余股票在公司价值中的份额将上涨56%，即年化4.6%。不过，由于苹果目前的估值明显高于其历史估值，回购在未来的影响可能会较小。例如，苹果去年的股票数量仅减少了2.6%。</blockquote></p><p> This is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么我相信未来十年股票数量不会再下降36%。当我们将其向下调整至25%时，当我们考虑每股指标时，这将为苹果的增长带来约3%的年度推动力，而每股指标是苹果股价增长的决定性因素。结合我5%-7%的业务增长预测，我因此假设苹果的每股长期增长将达到8%-10%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's future valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的未来估值</b></blockquote></p><p> AAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去的估值范围很广，其股票在某些时候的市盈率非常低，而投资者在其他时候愿意支付更高的价格：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be5cb8bbc04ff0e0a13ee64f6f2bd90a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"470\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.</p><p><blockquote>五年前，可以以非常低的10倍净利润购买股票，这自然是进入或扩大头寸的好时机。然而，2020年底，该公司的股价高达该公司净利润的40倍，这似乎是一个相当高的估值。目前，AAPL的往绩市盈率为28倍，远期利润约为24倍。在上图中，我们还看到了过去3年、5年、7年和10年的市盈率中位数。很明显，苹果的估值多年来一直在扩大，这就是为什么在较短的“回顾”期内中值较高。我不认为AAPL的市盈率会达到过去十年平均市盈率的15.5倍，因为对于像苹果这样拥有强大品牌、庞大规模的优质公司来说，这似乎是一个相当低的估值。、巨大的利润和堡垒般的资产负债表。另一方面，我也不相信苹果的市盈率会永远保持在24-28倍——对于一家业务增长稳健但不引人注目的中个位数的公司来说，这似乎相当昂贵。当我们考虑到十年后利率可能会更高时，尤其如此，在其他条件相同的情况下，这应该会给所有股票的估值带来压力。因此，我认为2031年净利润20倍左右的估值可能是合理的估计，这或多或少与3年市盈率中位数一致。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Is AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AAPL现在是买入还是卖出</b></blockquote></p><p> Starting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>从2021年每股收益估计为5.15美元开始计算，并假设到2031年每年增长7%-10%，我们的每股收益范围为10.10美元至13.40美元。将市盈率定为20倍，目标价约为每股200-270美元。因此，在235美元左右的中点，股价将较当前水平上涨约90%，年化涨幅约为6.5%。这肯定是一个不错的回报，当我们加上股息时，我们将获得大约7%的年化回报率。另一方面，我相信这也不是一个惊人的回报。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，苹果公司在未来十年具有巨大的上涨潜力，但这并不令人意外——许多公司将在这么长的时间内实现显着增长。我个人对7%的预期长期回报率不太兴奋。当我们考虑到，如果苹果的估值下降，例如由于利率上升，股价在未来1-3年内确实存在相当大的下行风险，目前保持观望可能是更好的选择。长期投资者在当前水平购买股票时可能不会表现不佳，但也可能不会表现出色。目前，我对苹果的评级为持有，如果其估值接近长期平均水平，则可能买入。那些对新产品发布更乐观的人可能不同意并倾向于在这里购买，但事实证明，等待更好的机会是这里的最佳选择。</blockquote></p><p> Summing it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.</p><p><blockquote>总而言之，我想说，该股在未来十年确实有巨大的上涨潜力，但上涨潜力还不足以让我以当前较高的估值购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4432703-apple-stock-in-10-years\">seekingalpha</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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4432703-apple-stock-in-10-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1122373606","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.\nApple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.\nShares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.\n\nPhoto by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nApple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.\nApple Stock Price\nOver the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:\nData by YCharts\nShares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.\nWhere Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years\nApple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.\nTo craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.\nApple's business growth\nApple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.\nData by YCharts\nOverall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.\nOn the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.\nApple's shareholder returns\nApple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.\nThis is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.\nApple's future valuation\nAAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:\nData by YCharts\nShares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.\nIs AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now\nStarting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.\nAAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.\nSumming it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1328,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":111168766,"gmtCreate":1622663911155,"gmtModify":1634099453421,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Fly to moon&nbsp;","listText":"Fly to moon&nbsp;","text":"Fly to moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/111168766","repostId":"1188552613","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1188552613","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1622627641,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1188552613?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-02 17:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC Stock Is Surging Again. How to Make Sense of the Move.<blockquote>AMC股价再次飙升。如何理解这一举动。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1188552613","media":"Barrons","summary":"AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, th","content":"<p>AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, that social media-fueled investor frenzy that has launched the likes of&nbsp;GameStop&nbsp;and&nbsp;BlackBerry&nbsp;into speculative territory.</p><p><blockquote>AMC院线股价飙升很容易被视为迷因交易疯狂，社交媒体推动的投资者狂热将游戏驿站和黑莓等公司带入了投机领域。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s possible that traditional investors have missed a fundamental change in the movie theater business—and it wouldn’t be the first time.</p><p><blockquote>但传统投资者可能错过了电影院业务的根本性变化——而且这已经不是第一次了。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of AMC (ticker: AMC) surged 23% on Tuesday, closing at $32.04—just off an all-time high of $36.72 set in late May. That puts the movie-theater chain’s market capitalization at roughly $16 billion, more than 15 times what it was in 2018, a record-breaking year at the box office.&nbsp;Shares were up another 34%, to $42.92, in premarket trading Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>AMC（股票代码：AMC）股价周二飙升23%，收于32.04美元，略低于5月底创下的36.72美元的历史高点。这使得这家连锁影院的市值约为160亿美元，是2018年票房破纪录的一年的15倍多。周三盘前交易中，该公司股价又上涨34%，至42.92美元。</blockquote></p><p> Even if investors missed an inflection point, though, the math doesn’t add up. The reason might be that market cap isn’t the right measure. Maybe it’s enterprise value, which is essentially market cap and debt. AMC’s enterprise value is about $26 billion, compared with $6.2 billion or so at the end of 2018.</p><p><blockquote>不过，即使投资者错过了拐点，数学也不成立。原因可能是市值不是正确的衡量标准。也许是企业价值，本质上是市值和债务。AMC的企业价值约为260亿美元，而2018年底为62亿美元左右。</blockquote></p><p> AMC added debt during the pandemic as theaters in the country’s biggest cities were dark for months. And the numbers make it easy to understand why: The U.S. box office in 2020 generated about $2.1 billion in ticket sales, down 81% from the 2018 record of $11.9 billion.</p><p><blockquote>AMC在疫情期间增加了债务，因为该国最大城市的影院连续几个月处于黑暗之中。这些数字很容易理解原因：2020年美国票房收入约为21亿美元，比2018年创纪录的119亿美元下降了81%。</blockquote></p><p> So, it seems investors have been vexed by movie theater economics. But it wouldn’t be the first time. The industry essentially went belly up at the turn of the millennium. Regal Cinemas, for instance, declared bankruptcy in 2001.</p><p><blockquote>因此，投资者似乎对电影院经济感到恼火。但这不是第一次了。这个行业在世纪之交基本上破产了。例如，富豪影院于2001年宣布破产。</blockquote></p><p> Back then, the industry had plenty of capacity because of a new theater design—stadium seating that gave a better view of the screen. That shift meant movie theater chains had to renovate or risk losing all their patrons to movie theaters that offered the better view. In the end, too many seats and not enough patrons meant the return on the stadium-seating investments never materialized.</p><p><blockquote>当时，该行业有足够的容量，因为一种新的剧院设计——体育场座位可以更好地观看屏幕。这种转变意味着连锁电影院必须翻新，否则就有可能失去所有顾客到视野更好的电影院。最终，太多的座位和不够的顾客意味着体育场座位投资的回报从未实现。</blockquote></p><p> The upshot was consolidation. With fewer operators, the number of screens stabilized. Between 2002 and 2007, Regal Cinemas became a cash-generating machine because the stock was mispriced. The stock returned 21% a year on average. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average both returned less than 9% a year on average over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>结果是整合。随着操作员的减少，屏幕数量稳定下来。2002年至2007年间，Regal Cinemas因股票定价错误而成为现金产生机器。该股平均每年回报率为21%。同期，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数的平均年回报率均低于9%。</blockquote></p><p> In those days, Regal Cinema’s enterprise value about $5 billion, or about 50% of total U.S. box office sales. That’s far short of AMC today. Something new has to be different for AMC to be worth it.</p><p><blockquote>当年，富豪影院的企业价值约为50亿美元，约占美国票房总收入的50%。这与今天的AMC相去甚远。新的东西必须与众不同，AMC才值得。</blockquote></p><p> Maybe the movie theater business is going to go through another period of consolidation, which can usher in another golden age of returns. AMC’s Tuesday gains, in fact, were catalyzed by new capital raised so the company could go on the offensive, acquiring defunct chains. Monopolies, after all, can be good for stock returns.</p><p><blockquote>也许电影院业务又要经历一段盘整期，可以迎来又一个回报的黄金时代。事实上，AMC周二的上涨是由筹集的新资金推动的，因此该公司可以继续进攻，收购已倒闭的连锁店。毕竟，垄断有利于股票回报。</blockquote></p><p> If AMC can increase market share and the U.S. box office sales can return to 2018 levels in a few years, total sales at might be $9 billion—$6 billion from tickets and $3 billion from concessions. Sales in 2018 amounted to $5.5 billion.</p><p><blockquote>如果AMC能够增加市场份额，并且美国票房销售额能够在几年内恢复到2018年的水平，那么总销售额可能会达到90亿美元——60亿美元来自门票，30亿美元来自特许经营。2018年销售额达55亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Then, with better gross profit margins derived from larger scale, AMC might be able to generate $600 million in free cash flow annually, which puts the stock at about a 4% free cash flow yield. The S&amp;P 500 trades for about a 3% free cash flow yield. The numbers can work—if they’re stretched.</p><p><blockquote>然后，随着规模的扩大带来更好的毛利率，AMC每年可能能够产生6亿美元的自由现金流，这使得该股的自由现金流收益率约为4%。标普500的自由现金流收益率约为3%。这些数字可以发挥作用——如果它们被拉伸的话。</blockquote></p><p> There are problems with this scenario, though. There are lots of ifs and mights—and AMC has never generated cash flow like that in the past. Arriving at $600 million in free cash flow is more about justifying current valuations than predicting what is likely.</p><p><blockquote>不过，这种情况存在问题。有很多如果和可能——AMC过去从未产生过这样的现金流。达到6亿美元的自由现金流更多的是为了证明当前估值的合理性，而不是预测可能发生的情况。</blockquote></p><p> Also, with mergers and acquisitions, AMC market shares might rise, but there are still competitors. Regal Cinemas is still out there, owned by Cineworld Holdings (CINE. London). So is Cinemark (CNK). There’s not a true monopoly.</p><p><blockquote>此外，通过并购，AMC的市场份额可能会上升，但仍然存在竞争对手。富豪影院仍然存在，归电影世界控股公司所有。伦敦）。喜满客（CNK）也是如此。没有真正的垄断。</blockquote></p><p> AMC and its peers have to deal with streaming, too. Windows for exclusive theater showings are shrinking. The pandemic has accelerated that. And if AMC gets too large and demanding for movie makers, the talent can always go to streaming faster, hurting box office sales.</p><p><blockquote>AMC及其同行也必须应对流媒体问题。独家影院放映的窗口正在缩小。疫情加速了这一点。如果AMC变得太大，对电影制作人的要求太高，人才总是可以更快地转向流媒体，从而损害票房销售。</blockquote></p><p> There is also the problem of the peer stocks. They aren’t trading like this is a brave new world for theaters. Cineworld stock is up 484% from its 52-week low, but shares are still off 72% from all-time highs. Cinemark shares are up 222% from their 52-week low. They are down 47% from their all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>还有同行股票的问题。他们并不认为这是剧院的一个勇敢的新世界。Cineworld股价较52周低点上涨484%，但仍较历史高点下跌72%。喜满客股价较52周低点上涨222%。它们比历史高点下跌了47%。</blockquote></p><p> AMC stock, again, is up almost 1,600% from its 52-week low and is down just 13% from its May all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股价再次较52周低点上涨近1,600%，较5月份历史高点仅下跌13%。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street just doesn’t see the potential either. Nine analysts cover the stock. The average analyst price target is about $5. Before the pandemic, the average analyst price target was $15. But there were fewer shares back then. The old target enterprise value was roughly $7 billion. It’s tough to get from $7 billion to $26 billion predicting better margins.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街也没有看到潜力。九名分析师关注该股。分析师平均目标价约为5美元。在疫情爆发之前，分析师的平均目标价为15美元。但当时股票较少。旧的目标企业价值约为70亿美元。很难从70亿美元增加到260亿美元来预测更好的利润率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Analysts do have positive free cash flow modeled, though–$13 million in 2022 and $90 million in 2023. That’s a long way from $600 million.</p><p><blockquote>不过，分析师确实模拟了正自由现金流——2022年为1300万美元，2023年为9000万美元。这距离6亿美元还有很长的路要走。</blockquote></p><p> And that’s just another way of saying that AMC bulls are a long way from making the math work.</p><p><blockquote>这只是AMC多头距离实现数学计算还有很长的路要走的另一种说法。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>AMC Stock Is Surging Again. How to Make Sense of the Move.<blockquote>AMC股价再次飙升。如何理解这一举动。</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\">\nAMC Stock Is Surging Again. How to Make Sense of the Move.<blockquote>AMC股价再次飙升。如何理解这一举动。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-02 17:54</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, that social media-fueled investor frenzy that has launched the likes of&nbsp;GameStop&nbsp;and&nbsp;BlackBerry&nbsp;into speculative territory.</p><p><blockquote>AMC院线股价飙升很容易被视为迷因交易疯狂，社交媒体推动的投资者狂热将游戏驿站和黑莓等公司带入了投机领域。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s possible that traditional investors have missed a fundamental change in the movie theater business—and it wouldn’t be the first time.</p><p><blockquote>但传统投资者可能错过了电影院业务的根本性变化——而且这已经不是第一次了。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of AMC (ticker: AMC) surged 23% on Tuesday, closing at $32.04—just off an all-time high of $36.72 set in late May. That puts the movie-theater chain’s market capitalization at roughly $16 billion, more than 15 times what it was in 2018, a record-breaking year at the box office.&nbsp;Shares were up another 34%, to $42.92, in premarket trading Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>AMC（股票代码：AMC）股价周二飙升23%，收于32.04美元，略低于5月底创下的36.72美元的历史高点。这使得这家连锁影院的市值约为160亿美元，是2018年票房破纪录的一年的15倍多。周三盘前交易中，该公司股价又上涨34%，至42.92美元。</blockquote></p><p> Even if investors missed an inflection point, though, the math doesn’t add up. The reason might be that market cap isn’t the right measure. Maybe it’s enterprise value, which is essentially market cap and debt. AMC’s enterprise value is about $26 billion, compared with $6.2 billion or so at the end of 2018.</p><p><blockquote>不过，即使投资者错过了拐点，数学也不成立。原因可能是市值不是正确的衡量标准。也许是企业价值，本质上是市值和债务。AMC的企业价值约为260亿美元，而2018年底为62亿美元左右。</blockquote></p><p> AMC added debt during the pandemic as theaters in the country’s biggest cities were dark for months. And the numbers make it easy to understand why: The U.S. box office in 2020 generated about $2.1 billion in ticket sales, down 81% from the 2018 record of $11.9 billion.</p><p><blockquote>AMC在疫情期间增加了债务，因为该国最大城市的影院连续几个月处于黑暗之中。这些数字很容易理解原因：2020年美国票房收入约为21亿美元，比2018年创纪录的119亿美元下降了81%。</blockquote></p><p> So, it seems investors have been vexed by movie theater economics. But it wouldn’t be the first time. The industry essentially went belly up at the turn of the millennium. Regal Cinemas, for instance, declared bankruptcy in 2001.</p><p><blockquote>因此，投资者似乎对电影院经济感到恼火。但这不是第一次了。这个行业在世纪之交基本上破产了。例如，富豪影院于2001年宣布破产。</blockquote></p><p> Back then, the industry had plenty of capacity because of a new theater design—stadium seating that gave a better view of the screen. That shift meant movie theater chains had to renovate or risk losing all their patrons to movie theaters that offered the better view. In the end, too many seats and not enough patrons meant the return on the stadium-seating investments never materialized.</p><p><blockquote>当时，该行业有足够的容量，因为一种新的剧院设计——体育场座位可以更好地观看屏幕。这种转变意味着连锁电影院必须翻新，否则就有可能失去所有顾客到视野更好的电影院。最终，太多的座位和不够的顾客意味着体育场座位投资的回报从未实现。</blockquote></p><p> The upshot was consolidation. With fewer operators, the number of screens stabilized. Between 2002 and 2007, Regal Cinemas became a cash-generating machine because the stock was mispriced. The stock returned 21% a year on average. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average both returned less than 9% a year on average over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>结果是整合。随着操作员的减少，屏幕数量稳定下来。2002年至2007年间，Regal Cinemas因股票定价错误而成为现金产生机器。该股平均每年回报率为21%。同期，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数的平均年回报率均低于9%。</blockquote></p><p> In those days, Regal Cinema’s enterprise value about $5 billion, or about 50% of total U.S. box office sales. That’s far short of AMC today. Something new has to be different for AMC to be worth it.</p><p><blockquote>当年，富豪影院的企业价值约为50亿美元，约占美国票房总收入的50%。这与今天的AMC相去甚远。新的东西必须与众不同，AMC才值得。</blockquote></p><p> Maybe the movie theater business is going to go through another period of consolidation, which can usher in another golden age of returns. AMC’s Tuesday gains, in fact, were catalyzed by new capital raised so the company could go on the offensive, acquiring defunct chains. Monopolies, after all, can be good for stock returns.</p><p><blockquote>也许电影院业务又要经历一段盘整期，可以迎来又一个回报的黄金时代。事实上，AMC周二的上涨是由筹集的新资金推动的，因此该公司可以继续进攻，收购已倒闭的连锁店。毕竟，垄断有利于股票回报。</blockquote></p><p> If AMC can increase market share and the U.S. box office sales can return to 2018 levels in a few years, total sales at might be $9 billion—$6 billion from tickets and $3 billion from concessions. Sales in 2018 amounted to $5.5 billion.</p><p><blockquote>如果AMC能够增加市场份额，并且美国票房销售额能够在几年内恢复到2018年的水平，那么总销售额可能会达到90亿美元——60亿美元来自门票，30亿美元来自特许经营。2018年销售额达55亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Then, with better gross profit margins derived from larger scale, AMC might be able to generate $600 million in free cash flow annually, which puts the stock at about a 4% free cash flow yield. The S&amp;P 500 trades for about a 3% free cash flow yield. The numbers can work—if they’re stretched.</p><p><blockquote>然后，随着规模的扩大带来更好的毛利率，AMC每年可能能够产生6亿美元的自由现金流，这使得该股的自由现金流收益率约为4%。标普500的自由现金流收益率约为3%。这些数字可以发挥作用——如果它们被拉伸的话。</blockquote></p><p> There are problems with this scenario, though. There are lots of ifs and mights—and AMC has never generated cash flow like that in the past. Arriving at $600 million in free cash flow is more about justifying current valuations than predicting what is likely.</p><p><blockquote>不过，这种情况存在问题。有很多如果和可能——AMC过去从未产生过这样的现金流。达到6亿美元的自由现金流更多的是为了证明当前估值的合理性，而不是预测可能发生的情况。</blockquote></p><p> Also, with mergers and acquisitions, AMC market shares might rise, but there are still competitors. Regal Cinemas is still out there, owned by Cineworld Holdings (CINE. London). So is Cinemark (CNK). There’s not a true monopoly.</p><p><blockquote>此外，通过并购，AMC的市场份额可能会上升，但仍然存在竞争对手。富豪影院仍然存在，归电影世界控股公司所有。伦敦）。喜满客（CNK）也是如此。没有真正的垄断。</blockquote></p><p> AMC and its peers have to deal with streaming, too. Windows for exclusive theater showings are shrinking. The pandemic has accelerated that. And if AMC gets too large and demanding for movie makers, the talent can always go to streaming faster, hurting box office sales.</p><p><blockquote>AMC及其同行也必须应对流媒体问题。独家影院放映的窗口正在缩小。疫情加速了这一点。如果AMC变得太大，对电影制作人的要求太高，人才总是可以更快地转向流媒体，从而损害票房销售。</blockquote></p><p> There is also the problem of the peer stocks. They aren’t trading like this is a brave new world for theaters. Cineworld stock is up 484% from its 52-week low, but shares are still off 72% from all-time highs. Cinemark shares are up 222% from their 52-week low. They are down 47% from their all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>还有同行股票的问题。他们并不认为这是剧院的一个勇敢的新世界。Cineworld股价较52周低点上涨484%，但仍较历史高点下跌72%。喜满客股价较52周低点上涨222%。它们比历史高点下跌了47%。</blockquote></p><p> AMC stock, again, is up almost 1,600% from its 52-week low and is down just 13% from its May all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股价再次较52周低点上涨近1,600%，较5月份历史高点仅下跌13%。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street just doesn’t see the potential either. Nine analysts cover the stock. The average analyst price target is about $5. Before the pandemic, the average analyst price target was $15. But there were fewer shares back then. The old target enterprise value was roughly $7 billion. It’s tough to get from $7 billion to $26 billion predicting better margins.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街也没有看到潜力。九名分析师关注该股。分析师平均目标价约为5美元。在疫情爆发之前，分析师的平均目标价为15美元。但当时股票较少。旧的目标企业价值约为70亿美元。很难从70亿美元增加到260亿美元来预测更好的利润率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Analysts do have positive free cash flow modeled, though–$13 million in 2022 and $90 million in 2023. That’s a long way from $600 million.</p><p><blockquote>不过，分析师确实模拟了正自由现金流——2022年为1300万美元，2023年为9000万美元。这距离6亿美元还有很长的路要走。</blockquote></p><p> And that’s just another way of saying that AMC bulls are a long way from making the math work.</p><p><blockquote>这只是AMC多头距离实现数学计算还有很长的路要走的另一种说法。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/amc-rockets-higher-is-it-worth-it-maybe-51622594691?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Barrons</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":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/amc-rockets-higher-is-it-worth-it-maybe-51622594691?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1188552613","content_text":"AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, that social media-fueled investor frenzy that has launched the likes of GameStop and BlackBerry into speculative territory.\nBut it’s possible that traditional investors have missed a fundamental change in the movie theater business—and it wouldn’t be the first time.\nShares of AMC (ticker: AMC) surged 23% on Tuesday, closing at $32.04—just off an all-time high of $36.72 set in late May. That puts the movie-theater chain’s market capitalization at roughly $16 billion, more than 15 times what it was in 2018, a record-breaking year at the box office. Shares were up another 34%, to $42.92, in premarket trading Wednesday.\nEven if investors missed an inflection point, though, the math doesn’t add up. The reason might be that market cap isn’t the right measure. Maybe it’s enterprise value, which is essentially market cap and debt. AMC’s enterprise value is about $26 billion, compared with $6.2 billion or so at the end of 2018.\nAMC added debt during the pandemic as theaters in the country’s biggest cities were dark for months. And the numbers make it easy to understand why: The U.S. box office in 2020 generated about $2.1 billion in ticket sales, down 81% from the 2018 record of $11.9 billion.\nSo, it seems investors have been vexed by movie theater economics. But it wouldn’t be the first time. The industry essentially went belly up at the turn of the millennium. Regal Cinemas, for instance, declared bankruptcy in 2001.\nBack then, the industry had plenty of capacity because of a new theater design—stadium seating that gave a better view of the screen. That shift meant movie theater chains had to renovate or risk losing all their patrons to movie theaters that offered the better view. In the end, too many seats and not enough patrons meant the return on the stadium-seating investments never materialized.\nThe upshot was consolidation. With fewer operators, the number of screens stabilized. Between 2002 and 2007, Regal Cinemas became a cash-generating machine because the stock was mispriced. The stock returned 21% a year on average. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average both returned less than 9% a year on average over the same period.\nIn those days, Regal Cinema’s enterprise value about $5 billion, or about 50% of total U.S. box office sales. That’s far short of AMC today. Something new has to be different for AMC to be worth it.\nMaybe the movie theater business is going to go through another period of consolidation, which can usher in another golden age of returns. AMC’s Tuesday gains, in fact, were catalyzed by new capital raised so the company could go on the offensive, acquiring defunct chains. Monopolies, after all, can be good for stock returns.\nIf AMC can increase market share and the U.S. box office sales can return to 2018 levels in a few years, total sales at might be $9 billion—$6 billion from tickets and $3 billion from concessions. Sales in 2018 amounted to $5.5 billion.\nThen, with better gross profit margins derived from larger scale, AMC might be able to generate $600 million in free cash flow annually, which puts the stock at about a 4% free cash flow yield. The S&P 500 trades for about a 3% free cash flow yield. The numbers can work—if they’re stretched.\nThere are problems with this scenario, though. There are lots of ifs and mights—and AMC has never generated cash flow like that in the past. Arriving at $600 million in free cash flow is more about justifying current valuations than predicting what is likely.\nAlso, with mergers and acquisitions, AMC market shares might rise, but there are still competitors. Regal Cinemas is still out there, owned by Cineworld Holdings (CINE. London). So is Cinemark (CNK). There’s not a true monopoly.\nAMC and its peers have to deal with streaming, too. Windows for exclusive theater showings are shrinking. The pandemic has accelerated that. And if AMC gets too large and demanding for movie makers, the talent can always go to streaming faster, hurting box office sales.\nThere is also the problem of the peer stocks. They aren’t trading like this is a brave new world for theaters. Cineworld stock is up 484% from its 52-week low, but shares are still off 72% from all-time highs. Cinemark shares are up 222% from their 52-week low. They are down 47% from their all-time high.\nAMC stock, again, is up almost 1,600% from its 52-week low and is down just 13% from its May all-time high.\nWall Street just doesn’t see the potential either. Nine analysts cover the stock. The average analyst price target is about $5. Before the pandemic, the average analyst price target was $15. But there were fewer shares back then. The old target enterprise value was roughly $7 billion. It’s tough to get from $7 billion to $26 billion predicting better margins.\nAnalysts do have positive free cash flow modeled, though–$13 million in 2022 and $90 million in 2023. That’s a long way from $600 million.\nAnd that’s just another way of saying that AMC bulls are a long way from making the math work.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":870,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":110579299,"gmtCreate":1622473438911,"gmtModify":1634101223659,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/110579299","repostId":"2139453630","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1085,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":134644129,"gmtCreate":1622231959061,"gmtModify":1634182645761,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Dip","listText":"Dip","text":"Dip","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/134644129","repostId":"2138765488","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":274,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":328958563,"gmtCreate":1615481521552,"gmtModify":1703489839230,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/328958563","repostId":"1123395191","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":241,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":360522776,"gmtCreate":1613958343395,"gmtModify":1634551776357,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/360522776","repostId":"1161529893","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1161529893","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1613733842,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1161529893?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-19 19:24","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Goldman Sachs is joining the robo-investing party — should you?<blockquote>高盛正在加入机器人投资行列——你应该加入吗？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1161529893","media":"Marketwatch","summary":"‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.Robo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.Now anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by so","content":"<p>  ‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.  Robo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.</p><p><blockquote>加州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯说，就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜。他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。机器人投资在几乎每个经纪平台上都变得越来越普遍。直到周二，高盛GS(-0.91%)将其机器人咨询服务Marcus限制为至少有1000万美元可投资的人。</blockquote></p><p> Now anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by some of Goldman Sachs’ wealthiest clients for a 0.35% annual advisory fee. But investing experts say there are more costs to consider before jumping on the robo-investing train.</p><p><blockquote>现在，任何拥有至少1,000美元可投资的人都可以使用高盛一些最富有的客户使用的相同交易算法，每年只需支付0.35%的咨询费。但投资专家表示，在跳上机器人投资列车之前，需要考虑更多成本。</blockquote></p><p> “Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.</p><p><blockquote>“就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜，”加利福尼亚州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯(Vance Barse)说，他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。</blockquote></p><p> Although the 35 basis-point price tag is a “loss leader” to Goldman Sachs, he said companies typically make such offers in order to attract clients to cross-sell them banking products.</p><p><blockquote>尽管35个基点的价格标签对高盛来说是一个“亏损领头羊”，但他表示，公司通常会提出这样的报价，以吸引客户向他们交叉销售银行产品。</blockquote></p><p> “People forget that banks are ultimately in the business of making money,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“人们忘记了银行最终是为了赚钱，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Goldman Sachs declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>高盛拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p> The company is among other major financial-services firms offering digital advisers, including Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab SCHW, +1.03% and startups such as Betterment and Wealthfront.</p><p><blockquote>该公司是其他提供数字顾问的主要金融服务公司之一，包括Vanguard、Fidelity和Schwab SCHW，+1.03%，以及Betterment和Wealthfront等初创公司。</blockquote></p><p> Fees for robo advisers can start at around 0.25%, and increase to 1% and above for traditional brokers. A survey of nearly 1,000 financial planners by Inside Information, a trade publication, found that the bigger the portfolio, the lower the percentage clients paid in fees.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问的费用从0.25%左右开始，传统经纪商的费用会增加到1%及以上。行业出版物Inside Information对近1,000名理财规划师进行的一项调查发现，投资组合越大，客户支付的费用比例就越低。</blockquote></p><p> The median annual charge hovered at around 1% for portfolios of $1 million or less, and 0.5% for portfolios worth $5 million to $10 million.</p><p><blockquote>对于100万美元或以下的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在1%左右，对于价值500万至1000万美元的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在0.5%左右。</blockquote></p><p> Robo advisers like those on offer from Goldman Sachs and Betterment differ from robo platforms like Robinhood. The former suggest portfolios focused on exchange-traded funds, while Robinhood allows users to invest in individual ETFs, stocks, options and even cryptocurrencies.</p><p><blockquote>高盛和Betterment提供的机器人顾问与Robinhood等机器人平台不同。前者建议投资组合专注于交易所交易基金，而Robinhood允许用户投资个人ETF、股票、期权甚至加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robo investing as a self-driving car</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人投资作为自动驾驶汽车</b></blockquote></p><p> Consumers have turned to robo-investing at unprecedented levels during the pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在疫情期间，消费者以前所未有的水平转向机器人投资。</blockquote></p><p> The rate of new accounts opened jumped between 50% and 300% during the first quarter of 2020 compared to the fourth quarter of last year, according to a May report published by research and advisory firm Aite Group.</p><p><blockquote>根据研究和咨询公司艾特集团5月份发布的一份报告，与去年第四季度相比，2020年第一季度的新开户率跃升了50%至300%。</blockquote></p><p> So what is rob-investing? Think of it like a self-driving car.</p><p><blockquote>那么什么是rob投资呢？把它想象成一辆自动驾驶汽车。</blockquote></p><p> You put in your destination, buckle up in the backseat and your driver (robo adviser) will get there. You, the passenger, can’t easily slam the breaks if you fear your driver is leading you in the wrong direction. Nor can you put your foot on the gas pedal if you’re in a rush and want to get to your destination faster.</p><p><blockquote>你输入你的目的地，在后座系好安全带，你的司机（机器人顾问）就会到达那里。作为乘客，如果你担心你的司机把你引向错误的方向，你就不能轻易刹车。如果您赶时间并想更快地到达目的地，也不能踩油门。</blockquote></p><p> Robo-investing platforms use advanced-trading algorithm software to design investment portfolios based on factors such as an individual’s appetite for risk-taking and desired short-term and long-term returns.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资平台使用先进的交易算法软件，根据个人的风险偏好以及期望的短期和长期回报等因素来设计投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> There are over 200 platforms that provide these services charging typically no more than a 0.5% annual advisory fee, compared to the 1% annual fee human investment advisors charge.</p><p><blockquote>有200多个平台提供这些服务，每年收取的咨询费通常不超过0.5%，而人力投资顾问收取的年费为1%。</blockquote></p><p> And rather than investing entirely on your own, which can become a second job and lead to emotional investment decisions, robo advisers handle buying and selling assets.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问处理资产的买卖，而不是完全自己投资，这可能成为第二份工作并导致情绪化的投资决策。</blockquote></p><p> Cynthia Loh, Schwab vice president of Digital Advice and Innovation, disagrees, and argues that robo investing doesn’t mean giving technology control of your money. Schwab, she said, has a team of investment experts who oversee investment strategy and keep watch during periods of market volatility, although some services have more input from humans than others.</p><p><blockquote>嘉信理财数字咨询和创新副总裁辛西娅·洛(Cynthia Loh)不同意这种观点，她认为机器人投资并不意味着让技术控制你的资金。她说，嘉信理财拥有一支投资专家团队，负责监督投资策略并在市场波动期间进行监控，尽管有些服务比其他服务有更多的人工输入。</blockquote></p><p> As she recently wrote on MarketWatch: “One common misconception about automated investing is that choosing a robo adviser essentially means handing control of your money over to robots. The truth is that robo solutions have a combination of automated and human components running things behind the scenes.”</p><p><blockquote>正如她最近在MarketWatch上所写：“关于自动化投资的一个常见误解是，选择机器人顾问本质上意味着将资金的控制权交给机器人。事实是，机器人解决方案结合了自动化和人工组件，在幕后运行事物。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robos appeal to inexperienced investors</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人吸引缺乏经验的投资者</b></blockquote></p><p> Robo investing tends to appeal to inexperienced investors or ones who don’t have the time or energy to manage their own portfolios. These investors can take comfort in the “set it and forget it approach to investing and overtime let the markets do their thing,” Barse said.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资往往吸引缺乏经验的投资者或没有时间或精力管理自己投资组合的投资者。巴尔斯说，这些投资者可以对“一劳永逸”的投资方法感到放心，随着时间的推移，让市场做自己的事情”。</blockquote></p><p> That makes it much easier to stomach market volatility knowing that you don’t necessarily have to make spur-of-the-moment decisions to buy or sell assets, said Tiffany Lam-Balfour, an investing and retirement specialist at NerdWallet.</p><p><blockquote>NerdWallet的投资和退休专家蒂芙尼·拉姆-贝尔福(Tiffany Lam-Balfour)表示，这使得你更容易承受市场波动，因为你不一定必须做出购买或出售资产的冲动决定。</blockquote></p><p> “When you’re investing, you don’t want to keep looking at the market and going ‘Oh I need to get out of this,’” she said. “You want to leave it to the professionals to get you through it because they know what your time horizon is, and they’ll adjust your portfolio automatically for you.”</p><p><blockquote>“当你投资时，你不会想一直关注市场并说‘哦，我需要摆脱困境’，”她说。“你想让专业人士来帮你度过难关，因为他们知道你的时间范围，他们会自动为你调整你的投资组合。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> That said, “you can’t just expect your investments will only go up. Even if you had the world’s best human financial adviser you can’t expect that.”</p><p><blockquote>也就是说，“你不能指望你的投资只会上涨。即使你有世界上最好的人类财务顾问，你也不能指望这一点。”</blockquote></p><p> Others disagree, and say robo advisers appeal to older investors. “Planning for and paying yourself in retirement is complex. There are many options out there to help investors through it, and robo investing is one of them,” Loh said.</p><p><blockquote>其他人不同意，并表示机器人顾问对老年投资者有吸引力。“退休后的规划和支付费用很复杂。有很多选择可以帮助投资者度过难关，机器人投资就是其中之一，”Loh说。</blockquote></p><p> “Many thoughtful, long-term investors have discovered that they want a more modern, streamlined, and inexpensive way to invest, and robo investing fits the bill. They are happy to let technology handle the mundane activities that are harder and more time-consuming for investors to do themselves,” she added.</p><p><blockquote>“许多深思熟虑的长期投资者发现，他们想要一种更现代、更简化、更便宜的投资方式，而机器人投资正好符合这一要求。他们很乐意让技术来处理更困难、更耗时的日常活动。投资者自己做，”她补充道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>There is often no door to knock on</b></p><p><blockquote><b>常常无门可敲</b></blockquote></p><p> Your robo adviser only knows what you tell it. The simplistic questionnaire you’re required to fill out will on most robo-investing platforms will collect information on your annual income, desired age to retire and the level of risk you’re willing to take on.</p><p><blockquote>你的机器人顾问只知道你告诉它什么。大多数机器人投资平台上要求您填写的简单问卷将收集有关您的年收入、期望退休年龄以及您愿意承担的风险水平的信息。</blockquote></p><p> It won’t however know if you just had a child and would like to begin saving for their education down the road or if you recently lost your job.</p><p><blockquote>然而，它不会知道你是否刚刚有了一个孩子，并想开始为他们的教育存钱，或者你是否最近失业了。</blockquote></p><p> “The question then becomes to whom does that person go to for advice and does that platform offer that and if so, to what level of complexity?” said Barse.</p><p><blockquote>“那么问题就变成了那个人向谁寻求建议？该平台是否提供建议？如果提供，复杂程度如何？”巴斯说。</blockquote></p><p> Not all platforms give individualized investment advice and the hybrid models that do offer advice from a human tend to charge higher annual fees.</p><p><blockquote>并非所有平台都提供个性化投资建议，提供人工建议的混合模式往往会收取更高的年费。</blockquote></p><p> Additionally, a robo adviser won’t necessarily “manage your money with tax efficiency at front of mind,” said Roger Ma, a certified financial planner at Lifelaidout, a New York City-based financial advisory group.</p><p><blockquote>此外，纽约市财务咨询集团Lifelaidout的注册财务规划师罗杰·马(Roger Ma)表示，机器人顾问不一定“在管理资金时首先考虑税收效率”。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, one common way investors offset the taxes they pay on long-term investments is by selling assets that have accrued losses. Traditional advisers often specialize in constructing portfolios that lead to the most tax-efficient outcomes, said Ma, who is the author of “Work Your Money, Not Your Life”.</p><p><blockquote>例如，投资者抵消长期投资税款的一种常见方式是出售已累计亏损的资产。《工作你的钱，而不是你的生活》一书的作者马说，传统顾问通常专注于构建能带来最节税结果的投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> But with robo investing, the trades that are made for you are the same ones that are being made for a slew of other investors who may fall under a different tax-bracket than you.</p><p><blockquote>但通过机器人投资，为您进行的交易与为许多其他投资者进行的交易是相同的，这些投资者可能属于与您不同的税级。</blockquote></p><p> On top of that, while robo investing may feel like a simplistic way to get into investing, especially for beginners it can “overcomplicate investing,” Ma said.</p><p><blockquote>最重要的是，虽然机器人投资可能感觉像是一种简单的投资方式，特别是对于初学者来说，它可能会“使投资过于复杂”，马云说。</blockquote></p><p> “If you are just looking to dip your toe in and you want to feel like you’re invested in a diversified portfolio, I wouldn’t say definitely don’t do a robo adviser,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你只是想尝试一下，并且想感觉自己投资于多元化的投资组合，我不会说绝对不要聘请机器人顾问，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t rule out investing through a target-date fund that selects a single fund to invest in and adjusts the position over time based on their investment goals, he added.</p><p><blockquote>他补充说，不要排除通过目标日期基金进行投资，该基金选择单一基金进行投资，并根据投资目标随着时间的推移调整头寸。</blockquote></p><p> But not everyone can tell the difference between robo advice and advice from a human being. In 2015, MarketWatch asked four prominent robo advisers and four of the traditional, flesh-and-blood variety to construct portfolios for a hypothetical 35-year-old investor with $40,000 to invest.</p><p><blockquote>但并不是每个人都能区分机器人的建议和人类的建议。2015年，MarketWatch请四位著名的机器人顾问和四位传统的有血有肉的机器人顾问为一位假设的35岁投资者构建投资组合，投资金额为40,000美元。</blockquote></p><p> The results were, perhaps, surprising for critics of robo advisers. The robots’ suggestions were “not massively different” from what the human advisers proposed, said Michael Kitces, Pinnacle Advisory Group’s research director, after reviewing the results.</p><p><blockquote>对于机器人顾问的批评者来说，结果或许令人惊讶。Pinnacle Advisory Group的研究总监Michael Kitces在审查结果后表示，机器人的建议与人类顾问的建议“没有太大不同”。</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>Goldman Sachs is joining the robo-investing party — should you?<blockquote>高盛正在加入机器人投资行列——你应该加入吗？</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\">\nGoldman Sachs is joining the robo-investing party — should you?<blockquote>高盛正在加入机器人投资行列——你应该加入吗？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Marketwatch</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-02-19 19:24</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  ‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.  Robo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.</p><p><blockquote>加州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯说，就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜。他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。机器人投资在几乎每个经纪平台上都变得越来越普遍。直到周二，高盛GS(-0.91%)将其机器人咨询服务Marcus限制为至少有1000万美元可投资的人。</blockquote></p><p> Now anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by some of Goldman Sachs’ wealthiest clients for a 0.35% annual advisory fee. But investing experts say there are more costs to consider before jumping on the robo-investing train.</p><p><blockquote>现在，任何拥有至少1,000美元可投资的人都可以使用高盛一些最富有的客户使用的相同交易算法，每年只需支付0.35%的咨询费。但投资专家表示，在跳上机器人投资列车之前，需要考虑更多成本。</blockquote></p><p> “Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.</p><p><blockquote>“就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜，”加利福尼亚州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯(Vance Barse)说，他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。</blockquote></p><p> Although the 35 basis-point price tag is a “loss leader” to Goldman Sachs, he said companies typically make such offers in order to attract clients to cross-sell them banking products.</p><p><blockquote>尽管35个基点的价格标签对高盛来说是一个“亏损领头羊”，但他表示，公司通常会提出这样的报价，以吸引客户向他们交叉销售银行产品。</blockquote></p><p> “People forget that banks are ultimately in the business of making money,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“人们忘记了银行最终是为了赚钱，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Goldman Sachs declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>高盛拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p> The company is among other major financial-services firms offering digital advisers, including Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab SCHW, +1.03% and startups such as Betterment and Wealthfront.</p><p><blockquote>该公司是其他提供数字顾问的主要金融服务公司之一，包括Vanguard、Fidelity和Schwab SCHW，+1.03%，以及Betterment和Wealthfront等初创公司。</blockquote></p><p> Fees for robo advisers can start at around 0.25%, and increase to 1% and above for traditional brokers. A survey of nearly 1,000 financial planners by Inside Information, a trade publication, found that the bigger the portfolio, the lower the percentage clients paid in fees.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问的费用从0.25%左右开始，传统经纪商的费用会增加到1%及以上。行业出版物Inside Information对近1,000名理财规划师进行的一项调查发现，投资组合越大，客户支付的费用比例就越低。</blockquote></p><p> The median annual charge hovered at around 1% for portfolios of $1 million or less, and 0.5% for portfolios worth $5 million to $10 million.</p><p><blockquote>对于100万美元或以下的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在1%左右，对于价值500万至1000万美元的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在0.5%左右。</blockquote></p><p> Robo advisers like those on offer from Goldman Sachs and Betterment differ from robo platforms like Robinhood. The former suggest portfolios focused on exchange-traded funds, while Robinhood allows users to invest in individual ETFs, stocks, options and even cryptocurrencies.</p><p><blockquote>高盛和Betterment提供的机器人顾问与Robinhood等机器人平台不同。前者建议投资组合专注于交易所交易基金，而Robinhood允许用户投资个人ETF、股票、期权甚至加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robo investing as a self-driving car</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人投资作为自动驾驶汽车</b></blockquote></p><p> Consumers have turned to robo-investing at unprecedented levels during the pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在疫情期间，消费者以前所未有的水平转向机器人投资。</blockquote></p><p> The rate of new accounts opened jumped between 50% and 300% during the first quarter of 2020 compared to the fourth quarter of last year, according to a May report published by research and advisory firm Aite Group.</p><p><blockquote>根据研究和咨询公司艾特集团5月份发布的一份报告，与去年第四季度相比，2020年第一季度的新开户率跃升了50%至300%。</blockquote></p><p> So what is rob-investing? Think of it like a self-driving car.</p><p><blockquote>那么什么是rob投资呢？把它想象成一辆自动驾驶汽车。</blockquote></p><p> You put in your destination, buckle up in the backseat and your driver (robo adviser) will get there. You, the passenger, can’t easily slam the breaks if you fear your driver is leading you in the wrong direction. Nor can you put your foot on the gas pedal if you’re in a rush and want to get to your destination faster.</p><p><blockquote>你输入你的目的地，在后座系好安全带，你的司机（机器人顾问）就会到达那里。作为乘客，如果你担心你的司机把你引向错误的方向，你就不能轻易刹车。如果您赶时间并想更快地到达目的地，也不能踩油门。</blockquote></p><p> Robo-investing platforms use advanced-trading algorithm software to design investment portfolios based on factors such as an individual’s appetite for risk-taking and desired short-term and long-term returns.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资平台使用先进的交易算法软件，根据个人的风险偏好以及期望的短期和长期回报等因素来设计投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> There are over 200 platforms that provide these services charging typically no more than a 0.5% annual advisory fee, compared to the 1% annual fee human investment advisors charge.</p><p><blockquote>有200多个平台提供这些服务，每年收取的咨询费通常不超过0.5%，而人力投资顾问收取的年费为1%。</blockquote></p><p> And rather than investing entirely on your own, which can become a second job and lead to emotional investment decisions, robo advisers handle buying and selling assets.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问处理资产的买卖，而不是完全自己投资，这可能成为第二份工作并导致情绪化的投资决策。</blockquote></p><p> Cynthia Loh, Schwab vice president of Digital Advice and Innovation, disagrees, and argues that robo investing doesn’t mean giving technology control of your money. Schwab, she said, has a team of investment experts who oversee investment strategy and keep watch during periods of market volatility, although some services have more input from humans than others.</p><p><blockquote>嘉信理财数字咨询和创新副总裁辛西娅·洛(Cynthia Loh)不同意这种观点，她认为机器人投资并不意味着让技术控制你的资金。她说，嘉信理财拥有一支投资专家团队，负责监督投资策略并在市场波动期间进行监控，尽管有些服务比其他服务有更多的人工输入。</blockquote></p><p> As she recently wrote on MarketWatch: “One common misconception about automated investing is that choosing a robo adviser essentially means handing control of your money over to robots. The truth is that robo solutions have a combination of automated and human components running things behind the scenes.”</p><p><blockquote>正如她最近在MarketWatch上所写：“关于自动化投资的一个常见误解是，选择机器人顾问本质上意味着将资金的控制权交给机器人。事实是，机器人解决方案结合了自动化和人工组件，在幕后运行事物。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robos appeal to inexperienced investors</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人吸引缺乏经验的投资者</b></blockquote></p><p> Robo investing tends to appeal to inexperienced investors or ones who don’t have the time or energy to manage their own portfolios. These investors can take comfort in the “set it and forget it approach to investing and overtime let the markets do their thing,” Barse said.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资往往吸引缺乏经验的投资者或没有时间或精力管理自己投资组合的投资者。巴尔斯说，这些投资者可以对“一劳永逸”的投资方法感到放心，随着时间的推移，让市场做自己的事情”。</blockquote></p><p> That makes it much easier to stomach market volatility knowing that you don’t necessarily have to make spur-of-the-moment decisions to buy or sell assets, said Tiffany Lam-Balfour, an investing and retirement specialist at NerdWallet.</p><p><blockquote>NerdWallet的投资和退休专家蒂芙尼·拉姆-贝尔福(Tiffany Lam-Balfour)表示，这使得你更容易承受市场波动，因为你不一定必须做出购买或出售资产的冲动决定。</blockquote></p><p> “When you’re investing, you don’t want to keep looking at the market and going ‘Oh I need to get out of this,’” she said. “You want to leave it to the professionals to get you through it because they know what your time horizon is, and they’ll adjust your portfolio automatically for you.”</p><p><blockquote>“当你投资时，你不会想一直关注市场并说‘哦，我需要摆脱困境’，”她说。“你想让专业人士来帮你度过难关，因为他们知道你的时间范围，他们会自动为你调整你的投资组合。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> That said, “you can’t just expect your investments will only go up. Even if you had the world’s best human financial adviser you can’t expect that.”</p><p><blockquote>也就是说，“你不能指望你的投资只会上涨。即使你有世界上最好的人类财务顾问，你也不能指望这一点。”</blockquote></p><p> Others disagree, and say robo advisers appeal to older investors. “Planning for and paying yourself in retirement is complex. There are many options out there to help investors through it, and robo investing is one of them,” Loh said.</p><p><blockquote>其他人不同意，并表示机器人顾问对老年投资者有吸引力。“退休后的规划和支付费用很复杂。有很多选择可以帮助投资者度过难关，机器人投资就是其中之一，”Loh说。</blockquote></p><p> “Many thoughtful, long-term investors have discovered that they want a more modern, streamlined, and inexpensive way to invest, and robo investing fits the bill. They are happy to let technology handle the mundane activities that are harder and more time-consuming for investors to do themselves,” she added.</p><p><blockquote>“许多深思熟虑的长期投资者发现，他们想要一种更现代、更简化、更便宜的投资方式，而机器人投资正好符合这一要求。他们很乐意让技术来处理更困难、更耗时的日常活动。投资者自己做，”她补充道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>There is often no door to knock on</b></p><p><blockquote><b>常常无门可敲</b></blockquote></p><p> Your robo adviser only knows what you tell it. The simplistic questionnaire you’re required to fill out will on most robo-investing platforms will collect information on your annual income, desired age to retire and the level of risk you’re willing to take on.</p><p><blockquote>你的机器人顾问只知道你告诉它什么。大多数机器人投资平台上要求您填写的简单问卷将收集有关您的年收入、期望退休年龄以及您愿意承担的风险水平的信息。</blockquote></p><p> It won’t however know if you just had a child and would like to begin saving for their education down the road or if you recently lost your job.</p><p><blockquote>然而，它不会知道你是否刚刚有了一个孩子，并想开始为他们的教育存钱，或者你是否最近失业了。</blockquote></p><p> “The question then becomes to whom does that person go to for advice and does that platform offer that and if so, to what level of complexity?” said Barse.</p><p><blockquote>“那么问题就变成了那个人向谁寻求建议？该平台是否提供建议？如果提供，复杂程度如何？”巴斯说。</blockquote></p><p> Not all platforms give individualized investment advice and the hybrid models that do offer advice from a human tend to charge higher annual fees.</p><p><blockquote>并非所有平台都提供个性化投资建议，提供人工建议的混合模式往往会收取更高的年费。</blockquote></p><p> Additionally, a robo adviser won’t necessarily “manage your money with tax efficiency at front of mind,” said Roger Ma, a certified financial planner at Lifelaidout, a New York City-based financial advisory group.</p><p><blockquote>此外，纽约市财务咨询集团Lifelaidout的注册财务规划师罗杰·马(Roger Ma)表示，机器人顾问不一定“在管理资金时首先考虑税收效率”。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, one common way investors offset the taxes they pay on long-term investments is by selling assets that have accrued losses. Traditional advisers often specialize in constructing portfolios that lead to the most tax-efficient outcomes, said Ma, who is the author of “Work Your Money, Not Your Life”.</p><p><blockquote>例如，投资者抵消长期投资税款的一种常见方式是出售已累计亏损的资产。《工作你的钱，而不是你的生活》一书的作者马说，传统顾问通常专注于构建能带来最节税结果的投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> But with robo investing, the trades that are made for you are the same ones that are being made for a slew of other investors who may fall under a different tax-bracket than you.</p><p><blockquote>但通过机器人投资，为您进行的交易与为许多其他投资者进行的交易是相同的，这些投资者可能属于与您不同的税级。</blockquote></p><p> On top of that, while robo investing may feel like a simplistic way to get into investing, especially for beginners it can “overcomplicate investing,” Ma said.</p><p><blockquote>最重要的是，虽然机器人投资可能感觉像是一种简单的投资方式，特别是对于初学者来说，它可能会“使投资过于复杂”，马云说。</blockquote></p><p> “If you are just looking to dip your toe in and you want to feel like you’re invested in a diversified portfolio, I wouldn’t say definitely don’t do a robo adviser,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你只是想尝试一下，并且想感觉自己投资于多元化的投资组合，我不会说绝对不要聘请机器人顾问，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t rule out investing through a target-date fund that selects a single fund to invest in and adjusts the position over time based on their investment goals, he added.</p><p><blockquote>他补充说，不要排除通过目标日期基金进行投资，该基金选择单一基金进行投资，并根据投资目标随着时间的推移调整头寸。</blockquote></p><p> But not everyone can tell the difference between robo advice and advice from a human being. In 2015, MarketWatch asked four prominent robo advisers and four of the traditional, flesh-and-blood variety to construct portfolios for a hypothetical 35-year-old investor with $40,000 to invest.</p><p><blockquote>但并不是每个人都能区分机器人的建议和人类的建议。2015年，MarketWatch请四位著名的机器人顾问和四位传统的有血有肉的机器人顾问为一位假设的35岁投资者构建投资组合，投资金额为40,000美元。</blockquote></p><p> The results were, perhaps, surprising for critics of robo advisers. The robots’ suggestions were “not massively different” from what the human advisers proposed, said Michael Kitces, Pinnacle Advisory Group’s research director, after reviewing the results.</p><p><blockquote>对于机器人顾问的批评者来说，结果或许令人惊讶。Pinnacle Advisory Group的研究总监Michael Kitces在审查结果后表示，机器人的建议与人类顾问的建议“没有太大不同”。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-sachs-is-joining-the-robo-investing-party-should-you-11613658128?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":{},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-sachs-is-joining-the-robo-investing-party-should-you-11613658128?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1161529893","content_text":"‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.\n\nRobo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.\nNow anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by some of Goldman Sachs’ wealthiest clients for a 0.35% annual advisory fee. But investing experts say there are more costs to consider before jumping on the robo-investing train.\n“Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.\nAlthough the 35 basis-point price tag is a “loss leader” to Goldman Sachs, he said companies typically make such offers in order to attract clients to cross-sell them banking products.\n“People forget that banks are ultimately in the business of making money,” he said.\nGoldman Sachs declined to comment.\nThe company is among other major financial-services firms offering digital advisers, including Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab SCHW, +1.03% and startups such as Betterment and Wealthfront.\nFees for robo advisers can start at around 0.25%, and increase to 1% and above for traditional brokers. A survey of nearly 1,000 financial planners by Inside Information, a trade publication, found that the bigger the portfolio, the lower the percentage clients paid in fees.\nThe median annual charge hovered at around 1% for portfolios of $1 million or less, and 0.5% for portfolios worth $5 million to $10 million.\nRobo advisers like those on offer from Goldman Sachs and Betterment differ from robo platforms like Robinhood. The former suggest portfolios focused on exchange-traded funds, while Robinhood allows users to invest in individual ETFs, stocks, options and even cryptocurrencies.\nRobo investing as a self-driving car\nConsumers have turned to robo-investing at unprecedented levels during the pandemic.\nThe rate of new accounts opened jumped between 50% and 300% during the first quarter of 2020 compared to the fourth quarter of last year, according to a May report published by research and advisory firm Aite Group.\nSo what is rob-investing? Think of it like a self-driving car.\nYou put in your destination, buckle up in the backseat and your driver (robo adviser) will get there. You, the passenger, can’t easily slam the breaks if you fear your driver is leading you in the wrong direction. Nor can you put your foot on the gas pedal if you’re in a rush and want to get to your destination faster.\nRobo-investing platforms use advanced-trading algorithm software to design investment portfolios based on factors such as an individual’s appetite for risk-taking and desired short-term and long-term returns.\nThere are over 200 platforms that provide these services charging typically no more than a 0.5% annual advisory fee, compared to the 1% annual fee human investment advisors charge.\nAnd rather than investing entirely on your own, which can become a second job and lead to emotional investment decisions, robo advisers handle buying and selling assets.\nCynthia Loh, Schwab vice president of Digital Advice and Innovation, disagrees, and argues that robo investing doesn’t mean giving technology control of your money. Schwab, she said, has a team of investment experts who oversee investment strategy and keep watch during periods of market volatility, although some services have more input from humans than others.\nAs she recently wrote on MarketWatch: “One common misconception about automated investing is that choosing a robo adviser essentially means handing control of your money over to robots. The truth is that robo solutions have a combination of automated and human components running things behind the scenes.”\nRobos appeal to inexperienced investors\nRobo investing tends to appeal to inexperienced investors or ones who don’t have the time or energy to manage their own portfolios. These investors can take comfort in the “set it and forget it approach to investing and overtime let the markets do their thing,” Barse said.\nThat makes it much easier to stomach market volatility knowing that you don’t necessarily have to make spur-of-the-moment decisions to buy or sell assets, said Tiffany Lam-Balfour, an investing and retirement specialist at NerdWallet.\n“When you’re investing, you don’t want to keep looking at the market and going ‘Oh I need to get out of this,’” she said. “You want to leave it to the professionals to get you through it because they know what your time horizon is, and they’ll adjust your portfolio automatically for you.”\nThat said, “you can’t just expect your investments will only go up. Even if you had the world’s best human financial adviser you can’t expect that.”\nOthers disagree, and say robo advisers appeal to older investors. “Planning for and paying yourself in retirement is complex. There are many options out there to help investors through it, and robo investing is one of them,” Loh said.\n“Many thoughtful, long-term investors have discovered that they want a more modern, streamlined, and inexpensive way to invest, and robo investing fits the bill. They are happy to let technology handle the mundane activities that are harder and more time-consuming for investors to do themselves,” she added.\nThere is often no door to knock on\nYour robo adviser only knows what you tell it. The simplistic questionnaire you’re required to fill out will on most robo-investing platforms will collect information on your annual income, desired age to retire and the level of risk you’re willing to take on.\nIt won’t however know if you just had a child and would like to begin saving for their education down the road or if you recently lost your job.\n“The question then becomes to whom does that person go to for advice and does that platform offer that and if so, to what level of complexity?” said Barse.\nNot all platforms give individualized investment advice and the hybrid models that do offer advice from a human tend to charge higher annual fees.\nAdditionally, a robo adviser won’t necessarily “manage your money with tax efficiency at front of mind,” said Roger Ma, a certified financial planner at Lifelaidout, a New York City-based financial advisory group.\nFor instance, one common way investors offset the taxes they pay on long-term investments is by selling assets that have accrued losses. Traditional advisers often specialize in constructing portfolios that lead to the most tax-efficient outcomes, said Ma, who is the author of “Work Your Money, Not Your Life”.\nBut with robo investing, the trades that are made for you are the same ones that are being made for a slew of other investors who may fall under a different tax-bracket than you.\nOn top of that, while robo investing may feel like a simplistic way to get into investing, especially for beginners it can “overcomplicate investing,” Ma said.\n“If you are just looking to dip your toe in and you want to feel like you’re invested in a diversified portfolio, I wouldn’t say definitely don’t do a robo adviser,” he said.\nDon’t rule out investing through a target-date fund that selects a single fund to invest in and adjusts the position over time based on their investment goals, he added.\nBut not everyone can tell the difference between robo advice and advice from a human being. In 2015, MarketWatch asked four prominent robo advisers and four of the traditional, flesh-and-blood variety to construct portfolios for a hypothetical 35-year-old investor with $40,000 to invest.\nThe results were, perhaps, surprising for critics of robo advisers. The robots’ suggestions were “not massively different” from what the human advisers proposed, said Michael Kitces, Pinnacle Advisory Group’s research director, after reviewing the results.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":550,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":384502893,"gmtCreate":1613659613612,"gmtModify":1634552739479,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/384502893","repostId":"1102078157","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":394,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":382497125,"gmtCreate":1613473328267,"gmtModify":1634553537460,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/382497125","repostId":"1108705396","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108705396","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1613469786,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108705396?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-16 18:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy<blockquote>随着拜登的崛起，华尔街经济学家越来越看好美国经济</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108705396","media":"CNN Business","summary":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a doubl","content":"<p><b>New York (CNN Business)&nbsp;</b>The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington&nbsp;and millions of families were about to&nbsp;lose crucial benefits.</p><p><blockquote><b>纽约（CNN商业）</b>2020年底，饱受新冠疫情蹂躏的美国经济濒临陷入双底衰退。疫情正在加剧，僵局使华盛顿陷入瘫痪，数百万家庭即将失去重要福利。</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward two months, and the&nbsp;economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.</p><p><blockquote>快进两个月，经济仍在挣扎，但对复苏的信心正在迅速增长。</blockquote></p><p> Economists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家正在迅速上调GDP和失业率预测，并将美联储能够提高最低利率的日期提前。高盛预测美国经济将以三十多年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> The renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the&nbsp;health crisis is easing&nbsp;and Uncle Sam is&nbsp;coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.</p><p><blockquote>重新燃起的乐观情绪是由两个主要因素推动的：健康危机正在缓解，山姆大叔正在提供惊人数量的援助——比几个月前似乎多了数千亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> After supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.</p><p><blockquote>根据穆迪分析公司的数据，继去年提供4万亿美元的救助后，华盛顿预计将在2021年再提供2万亿美元的赤字融资支持。这相当于美国年度GDP的四分之一以上。</blockquote></p><p> \"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪分析公司首席经济学家马克·赞迪(Mark Zandi)告诉CNN Business：“这是大量的经济动力。”</blockquote></p><p> The turning point happened last month&nbsp;when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for&nbsp;President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.</p><p><blockquote>转折点发生在上个月，当时民主党在佐治亚州的决选中以微弱优势控制了美国参议院。这为乔·拜登总统1.9万亿美元的美国救援计划开辟了道路，该计划包括1400美元的刺激支票、提高失业救济金以及向州和地方政府提供3500亿美元的生命线。</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Summer mini-boom'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“夏季迷你热潮”</b></blockquote></p><p> Before the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a&nbsp;forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.</p><p><blockquote>在佐治亚州选举之前，赞迪认为美国经济要到2023年春季或夏季才能恢复充分就业（强劲的劳动力市场，失业率为4%）。现在，他预计这一成就将在明年春天实现，这与财政部长珍妮特·耶伦的预测相呼应。</blockquote></p><p> \"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行经济学家在最近给客户的一份报告中写道，“超级财政政策”意味着美国经济增长快于其他国家的论点“似乎日益强烈”。</blockquote></p><p> Oxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>牛津经济研究院首席美国经济学家Gregory Daco呼吁美国出现“夏季小繁荣”，2021年GDP增长5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> Likewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"</p><p><blockquote>同样，杰富瑞(Jefferies)经济学家表示，“爆炸性的收入增长（得益于财政刺激）可能会推动美国GDP今年增长6.4%，明年增长近5%。”</blockquote></p><p> \"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.</p><p><blockquote>杰富瑞在最近的一份报告中告诉客户：“如果说有什么不同的话，那就是我们的预测可能过于保守。”他指出，其观点仅纳入了拜登计划的1万亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Indeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.</p><p><blockquote>事实上，高盛本周早些时候将2021年GDP预期上调至6.8%，因为这家华尔街银行现在假设额外财政救助为1.5万亿美元，高于此前的1.1万亿美元。根据圣路易斯联储的数据，如果高盛的预测成真，这将是美国自1989年以来最快的年度GDP增长。</blockquote></p><p> The rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.</p><p><blockquote>乐观的GDP预测远高于美联储的要求。去年12月，美联储预计2021年GDP增长仅为4.2%，并表示失业率要到2023年才会降至4%以下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Double-dip recession averted</b></p><p><blockquote><b>避免了双底衰退</b></blockquote></p><p> The Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.</p><p><blockquote>美联储对经济预测趋于保守。而且，至关重要的是，美联储的预测是在DC政治功能失调给美国经济蒙上阴影之际发布的。</blockquote></p><p> For months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.</p><p><blockquote>几个月来，共和党和民主党试图就延长计划失效的关键失业和驱逐福利以及向小企业提供更多可原谅贷款达成协议，但未能达成协议。然后当最终达成协议时，前总统唐纳德·特朗普威胁要炸毁它。</blockquote></p><p> At the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.</p><p><blockquote>在最后一刻，特朗普将9000亿美元的救助计划签署成为法律，避免了经济灾难。</blockquote></p><p> \"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“如果没有这一点，我们将陷入双底衰退。”</blockquote></p><p> Slammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States&nbsp;added just 49,000 jobs in January.</p><p><blockquote>受疫情冲击，美国经济一瘸一拐地走到2020年底，今年开局缓慢。12月，雇主自春季以来首次裁员。美国1月份仅增加了49,000个就业岗位。</blockquote></p><p> Jobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.</p><p><blockquote>申请失业救济人数仍然高得惊人。仅上周就有793,000名美国人首次申请失业救济。就背景而言，这高于大衰退的最严重水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Vaccines to the rescue</b></p><p><blockquote><b>疫苗拯救生命</b></blockquote></p><p> But there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.</p><p><blockquote>但疫情仍有一线希望。尽管Covid死亡人数仍然高得难以想象，但住院人数和病例数已经下降。</blockquote></p><p> Critically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.</p><p><blockquote>至关重要的是，冠状病毒疫苗的推出正在加速。据摩根士丹利称，在总共分发的6600万支疫苗中，约70%已经接种。</blockquote></p><p> And Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday&nbsp;that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.</p><p><blockquote>美国顶级传染病专家安东尼·福奇博士周四告诉NBC新闻，美国可能能够在夏季中期或结束前为大多数美国人接种疫苗。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> All of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些使得包括加利福尼亚、纽约和新泽西在内的州放松了对餐馆和其他小企业的健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> That's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants&nbsp;force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.</p><p><blockquote>这并不是说疫情已经结束。事实上，一个风险是，新的Covid-19变种迫使美国各州和城市再次收紧健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Low-wage workers are still hurting badly</b></p><p><blockquote><b>低薪工人仍然受到严重伤害</b></blockquote></p><p> Against this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>在此背景下，许多经济学家敦促华盛顿推进激进的财政刺激计划。</blockquote></p><p> \"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“请把脚平放在油门上。”“政策制定101说，错误在于做得太多，而不是做得太少。”</blockquote></p><p> Doing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.</p><p><blockquote>做得太少可能会加剧美国的不平等问题。这是因为与之前的衰退相比，这次衰退对餐馆、儿童保育和酒店业等遭受重创行业的低收入工人造成了不成比例的伤害。</blockquote></p><p> Employment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.</p><p><blockquote>根据Opportunity Insights经济跟踪系统的数据，低工资工人（年收入低于27,000美元的人）的就业水平仍下降了20%以上。相比之下，年收入超过6万美元的人的就业水平高于危机前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> \"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行的经济学家在给客户的一份报告中写道：“如果收入和种族群体之间的充分就业情况不明显，拜登的团队就不太可能为实现充分就业而开香槟。”</blockquote></p><p> However, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>然而，前美联储官员、现任Quill Intelligence首席执行官丹妮尔·迪马蒂诺·布斯(Danielle DiMartino Booth)担心，专注于提供收入，而不是投资基础设施和再培训工人，会让该国沉迷于刺激措施。</blockquote></p><p> \"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯说：“经济将变成这个依赖患者，总是等待下一次注射。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Bring it on'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“来吧”</b></blockquote></p><p> Some economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington&nbsp;overheats the economy by injecting too much support.</p><p><blockquote>包括前财政部长拉里·萨默斯在内的一些经济学家警告说，华盛顿注入过多支持可能会导致经济过热。</blockquote></p><p> \"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯表示：“未来几个月可能会出现相当大的通胀恐慌，这将考验债券市场和美联储。”</blockquote></p><p> And that in turn would spook the&nbsp;red-hot stock market.</p><p><blockquote>这反过来又会惊动炙手可热的股市。</blockquote></p><p> Fed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.</p><p><blockquote>美联储观察人士正在提前确定美联储何时能够结束紧急政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p> Citing \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.</p><p><blockquote>高盛援引“通胀前景走强的迹象”，目前预计美联储将在2022年初开始“缩减”资产购买规模，并在2024年上半年加息。</blockquote></p><p> Zandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.</p><p><blockquote>赞迪并没有因为通货膨胀而失眠，主要是因为美国还远未实现充分就业。</blockquote></p><p> \"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"</p><p><blockquote>“这是一种被大大夸大的担忧，”他说。“来吧。十多年来，我们最大的问题一直是低通胀。更高的通胀将是一个高级问题。”</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>With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy<blockquote>随着拜登的崛起，华尔街经济学家越来越看好美国经济</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\">\nWith Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy<blockquote>随着拜登的崛起，华尔街经济学家越来越看好美国经济</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">CNN Business</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-02-16 18:03</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>New York (CNN Business)&nbsp;</b>The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington&nbsp;and millions of families were about to&nbsp;lose crucial benefits.</p><p><blockquote><b>纽约（CNN商业）</b>2020年底，饱受新冠疫情蹂躏的美国经济濒临陷入双底衰退。疫情正在加剧，僵局使华盛顿陷入瘫痪，数百万家庭即将失去重要福利。</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward two months, and the&nbsp;economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.</p><p><blockquote>快进两个月，经济仍在挣扎，但对复苏的信心正在迅速增长。</blockquote></p><p> Economists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家正在迅速上调GDP和失业率预测，并将美联储能够提高最低利率的日期提前。高盛预测美国经济将以三十多年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> The renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the&nbsp;health crisis is easing&nbsp;and Uncle Sam is&nbsp;coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.</p><p><blockquote>重新燃起的乐观情绪是由两个主要因素推动的：健康危机正在缓解，山姆大叔正在提供惊人数量的援助——比几个月前似乎多了数千亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> After supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.</p><p><blockquote>根据穆迪分析公司的数据，继去年提供4万亿美元的救助后，华盛顿预计将在2021年再提供2万亿美元的赤字融资支持。这相当于美国年度GDP的四分之一以上。</blockquote></p><p> \"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪分析公司首席经济学家马克·赞迪(Mark Zandi)告诉CNN Business：“这是大量的经济动力。”</blockquote></p><p> The turning point happened last month&nbsp;when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for&nbsp;President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.</p><p><blockquote>转折点发生在上个月，当时民主党在佐治亚州的决选中以微弱优势控制了美国参议院。这为乔·拜登总统1.9万亿美元的美国救援计划开辟了道路，该计划包括1400美元的刺激支票、提高失业救济金以及向州和地方政府提供3500亿美元的生命线。</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Summer mini-boom'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“夏季迷你热潮”</b></blockquote></p><p> Before the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a&nbsp;forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.</p><p><blockquote>在佐治亚州选举之前，赞迪认为美国经济要到2023年春季或夏季才能恢复充分就业（强劲的劳动力市场，失业率为4%）。现在，他预计这一成就将在明年春天实现，这与财政部长珍妮特·耶伦的预测相呼应。</blockquote></p><p> \"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行经济学家在最近给客户的一份报告中写道，“超级财政政策”意味着美国经济增长快于其他国家的论点“似乎日益强烈”。</blockquote></p><p> Oxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>牛津经济研究院首席美国经济学家Gregory Daco呼吁美国出现“夏季小繁荣”，2021年GDP增长5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> Likewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"</p><p><blockquote>同样，杰富瑞(Jefferies)经济学家表示，“爆炸性的收入增长（得益于财政刺激）可能会推动美国GDP今年增长6.4%，明年增长近5%。”</blockquote></p><p> \"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.</p><p><blockquote>杰富瑞在最近的一份报告中告诉客户：“如果说有什么不同的话，那就是我们的预测可能过于保守。”他指出，其观点仅纳入了拜登计划的1万亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Indeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.</p><p><blockquote>事实上，高盛本周早些时候将2021年GDP预期上调至6.8%，因为这家华尔街银行现在假设额外财政救助为1.5万亿美元，高于此前的1.1万亿美元。根据圣路易斯联储的数据，如果高盛的预测成真，这将是美国自1989年以来最快的年度GDP增长。</blockquote></p><p> The rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.</p><p><blockquote>乐观的GDP预测远高于美联储的要求。去年12月，美联储预计2021年GDP增长仅为4.2%，并表示失业率要到2023年才会降至4%以下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Double-dip recession averted</b></p><p><blockquote><b>避免了双底衰退</b></blockquote></p><p> The Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.</p><p><blockquote>美联储对经济预测趋于保守。而且，至关重要的是，美联储的预测是在DC政治功能失调给美国经济蒙上阴影之际发布的。</blockquote></p><p> For months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.</p><p><blockquote>几个月来，共和党和民主党试图就延长计划失效的关键失业和驱逐福利以及向小企业提供更多可原谅贷款达成协议，但未能达成协议。然后当最终达成协议时，前总统唐纳德·特朗普威胁要炸毁它。</blockquote></p><p> At the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.</p><p><blockquote>在最后一刻，特朗普将9000亿美元的救助计划签署成为法律，避免了经济灾难。</blockquote></p><p> \"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“如果没有这一点，我们将陷入双底衰退。”</blockquote></p><p> Slammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States&nbsp;added just 49,000 jobs in January.</p><p><blockquote>受疫情冲击，美国经济一瘸一拐地走到2020年底，今年开局缓慢。12月，雇主自春季以来首次裁员。美国1月份仅增加了49,000个就业岗位。</blockquote></p><p> Jobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.</p><p><blockquote>申请失业救济人数仍然高得惊人。仅上周就有793,000名美国人首次申请失业救济。就背景而言，这高于大衰退的最严重水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Vaccines to the rescue</b></p><p><blockquote><b>疫苗拯救生命</b></blockquote></p><p> But there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.</p><p><blockquote>但疫情仍有一线希望。尽管Covid死亡人数仍然高得难以想象，但住院人数和病例数已经下降。</blockquote></p><p> Critically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.</p><p><blockquote>至关重要的是，冠状病毒疫苗的推出正在加速。据摩根士丹利称，在总共分发的6600万支疫苗中，约70%已经接种。</blockquote></p><p> And Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday&nbsp;that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.</p><p><blockquote>美国顶级传染病专家安东尼·福奇博士周四告诉NBC新闻，美国可能能够在夏季中期或结束前为大多数美国人接种疫苗。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> All of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些使得包括加利福尼亚、纽约和新泽西在内的州放松了对餐馆和其他小企业的健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> That's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants&nbsp;force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.</p><p><blockquote>这并不是说疫情已经结束。事实上，一个风险是，新的Covid-19变种迫使美国各州和城市再次收紧健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Low-wage workers are still hurting badly</b></p><p><blockquote><b>低薪工人仍然受到严重伤害</b></blockquote></p><p> Against this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>在此背景下，许多经济学家敦促华盛顿推进激进的财政刺激计划。</blockquote></p><p> \"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“请把脚平放在油门上。”“政策制定101说，错误在于做得太多，而不是做得太少。”</blockquote></p><p> Doing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.</p><p><blockquote>做得太少可能会加剧美国的不平等问题。这是因为与之前的衰退相比，这次衰退对餐馆、儿童保育和酒店业等遭受重创行业的低收入工人造成了不成比例的伤害。</blockquote></p><p> Employment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.</p><p><blockquote>根据Opportunity Insights经济跟踪系统的数据，低工资工人（年收入低于27,000美元的人）的就业水平仍下降了20%以上。相比之下，年收入超过6万美元的人的就业水平高于危机前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> \"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行的经济学家在给客户的一份报告中写道：“如果收入和种族群体之间的充分就业情况不明显，拜登的团队就不太可能为实现充分就业而开香槟。”</blockquote></p><p> However, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>然而，前美联储官员、现任Quill Intelligence首席执行官丹妮尔·迪马蒂诺·布斯(Danielle DiMartino Booth)担心，专注于提供收入，而不是投资基础设施和再培训工人，会让该国沉迷于刺激措施。</blockquote></p><p> \"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯说：“经济将变成这个依赖患者，总是等待下一次注射。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Bring it on'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“来吧”</b></blockquote></p><p> Some economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington&nbsp;overheats the economy by injecting too much support.</p><p><blockquote>包括前财政部长拉里·萨默斯在内的一些经济学家警告说，华盛顿注入过多支持可能会导致经济过热。</blockquote></p><p> \"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯表示：“未来几个月可能会出现相当大的通胀恐慌，这将考验债券市场和美联储。”</blockquote></p><p> And that in turn would spook the&nbsp;red-hot stock market.</p><p><blockquote>这反过来又会惊动炙手可热的股市。</blockquote></p><p> Fed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.</p><p><blockquote>美联储观察人士正在提前确定美联储何时能够结束紧急政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p> Citing \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.</p><p><blockquote>高盛援引“通胀前景走强的迹象”，目前预计美联储将在2022年初开始“缩减”资产购买规模，并在2024年上半年加息。</blockquote></p><p> Zandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.</p><p><blockquote>赞迪并没有因为通货膨胀而失眠，主要是因为美国还远未实现充分就业。</blockquote></p><p> \"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"</p><p><blockquote>“这是一种被大大夸大的担忧，”他说。“来吧。十多年来，我们最大的问题一直是低通胀。更高的通胀将是一个高级问题。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html\">CNN Business</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":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108705396","content_text":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington and millions of families were about to lose crucial benefits.\nFast forward two months, and the economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.\nEconomists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.\nThe renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the health crisis is easing and Uncle Sam is coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.\nAfter supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.\n\"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.\nThe turning point happened last month when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.\n'Summer mini-boom'\nBefore the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.\n\"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.\nOxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.\nLikewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"\n\"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.\nIndeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.\nThe rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.\nDouble-dip recession averted\nThe Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.\nFor months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.\nAt the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.\n\"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.\nSlammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States added just 49,000 jobs in January.\nJobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.\nVaccines to the rescue\nBut there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.\nCritically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.\nAnd Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.\nAll of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.\nThat's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.\nLow-wage workers are still hurting badly\nAgainst this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.\n\"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"\nDoing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.\nEmployment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.\n\"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.\nHowever, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.\n\"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.\n'Bring it on'\nSome economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington overheats the economy by injecting too much support.\n\"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.\nAnd that in turn would spook the red-hot stock market.\nFed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.\nCiting \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.\nZandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.\n\"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":558,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386416566,"gmtCreate":1613239801355,"gmtModify":1634554106612,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/386416566","repostId":"2110026963","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":332,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386416231,"gmtCreate":1613239761523,"gmtModify":1634554106732,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/386416231","repostId":"2110044852","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":314,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388676512,"gmtCreate":1613055805736,"gmtModify":1703768949107,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cool","listText":"Cool","text":"Cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388676512","repostId":"2110041062","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":404,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388678544,"gmtCreate":1613055778688,"gmtModify":1703768947525,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03086\">$BMO NASDAQ100(03086)$</a>Good","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03086\">$BMO NASDAQ100(03086)$</a>Good","text":"$BMO NASDAQ100(03086)$Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388678544","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":313,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388644371,"gmtCreate":1613055548593,"gmtModify":1703768938431,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388644371","repostId":"2110044852","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":386,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":183278014,"gmtCreate":1623334250138,"gmtModify":1634034456391,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[Happy]&nbsp;","listText":"[Happy]&nbsp;","text":"[Happy]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":5,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/183278014","repostId":"1128810191","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1062,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":187780470,"gmtCreate":1623764471990,"gmtModify":1634028712634,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thanks&nbsp;","listText":"Thanks&nbsp;","text":"Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/187780470","repostId":"1146320033","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1345,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":116233606,"gmtCreate":1622801911505,"gmtModify":1634097876967,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/116233606","repostId":"1122373606","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1122373606","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1622793373,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1122373606?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-04 15:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？要考虑什么</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1122373606","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nApple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.</li>  <li>Apple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.</li>  <li>Shares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f2ea192ed76d9772c2c6a820098faf5\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Photo by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果在过去十年中是一项伟大的投资，但下一个十年可能会大不相同。</li><li>苹果的增长在过去十年中有所放缓，未来几年也可能不会成为增长怪物。</li><li>股价具有充足的长期上涨空间，但投资者在做出决定之前应考虑当前的估值。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>摄影：Paopano/iStock社论，来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.</p><p><blockquote>苹果（AAPL）是过去十年中最好的投资之一。然而，在接下来的十年里，它的增长可能会有所不同。然而，由于大规模的股东回报计划和向服务业的转变，苹果的股价在十年后仍可能大幅上涨——尽管目前的估值相当高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:</p><p><blockquote>在过去十年中，苹果公司一直是一项伟大的投资：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5d29aa34bdbc5bab7d0730a4095954e6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.</p><p><blockquote>在这十年中，扣除股息前，股票回报率为900%，复合年回报率约为26%，轻松击败了同期大盘的回报率。重要的是，该公司股价的涨幅远远超过了该公司的市值，而该公司的市值在过去十年中仅增长了550%。这种差异可以用该公司的大规模股票回购计划来解释，该计划在过去十年中大幅减少了股票数量。当然，过去十年对苹果来说是商业上非常成功的时期，因为该公司受益于智能手机的兴起，同时也在手表和平板电脑等新产品上取得了成功，苹果或多或少地将其作为一个新产品类别推出。目前，股价为125美元，过去12个月上涨57%，但2021年迄今下跌6%。继2020年强劲上涨之后，股价目前似乎处于盘整格局，这并不令人意外，因为苹果的估值最近已经扩大了很多，而且该公司的业务增长似乎必须赶上最近的股价上涨。目前的一致目标价为156美元，这意味着25%的上涨潜力。由于目前没有迹象表明股价会离开当前的交易区间，我个人认为苹果短期内不会突破150美元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years</b></p><p><blockquote><b>10年后苹果股票会在哪里</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.</p><p><blockquote>当然，苹果2031年的股价是无法准确预测的。正如历史一次又一次地表明的那样，甚至不可能在更短的时间内准确预测股价。然而，可以设计情景来了解在某些条件下未来股价的走势，从而了解对未来的合理预期。</blockquote></p><p> To craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.</p><p><blockquote>为了构建这样的场景，我们必须考虑苹果的业务增长、苹果的股东回报计划以及股票未来可能交易的估值倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's business growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的业务增长</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去曾经历过多年的强劲增长和多年的疲软增长。这主要可以用新产品推出等因素来解释，例如。手表或iPad，以及各自当前iPhone型号的强度，这些型号的需求因年份而异。其他因素，如经济增长或贸易问题，也发挥了作用。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5b8bd8ef6cdaa13850c1380e870554c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Overall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，过去十年收入增长了154%，但正如我们在上图中看到的，收入增长相对不均衡。2010年代初，苹果凭借iPhone的“胜利之路”实现了巨大增长，而在接下来的几年里，收入增长速度放缓。甚至有一些年份的收入同比下降，例如2016年。过去十年的平均年收入增长率为10%，但当我们考虑到2011年和2012年的强劲增长推动了这一增长率时，假设苹果将增长10%可能不太合理。未来一年也是如此。投资者还应该考虑到，公司规模越大，保持高增长率就变得越困难。然而，这并不意味着苹果的收入增长将放缓至零。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> On the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in&nbsp;high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.</p><p><blockquote>在其产品价格上涨以及中国等高增长国家市场份额增长的潜力（越来越多的人将能够购买苹果价格较高的产品）的背景下，似乎有理由假设苹果将至少从其核心业务中产生一些增长。再加上服务领域的增长——人们越来越多地使用手机，这应该会导致更高的应用支出——并考虑新产品发布的潜力（尽管我认为没有一款产品会像iPhone那样庞大），苹果应该能够以稳健的速度发展其业务。我个人认为5%-7%的收入增长率可能是未来几年的现实估计，尽管一些读者当然会有不同的意见。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's shareholder returns</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的股东回报</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.</p><p><blockquote>如上所示，苹果过去曾大幅减少其股票数量，我相信，有理由假设未来也会发生同样的情况。过去十年，苹果回购了36%的股份。如果未来十年发生同样的情况，每股剩余股票在公司价值中的份额将上涨56%，即年化4.6%。不过，由于苹果目前的估值明显高于其历史估值，回购在未来的影响可能会较小。例如，苹果去年的股票数量仅减少了2.6%。</blockquote></p><p> This is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么我相信未来十年股票数量不会再下降36%。当我们将其向下调整至25%时，当我们考虑每股指标时，这将为苹果的增长带来约3%的年度推动力，而每股指标是苹果股价增长的决定性因素。结合我5%-7%的业务增长预测，我因此假设苹果的每股长期增长将达到8%-10%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's future valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的未来估值</b></blockquote></p><p> AAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去的估值范围很广，其股票在某些时候的市盈率非常低，而投资者在其他时候愿意支付更高的价格：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be5cb8bbc04ff0e0a13ee64f6f2bd90a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"470\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.</p><p><blockquote>五年前，可以以非常低的10倍净利润购买股票，这自然是进入或扩大头寸的好时机。然而，2020年底，该公司的股价高达该公司净利润的40倍，这似乎是一个相当高的估值。目前，AAPL的往绩市盈率为28倍，远期利润约为24倍。在上图中，我们还看到了过去3年、5年、7年和10年的市盈率中位数。很明显，苹果的估值多年来一直在扩大，这就是为什么在较短的“回顾”期内中值较高。我不认为AAPL的市盈率会达到过去十年平均市盈率的15.5倍，因为对于像苹果这样拥有强大品牌、庞大规模的优质公司来说，这似乎是一个相当低的估值。、巨大的利润和堡垒般的资产负债表。另一方面，我也不相信苹果的市盈率会永远保持在24-28倍——对于一家业务增长稳健但不引人注目的中个位数的公司来说，这似乎相当昂贵。当我们考虑到十年后利率可能会更高时，尤其如此，在其他条件相同的情况下，这应该会给所有股票的估值带来压力。因此，我认为2031年净利润20倍左右的估值可能是合理的估计，这或多或少与3年市盈率中位数一致。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Is AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AAPL现在是买入还是卖出</b></blockquote></p><p> Starting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>从2021年每股收益估计为5.15美元开始计算，并假设到2031年每年增长7%-10%，我们的每股收益范围为10.10美元至13.40美元。将市盈率定为20倍，目标价约为每股200-270美元。因此，在235美元左右的中点，股价将较当前水平上涨约90%，年化涨幅约为6.5%。这肯定是一个不错的回报，当我们加上股息时，我们将获得大约7%的年化回报率。另一方面，我相信这也不是一个惊人的回报。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，苹果公司在未来十年具有巨大的上涨潜力，但这并不令人意外——许多公司将在这么长的时间内实现显着增长。我个人对7%的预期长期回报率不太兴奋。当我们考虑到，如果苹果的估值下降，例如由于利率上升，股价在未来1-3年内确实存在相当大的下行风险，目前保持观望可能是更好的选择。长期投资者在当前水平购买股票时可能不会表现不佳，但也可能不会表现出色。目前，我对苹果的评级为持有，如果其估值接近长期平均水平，则可能买入。那些对新产品发布更乐观的人可能不同意并倾向于在这里购买，但事实证明，等待更好的机会是这里的最佳选择。</blockquote></p><p> Summing it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.</p><p><blockquote>总而言之，我想说，该股在未来十年确实有巨大的上涨潜力，但上涨潜力还不足以让我以当前较高的估值购买股票。</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>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？要考虑什么</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhere Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？要考虑什么</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-04 15:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.</li>  <li>Apple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.</li>  <li>Shares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f2ea192ed76d9772c2c6a820098faf5\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Photo by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果在过去十年中是一项伟大的投资，但下一个十年可能会大不相同。</li><li>苹果的增长在过去十年中有所放缓，未来几年也可能不会成为增长怪物。</li><li>股价具有充足的长期上涨空间，但投资者在做出决定之前应考虑当前的估值。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>摄影：Paopano/iStock社论，来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.</p><p><blockquote>苹果（AAPL）是过去十年中最好的投资之一。然而，在接下来的十年里，它的增长可能会有所不同。然而，由于大规模的股东回报计划和向服务业的转变，苹果的股价在十年后仍可能大幅上涨——尽管目前的估值相当高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:</p><p><blockquote>在过去十年中，苹果公司一直是一项伟大的投资：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5d29aa34bdbc5bab7d0730a4095954e6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.</p><p><blockquote>在这十年中，扣除股息前，股票回报率为900%，复合年回报率约为26%，轻松击败了同期大盘的回报率。重要的是，该公司股价的涨幅远远超过了该公司的市值，而该公司的市值在过去十年中仅增长了550%。这种差异可以用该公司的大规模股票回购计划来解释，该计划在过去十年中大幅减少了股票数量。当然，过去十年对苹果来说是商业上非常成功的时期，因为该公司受益于智能手机的兴起，同时也在手表和平板电脑等新产品上取得了成功，苹果或多或少地将其作为一个新产品类别推出。目前，股价为125美元，过去12个月上涨57%，但2021年迄今下跌6%。继2020年强劲上涨之后，股价目前似乎处于盘整格局，这并不令人意外，因为苹果的估值最近已经扩大了很多，而且该公司的业务增长似乎必须赶上最近的股价上涨。目前的一致目标价为156美元，这意味着25%的上涨潜力。由于目前没有迹象表明股价会离开当前的交易区间，我个人认为苹果短期内不会突破150美元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years</b></p><p><blockquote><b>10年后苹果股票会在哪里</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.</p><p><blockquote>当然，苹果2031年的股价是无法准确预测的。正如历史一次又一次地表明的那样，甚至不可能在更短的时间内准确预测股价。然而，可以设计情景来了解在某些条件下未来股价的走势，从而了解对未来的合理预期。</blockquote></p><p> To craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.</p><p><blockquote>为了构建这样的场景，我们必须考虑苹果的业务增长、苹果的股东回报计划以及股票未来可能交易的估值倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's business growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的业务增长</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去曾经历过多年的强劲增长和多年的疲软增长。这主要可以用新产品推出等因素来解释，例如。手表或iPad，以及各自当前iPhone型号的强度，这些型号的需求因年份而异。其他因素，如经济增长或贸易问题，也发挥了作用。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5b8bd8ef6cdaa13850c1380e870554c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Overall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，过去十年收入增长了154%，但正如我们在上图中看到的，收入增长相对不均衡。2010年代初，苹果凭借iPhone的“胜利之路”实现了巨大增长，而在接下来的几年里，收入增长速度放缓。甚至有一些年份的收入同比下降，例如2016年。过去十年的平均年收入增长率为10%，但当我们考虑到2011年和2012年的强劲增长推动了这一增长率时，假设苹果将增长10%可能不太合理。未来一年也是如此。投资者还应该考虑到，公司规模越大，保持高增长率就变得越困难。然而，这并不意味着苹果的收入增长将放缓至零。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> On the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in&nbsp;high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.</p><p><blockquote>在其产品价格上涨以及中国等高增长国家市场份额增长的潜力（越来越多的人将能够购买苹果价格较高的产品）的背景下，似乎有理由假设苹果将至少从其核心业务中产生一些增长。再加上服务领域的增长——人们越来越多地使用手机，这应该会导致更高的应用支出——并考虑新产品发布的潜力（尽管我认为没有一款产品会像iPhone那样庞大），苹果应该能够以稳健的速度发展其业务。我个人认为5%-7%的收入增长率可能是未来几年的现实估计，尽管一些读者当然会有不同的意见。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's shareholder returns</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的股东回报</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.</p><p><blockquote>如上所示，苹果过去曾大幅减少其股票数量，我相信，有理由假设未来也会发生同样的情况。过去十年，苹果回购了36%的股份。如果未来十年发生同样的情况，每股剩余股票在公司价值中的份额将上涨56%，即年化4.6%。不过，由于苹果目前的估值明显高于其历史估值，回购在未来的影响可能会较小。例如，苹果去年的股票数量仅减少了2.6%。</blockquote></p><p> This is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么我相信未来十年股票数量不会再下降36%。当我们将其向下调整至25%时，当我们考虑每股指标时，这将为苹果的增长带来约3%的年度推动力，而每股指标是苹果股价增长的决定性因素。结合我5%-7%的业务增长预测，我因此假设苹果的每股长期增长将达到8%-10%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's future valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的未来估值</b></blockquote></p><p> AAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去的估值范围很广，其股票在某些时候的市盈率非常低，而投资者在其他时候愿意支付更高的价格：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be5cb8bbc04ff0e0a13ee64f6f2bd90a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"470\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.</p><p><blockquote>五年前，可以以非常低的10倍净利润购买股票，这自然是进入或扩大头寸的好时机。然而，2020年底，该公司的股价高达该公司净利润的40倍，这似乎是一个相当高的估值。目前，AAPL的往绩市盈率为28倍，远期利润约为24倍。在上图中，我们还看到了过去3年、5年、7年和10年的市盈率中位数。很明显，苹果的估值多年来一直在扩大，这就是为什么在较短的“回顾”期内中值较高。我不认为AAPL的市盈率会达到过去十年平均市盈率的15.5倍，因为对于像苹果这样拥有强大品牌、庞大规模的优质公司来说，这似乎是一个相当低的估值。、巨大的利润和堡垒般的资产负债表。另一方面，我也不相信苹果的市盈率会永远保持在24-28倍——对于一家业务增长稳健但不引人注目的中个位数的公司来说，这似乎相当昂贵。当我们考虑到十年后利率可能会更高时，尤其如此，在其他条件相同的情况下，这应该会给所有股票的估值带来压力。因此，我认为2031年净利润20倍左右的估值可能是合理的估计，这或多或少与3年市盈率中位数一致。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Is AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AAPL现在是买入还是卖出</b></blockquote></p><p> Starting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>从2021年每股收益估计为5.15美元开始计算，并假设到2031年每年增长7%-10%，我们的每股收益范围为10.10美元至13.40美元。将市盈率定为20倍，目标价约为每股200-270美元。因此，在235美元左右的中点，股价将较当前水平上涨约90%，年化涨幅约为6.5%。这肯定是一个不错的回报，当我们加上股息时，我们将获得大约7%的年化回报率。另一方面，我相信这也不是一个惊人的回报。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，苹果公司在未来十年具有巨大的上涨潜力，但这并不令人意外——许多公司将在这么长的时间内实现显着增长。我个人对7%的预期长期回报率不太兴奋。当我们考虑到，如果苹果的估值下降，例如由于利率上升，股价在未来1-3年内确实存在相当大的下行风险，目前保持观望可能是更好的选择。长期投资者在当前水平购买股票时可能不会表现不佳，但也可能不会表现出色。目前，我对苹果的评级为持有，如果其估值接近长期平均水平，则可能买入。那些对新产品发布更乐观的人可能不同意并倾向于在这里购买，但事实证明，等待更好的机会是这里的最佳选择。</blockquote></p><p> Summing it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.</p><p><blockquote>总而言之，我想说，该股在未来十年确实有巨大的上涨潜力，但上涨潜力还不足以让我以当前较高的估值购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4432703-apple-stock-in-10-years\">seekingalpha</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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4432703-apple-stock-in-10-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1122373606","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.\nApple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.\nShares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.\n\nPhoto by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nApple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.\nApple Stock Price\nOver the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:\nData by YCharts\nShares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.\nWhere Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years\nApple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.\nTo craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.\nApple's business growth\nApple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.\nData by YCharts\nOverall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.\nOn the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.\nApple's shareholder returns\nApple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.\nThis is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.\nApple's future valuation\nAAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:\nData by YCharts\nShares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.\nIs AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now\nStarting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.\nAAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.\nSumming it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1328,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":384502893,"gmtCreate":1613659613612,"gmtModify":1634552739479,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/384502893","repostId":"1102078157","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":394,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386416231,"gmtCreate":1613239761523,"gmtModify":1634554106732,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/386416231","repostId":"2110044852","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":314,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":188254672,"gmtCreate":1623451678196,"gmtModify":1634033123409,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;G","listText":"&nbsp;G","text":"G","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/188254672","repostId":"2142202150","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1158,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":188255695,"gmtCreate":1623451647217,"gmtModify":1634033124508,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/188255695","repostId":"2142202150","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1252,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":189186548,"gmtCreate":1623248043584,"gmtModify":1634035371898,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Win","listText":"Win","text":"Win","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/189186548","repostId":"1188697627","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2396,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":180956541,"gmtCreate":1623171635083,"gmtModify":1634036159865,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"我","listText":"我","text":"我","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/180956541","repostId":"1166056944","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1918,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":114632827,"gmtCreate":1623071667069,"gmtModify":1634037297019,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good&nbsp;","listText":"Good&nbsp;","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/114632827","repostId":"1126396501","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1189,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":111168766,"gmtCreate":1622663911155,"gmtModify":1634099453421,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Fly to moon&nbsp;","listText":"Fly to moon&nbsp;","text":"Fly to moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/111168766","repostId":"1188552613","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1188552613","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1622627641,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1188552613?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-02 17:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC Stock Is Surging Again. How to Make Sense of the Move.<blockquote>AMC股价再次飙升。如何理解这一举动。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1188552613","media":"Barrons","summary":"AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, th","content":"<p>AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, that social media-fueled investor frenzy that has launched the likes of&nbsp;GameStop&nbsp;and&nbsp;BlackBerry&nbsp;into speculative territory.</p><p><blockquote>AMC院线股价飙升很容易被视为迷因交易疯狂，社交媒体推动的投资者狂热将游戏驿站和黑莓等公司带入了投机领域。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s possible that traditional investors have missed a fundamental change in the movie theater business—and it wouldn’t be the first time.</p><p><blockquote>但传统投资者可能错过了电影院业务的根本性变化——而且这已经不是第一次了。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of AMC (ticker: AMC) surged 23% on Tuesday, closing at $32.04—just off an all-time high of $36.72 set in late May. That puts the movie-theater chain’s market capitalization at roughly $16 billion, more than 15 times what it was in 2018, a record-breaking year at the box office.&nbsp;Shares were up another 34%, to $42.92, in premarket trading Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>AMC（股票代码：AMC）股价周二飙升23%，收于32.04美元，略低于5月底创下的36.72美元的历史高点。这使得这家连锁影院的市值约为160亿美元，是2018年票房破纪录的一年的15倍多。周三盘前交易中，该公司股价又上涨34%，至42.92美元。</blockquote></p><p> Even if investors missed an inflection point, though, the math doesn’t add up. The reason might be that market cap isn’t the right measure. Maybe it’s enterprise value, which is essentially market cap and debt. AMC’s enterprise value is about $26 billion, compared with $6.2 billion or so at the end of 2018.</p><p><blockquote>不过，即使投资者错过了拐点，数学也不成立。原因可能是市值不是正确的衡量标准。也许是企业价值，本质上是市值和债务。AMC的企业价值约为260亿美元，而2018年底为62亿美元左右。</blockquote></p><p> AMC added debt during the pandemic as theaters in the country’s biggest cities were dark for months. And the numbers make it easy to understand why: The U.S. box office in 2020 generated about $2.1 billion in ticket sales, down 81% from the 2018 record of $11.9 billion.</p><p><blockquote>AMC在疫情期间增加了债务，因为该国最大城市的影院连续几个月处于黑暗之中。这些数字很容易理解原因：2020年美国票房收入约为21亿美元，比2018年创纪录的119亿美元下降了81%。</blockquote></p><p> So, it seems investors have been vexed by movie theater economics. But it wouldn’t be the first time. The industry essentially went belly up at the turn of the millennium. Regal Cinemas, for instance, declared bankruptcy in 2001.</p><p><blockquote>因此，投资者似乎对电影院经济感到恼火。但这不是第一次了。这个行业在世纪之交基本上破产了。例如，富豪影院于2001年宣布破产。</blockquote></p><p> Back then, the industry had plenty of capacity because of a new theater design—stadium seating that gave a better view of the screen. That shift meant movie theater chains had to renovate or risk losing all their patrons to movie theaters that offered the better view. In the end, too many seats and not enough patrons meant the return on the stadium-seating investments never materialized.</p><p><blockquote>当时，该行业有足够的容量，因为一种新的剧院设计——体育场座位可以更好地观看屏幕。这种转变意味着连锁电影院必须翻新，否则就有可能失去所有顾客到视野更好的电影院。最终，太多的座位和不够的顾客意味着体育场座位投资的回报从未实现。</blockquote></p><p> The upshot was consolidation. With fewer operators, the number of screens stabilized. Between 2002 and 2007, Regal Cinemas became a cash-generating machine because the stock was mispriced. The stock returned 21% a year on average. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average both returned less than 9% a year on average over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>结果是整合。随着操作员的减少，屏幕数量稳定下来。2002年至2007年间，Regal Cinemas因股票定价错误而成为现金产生机器。该股平均每年回报率为21%。同期，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数的平均年回报率均低于9%。</blockquote></p><p> In those days, Regal Cinema’s enterprise value about $5 billion, or about 50% of total U.S. box office sales. That’s far short of AMC today. Something new has to be different for AMC to be worth it.</p><p><blockquote>当年，富豪影院的企业价值约为50亿美元，约占美国票房总收入的50%。这与今天的AMC相去甚远。新的东西必须与众不同，AMC才值得。</blockquote></p><p> Maybe the movie theater business is going to go through another period of consolidation, which can usher in another golden age of returns. AMC’s Tuesday gains, in fact, were catalyzed by new capital raised so the company could go on the offensive, acquiring defunct chains. Monopolies, after all, can be good for stock returns.</p><p><blockquote>也许电影院业务又要经历一段盘整期，可以迎来又一个回报的黄金时代。事实上，AMC周二的上涨是由筹集的新资金推动的，因此该公司可以继续进攻，收购已倒闭的连锁店。毕竟，垄断有利于股票回报。</blockquote></p><p> If AMC can increase market share and the U.S. box office sales can return to 2018 levels in a few years, total sales at might be $9 billion—$6 billion from tickets and $3 billion from concessions. Sales in 2018 amounted to $5.5 billion.</p><p><blockquote>如果AMC能够增加市场份额，并且美国票房销售额能够在几年内恢复到2018年的水平，那么总销售额可能会达到90亿美元——60亿美元来自门票，30亿美元来自特许经营。2018年销售额达55亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Then, with better gross profit margins derived from larger scale, AMC might be able to generate $600 million in free cash flow annually, which puts the stock at about a 4% free cash flow yield. The S&amp;P 500 trades for about a 3% free cash flow yield. The numbers can work—if they’re stretched.</p><p><blockquote>然后，随着规模的扩大带来更好的毛利率，AMC每年可能能够产生6亿美元的自由现金流，这使得该股的自由现金流收益率约为4%。标普500的自由现金流收益率约为3%。这些数字可以发挥作用——如果它们被拉伸的话。</blockquote></p><p> There are problems with this scenario, though. There are lots of ifs and mights—and AMC has never generated cash flow like that in the past. Arriving at $600 million in free cash flow is more about justifying current valuations than predicting what is likely.</p><p><blockquote>不过，这种情况存在问题。有很多如果和可能——AMC过去从未产生过这样的现金流。达到6亿美元的自由现金流更多的是为了证明当前估值的合理性，而不是预测可能发生的情况。</blockquote></p><p> Also, with mergers and acquisitions, AMC market shares might rise, but there are still competitors. Regal Cinemas is still out there, owned by Cineworld Holdings (CINE. London). So is Cinemark (CNK). There’s not a true monopoly.</p><p><blockquote>此外，通过并购，AMC的市场份额可能会上升，但仍然存在竞争对手。富豪影院仍然存在，归电影世界控股公司所有。伦敦）。喜满客（CNK）也是如此。没有真正的垄断。</blockquote></p><p> AMC and its peers have to deal with streaming, too. Windows for exclusive theater showings are shrinking. The pandemic has accelerated that. And if AMC gets too large and demanding for movie makers, the talent can always go to streaming faster, hurting box office sales.</p><p><blockquote>AMC及其同行也必须应对流媒体问题。独家影院放映的窗口正在缩小。疫情加速了这一点。如果AMC变得太大，对电影制作人的要求太高，人才总是可以更快地转向流媒体，从而损害票房销售。</blockquote></p><p> There is also the problem of the peer stocks. They aren’t trading like this is a brave new world for theaters. Cineworld stock is up 484% from its 52-week low, but shares are still off 72% from all-time highs. Cinemark shares are up 222% from their 52-week low. They are down 47% from their all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>还有同行股票的问题。他们并不认为这是剧院的一个勇敢的新世界。Cineworld股价较52周低点上涨484%，但仍较历史高点下跌72%。喜满客股价较52周低点上涨222%。它们比历史高点下跌了47%。</blockquote></p><p> AMC stock, again, is up almost 1,600% from its 52-week low and is down just 13% from its May all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股价再次较52周低点上涨近1,600%，较5月份历史高点仅下跌13%。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street just doesn’t see the potential either. Nine analysts cover the stock. The average analyst price target is about $5. Before the pandemic, the average analyst price target was $15. But there were fewer shares back then. The old target enterprise value was roughly $7 billion. It’s tough to get from $7 billion to $26 billion predicting better margins.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街也没有看到潜力。九名分析师关注该股。分析师平均目标价约为5美元。在疫情爆发之前，分析师的平均目标价为15美元。但当时股票较少。旧的目标企业价值约为70亿美元。很难从70亿美元增加到260亿美元来预测更好的利润率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Analysts do have positive free cash flow modeled, though–$13 million in 2022 and $90 million in 2023. That’s a long way from $600 million.</p><p><blockquote>不过，分析师确实模拟了正自由现金流——2022年为1300万美元，2023年为9000万美元。这距离6亿美元还有很长的路要走。</blockquote></p><p> And that’s just another way of saying that AMC bulls are a long way from making the math work.</p><p><blockquote>这只是AMC多头距离实现数学计算还有很长的路要走的另一种说法。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>AMC Stock Is Surging Again. How to Make Sense of the Move.<blockquote>AMC股价再次飙升。如何理解这一举动。</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\">\nAMC Stock Is Surging Again. How to Make Sense of the Move.<blockquote>AMC股价再次飙升。如何理解这一举动。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-02 17:54</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, that social media-fueled investor frenzy that has launched the likes of&nbsp;GameStop&nbsp;and&nbsp;BlackBerry&nbsp;into speculative territory.</p><p><blockquote>AMC院线股价飙升很容易被视为迷因交易疯狂，社交媒体推动的投资者狂热将游戏驿站和黑莓等公司带入了投机领域。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s possible that traditional investors have missed a fundamental change in the movie theater business—and it wouldn’t be the first time.</p><p><blockquote>但传统投资者可能错过了电影院业务的根本性变化——而且这已经不是第一次了。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of AMC (ticker: AMC) surged 23% on Tuesday, closing at $32.04—just off an all-time high of $36.72 set in late May. That puts the movie-theater chain’s market capitalization at roughly $16 billion, more than 15 times what it was in 2018, a record-breaking year at the box office.&nbsp;Shares were up another 34%, to $42.92, in premarket trading Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>AMC（股票代码：AMC）股价周二飙升23%，收于32.04美元，略低于5月底创下的36.72美元的历史高点。这使得这家连锁影院的市值约为160亿美元，是2018年票房破纪录的一年的15倍多。周三盘前交易中，该公司股价又上涨34%，至42.92美元。</blockquote></p><p> Even if investors missed an inflection point, though, the math doesn’t add up. The reason might be that market cap isn’t the right measure. Maybe it’s enterprise value, which is essentially market cap and debt. AMC’s enterprise value is about $26 billion, compared with $6.2 billion or so at the end of 2018.</p><p><blockquote>不过，即使投资者错过了拐点，数学也不成立。原因可能是市值不是正确的衡量标准。也许是企业价值，本质上是市值和债务。AMC的企业价值约为260亿美元，而2018年底为62亿美元左右。</blockquote></p><p> AMC added debt during the pandemic as theaters in the country’s biggest cities were dark for months. And the numbers make it easy to understand why: The U.S. box office in 2020 generated about $2.1 billion in ticket sales, down 81% from the 2018 record of $11.9 billion.</p><p><blockquote>AMC在疫情期间增加了债务，因为该国最大城市的影院连续几个月处于黑暗之中。这些数字很容易理解原因：2020年美国票房收入约为21亿美元，比2018年创纪录的119亿美元下降了81%。</blockquote></p><p> So, it seems investors have been vexed by movie theater economics. But it wouldn’t be the first time. The industry essentially went belly up at the turn of the millennium. Regal Cinemas, for instance, declared bankruptcy in 2001.</p><p><blockquote>因此，投资者似乎对电影院经济感到恼火。但这不是第一次了。这个行业在世纪之交基本上破产了。例如，富豪影院于2001年宣布破产。</blockquote></p><p> Back then, the industry had plenty of capacity because of a new theater design—stadium seating that gave a better view of the screen. That shift meant movie theater chains had to renovate or risk losing all their patrons to movie theaters that offered the better view. In the end, too many seats and not enough patrons meant the return on the stadium-seating investments never materialized.</p><p><blockquote>当时，该行业有足够的容量，因为一种新的剧院设计——体育场座位可以更好地观看屏幕。这种转变意味着连锁电影院必须翻新，否则就有可能失去所有顾客到视野更好的电影院。最终，太多的座位和不够的顾客意味着体育场座位投资的回报从未实现。</blockquote></p><p> The upshot was consolidation. With fewer operators, the number of screens stabilized. Between 2002 and 2007, Regal Cinemas became a cash-generating machine because the stock was mispriced. The stock returned 21% a year on average. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average both returned less than 9% a year on average over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>结果是整合。随着操作员的减少，屏幕数量稳定下来。2002年至2007年间，Regal Cinemas因股票定价错误而成为现金产生机器。该股平均每年回报率为21%。同期，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数的平均年回报率均低于9%。</blockquote></p><p> In those days, Regal Cinema’s enterprise value about $5 billion, or about 50% of total U.S. box office sales. That’s far short of AMC today. Something new has to be different for AMC to be worth it.</p><p><blockquote>当年，富豪影院的企业价值约为50亿美元，约占美国票房总收入的50%。这与今天的AMC相去甚远。新的东西必须与众不同，AMC才值得。</blockquote></p><p> Maybe the movie theater business is going to go through another period of consolidation, which can usher in another golden age of returns. AMC’s Tuesday gains, in fact, were catalyzed by new capital raised so the company could go on the offensive, acquiring defunct chains. Monopolies, after all, can be good for stock returns.</p><p><blockquote>也许电影院业务又要经历一段盘整期，可以迎来又一个回报的黄金时代。事实上，AMC周二的上涨是由筹集的新资金推动的，因此该公司可以继续进攻，收购已倒闭的连锁店。毕竟，垄断有利于股票回报。</blockquote></p><p> If AMC can increase market share and the U.S. box office sales can return to 2018 levels in a few years, total sales at might be $9 billion—$6 billion from tickets and $3 billion from concessions. Sales in 2018 amounted to $5.5 billion.</p><p><blockquote>如果AMC能够增加市场份额，并且美国票房销售额能够在几年内恢复到2018年的水平，那么总销售额可能会达到90亿美元——60亿美元来自门票，30亿美元来自特许经营。2018年销售额达55亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Then, with better gross profit margins derived from larger scale, AMC might be able to generate $600 million in free cash flow annually, which puts the stock at about a 4% free cash flow yield. The S&amp;P 500 trades for about a 3% free cash flow yield. The numbers can work—if they’re stretched.</p><p><blockquote>然后，随着规模的扩大带来更好的毛利率，AMC每年可能能够产生6亿美元的自由现金流，这使得该股的自由现金流收益率约为4%。标普500的自由现金流收益率约为3%。这些数字可以发挥作用——如果它们被拉伸的话。</blockquote></p><p> There are problems with this scenario, though. There are lots of ifs and mights—and AMC has never generated cash flow like that in the past. Arriving at $600 million in free cash flow is more about justifying current valuations than predicting what is likely.</p><p><blockquote>不过，这种情况存在问题。有很多如果和可能——AMC过去从未产生过这样的现金流。达到6亿美元的自由现金流更多的是为了证明当前估值的合理性，而不是预测可能发生的情况。</blockquote></p><p> Also, with mergers and acquisitions, AMC market shares might rise, but there are still competitors. Regal Cinemas is still out there, owned by Cineworld Holdings (CINE. London). So is Cinemark (CNK). There’s not a true monopoly.</p><p><blockquote>此外，通过并购，AMC的市场份额可能会上升，但仍然存在竞争对手。富豪影院仍然存在，归电影世界控股公司所有。伦敦）。喜满客（CNK）也是如此。没有真正的垄断。</blockquote></p><p> AMC and its peers have to deal with streaming, too. Windows for exclusive theater showings are shrinking. The pandemic has accelerated that. And if AMC gets too large and demanding for movie makers, the talent can always go to streaming faster, hurting box office sales.</p><p><blockquote>AMC及其同行也必须应对流媒体问题。独家影院放映的窗口正在缩小。疫情加速了这一点。如果AMC变得太大，对电影制作人的要求太高，人才总是可以更快地转向流媒体，从而损害票房销售。</blockquote></p><p> There is also the problem of the peer stocks. They aren’t trading like this is a brave new world for theaters. Cineworld stock is up 484% from its 52-week low, but shares are still off 72% from all-time highs. Cinemark shares are up 222% from their 52-week low. They are down 47% from their all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>还有同行股票的问题。他们并不认为这是剧院的一个勇敢的新世界。Cineworld股价较52周低点上涨484%，但仍较历史高点下跌72%。喜满客股价较52周低点上涨222%。它们比历史高点下跌了47%。</blockquote></p><p> AMC stock, again, is up almost 1,600% from its 52-week low and is down just 13% from its May all-time high.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股价再次较52周低点上涨近1,600%，较5月份历史高点仅下跌13%。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street just doesn’t see the potential either. Nine analysts cover the stock. The average analyst price target is about $5. Before the pandemic, the average analyst price target was $15. But there were fewer shares back then. The old target enterprise value was roughly $7 billion. It’s tough to get from $7 billion to $26 billion predicting better margins.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街也没有看到潜力。九名分析师关注该股。分析师平均目标价约为5美元。在疫情爆发之前，分析师的平均目标价为15美元。但当时股票较少。旧的目标企业价值约为70亿美元。很难从70亿美元增加到260亿美元来预测更好的利润率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Analysts do have positive free cash flow modeled, though–$13 million in 2022 and $90 million in 2023. That’s a long way from $600 million.</p><p><blockquote>不过，分析师确实模拟了正自由现金流——2022年为1300万美元，2023年为9000万美元。这距离6亿美元还有很长的路要走。</blockquote></p><p> And that’s just another way of saying that AMC bulls are a long way from making the math work.</p><p><blockquote>这只是AMC多头距离实现数学计算还有很长的路要走的另一种说法。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/amc-rockets-higher-is-it-worth-it-maybe-51622594691?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Barrons</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":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/amc-rockets-higher-is-it-worth-it-maybe-51622594691?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1188552613","content_text":"AMC Entertainment‘s skyrocketing stock price would be easy to dismiss as just meme-trade madness, that social media-fueled investor frenzy that has launched the likes of GameStop and BlackBerry into speculative territory.\nBut it’s possible that traditional investors have missed a fundamental change in the movie theater business—and it wouldn’t be the first time.\nShares of AMC (ticker: AMC) surged 23% on Tuesday, closing at $32.04—just off an all-time high of $36.72 set in late May. That puts the movie-theater chain’s market capitalization at roughly $16 billion, more than 15 times what it was in 2018, a record-breaking year at the box office. Shares were up another 34%, to $42.92, in premarket trading Wednesday.\nEven if investors missed an inflection point, though, the math doesn’t add up. The reason might be that market cap isn’t the right measure. Maybe it’s enterprise value, which is essentially market cap and debt. AMC’s enterprise value is about $26 billion, compared with $6.2 billion or so at the end of 2018.\nAMC added debt during the pandemic as theaters in the country’s biggest cities were dark for months. And the numbers make it easy to understand why: The U.S. box office in 2020 generated about $2.1 billion in ticket sales, down 81% from the 2018 record of $11.9 billion.\nSo, it seems investors have been vexed by movie theater economics. But it wouldn’t be the first time. The industry essentially went belly up at the turn of the millennium. Regal Cinemas, for instance, declared bankruptcy in 2001.\nBack then, the industry had plenty of capacity because of a new theater design—stadium seating that gave a better view of the screen. That shift meant movie theater chains had to renovate or risk losing all their patrons to movie theaters that offered the better view. In the end, too many seats and not enough patrons meant the return on the stadium-seating investments never materialized.\nThe upshot was consolidation. With fewer operators, the number of screens stabilized. Between 2002 and 2007, Regal Cinemas became a cash-generating machine because the stock was mispriced. The stock returned 21% a year on average. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average both returned less than 9% a year on average over the same period.\nIn those days, Regal Cinema’s enterprise value about $5 billion, or about 50% of total U.S. box office sales. That’s far short of AMC today. Something new has to be different for AMC to be worth it.\nMaybe the movie theater business is going to go through another period of consolidation, which can usher in another golden age of returns. AMC’s Tuesday gains, in fact, were catalyzed by new capital raised so the company could go on the offensive, acquiring defunct chains. Monopolies, after all, can be good for stock returns.\nIf AMC can increase market share and the U.S. box office sales can return to 2018 levels in a few years, total sales at might be $9 billion—$6 billion from tickets and $3 billion from concessions. Sales in 2018 amounted to $5.5 billion.\nThen, with better gross profit margins derived from larger scale, AMC might be able to generate $600 million in free cash flow annually, which puts the stock at about a 4% free cash flow yield. The S&P 500 trades for about a 3% free cash flow yield. The numbers can work—if they’re stretched.\nThere are problems with this scenario, though. There are lots of ifs and mights—and AMC has never generated cash flow like that in the past. Arriving at $600 million in free cash flow is more about justifying current valuations than predicting what is likely.\nAlso, with mergers and acquisitions, AMC market shares might rise, but there are still competitors. Regal Cinemas is still out there, owned by Cineworld Holdings (CINE. London). So is Cinemark (CNK). There’s not a true monopoly.\nAMC and its peers have to deal with streaming, too. Windows for exclusive theater showings are shrinking. The pandemic has accelerated that. And if AMC gets too large and demanding for movie makers, the talent can always go to streaming faster, hurting box office sales.\nThere is also the problem of the peer stocks. They aren’t trading like this is a brave new world for theaters. Cineworld stock is up 484% from its 52-week low, but shares are still off 72% from all-time highs. Cinemark shares are up 222% from their 52-week low. They are down 47% from their all-time high.\nAMC stock, again, is up almost 1,600% from its 52-week low and is down just 13% from its May all-time high.\nWall Street just doesn’t see the potential either. Nine analysts cover the stock. The average analyst price target is about $5. Before the pandemic, the average analyst price target was $15. But there were fewer shares back then. The old target enterprise value was roughly $7 billion. It’s tough to get from $7 billion to $26 billion predicting better margins.\nAnalysts do have positive free cash flow modeled, though–$13 million in 2022 and $90 million in 2023. That’s a long way from $600 million.\nAnd that’s just another way of saying that AMC bulls are a long way from making the math work.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":870,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386416566,"gmtCreate":1613239801355,"gmtModify":1634554106612,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/386416566","repostId":"2110026963","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":332,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":110579299,"gmtCreate":1622473438911,"gmtModify":1634101223659,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/110579299","repostId":"2139453630","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1085,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388676512,"gmtCreate":1613055805736,"gmtModify":1703768949107,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cool","listText":"Cool","text":"Cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388676512","repostId":"2110041062","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":404,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388644371,"gmtCreate":1613055548593,"gmtModify":1703768938431,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388644371","repostId":"2110044852","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":386,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":134644129,"gmtCreate":1622231959061,"gmtModify":1634182645761,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Dip","listText":"Dip","text":"Dip","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/134644129","repostId":"2138765488","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":274,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":328958563,"gmtCreate":1615481521552,"gmtModify":1703489839230,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/328958563","repostId":"1123395191","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":241,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":360522776,"gmtCreate":1613958343395,"gmtModify":1634551776357,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/360522776","repostId":"1161529893","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1161529893","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1613733842,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1161529893?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-19 19:24","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Goldman Sachs is joining the robo-investing party — should you?<blockquote>高盛正在加入机器人投资行列——你应该加入吗？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1161529893","media":"Marketwatch","summary":"‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.Robo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.Now anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by so","content":"<p>  ‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.  Robo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.</p><p><blockquote>加州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯说，就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜。他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。机器人投资在几乎每个经纪平台上都变得越来越普遍。直到周二，高盛GS(-0.91%)将其机器人咨询服务Marcus限制为至少有1000万美元可投资的人。</blockquote></p><p> Now anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by some of Goldman Sachs’ wealthiest clients for a 0.35% annual advisory fee. But investing experts say there are more costs to consider before jumping on the robo-investing train.</p><p><blockquote>现在，任何拥有至少1,000美元可投资的人都可以使用高盛一些最富有的客户使用的相同交易算法，每年只需支付0.35%的咨询费。但投资专家表示，在跳上机器人投资列车之前，需要考虑更多成本。</blockquote></p><p> “Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.</p><p><blockquote>“就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜，”加利福尼亚州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯(Vance Barse)说，他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。</blockquote></p><p> Although the 35 basis-point price tag is a “loss leader” to Goldman Sachs, he said companies typically make such offers in order to attract clients to cross-sell them banking products.</p><p><blockquote>尽管35个基点的价格标签对高盛来说是一个“亏损领头羊”，但他表示，公司通常会提出这样的报价，以吸引客户向他们交叉销售银行产品。</blockquote></p><p> “People forget that banks are ultimately in the business of making money,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“人们忘记了银行最终是为了赚钱，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Goldman Sachs declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>高盛拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p> The company is among other major financial-services firms offering digital advisers, including Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab SCHW, +1.03% and startups such as Betterment and Wealthfront.</p><p><blockquote>该公司是其他提供数字顾问的主要金融服务公司之一，包括Vanguard、Fidelity和Schwab SCHW，+1.03%，以及Betterment和Wealthfront等初创公司。</blockquote></p><p> Fees for robo advisers can start at around 0.25%, and increase to 1% and above for traditional brokers. A survey of nearly 1,000 financial planners by Inside Information, a trade publication, found that the bigger the portfolio, the lower the percentage clients paid in fees.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问的费用从0.25%左右开始，传统经纪商的费用会增加到1%及以上。行业出版物Inside Information对近1,000名理财规划师进行的一项调查发现，投资组合越大，客户支付的费用比例就越低。</blockquote></p><p> The median annual charge hovered at around 1% for portfolios of $1 million or less, and 0.5% for portfolios worth $5 million to $10 million.</p><p><blockquote>对于100万美元或以下的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在1%左右，对于价值500万至1000万美元的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在0.5%左右。</blockquote></p><p> Robo advisers like those on offer from Goldman Sachs and Betterment differ from robo platforms like Robinhood. The former suggest portfolios focused on exchange-traded funds, while Robinhood allows users to invest in individual ETFs, stocks, options and even cryptocurrencies.</p><p><blockquote>高盛和Betterment提供的机器人顾问与Robinhood等机器人平台不同。前者建议投资组合专注于交易所交易基金，而Robinhood允许用户投资个人ETF、股票、期权甚至加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robo investing as a self-driving car</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人投资作为自动驾驶汽车</b></blockquote></p><p> Consumers have turned to robo-investing at unprecedented levels during the pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在疫情期间，消费者以前所未有的水平转向机器人投资。</blockquote></p><p> The rate of new accounts opened jumped between 50% and 300% during the first quarter of 2020 compared to the fourth quarter of last year, according to a May report published by research and advisory firm Aite Group.</p><p><blockquote>根据研究和咨询公司艾特集团5月份发布的一份报告，与去年第四季度相比，2020年第一季度的新开户率跃升了50%至300%。</blockquote></p><p> So what is rob-investing? Think of it like a self-driving car.</p><p><blockquote>那么什么是rob投资呢？把它想象成一辆自动驾驶汽车。</blockquote></p><p> You put in your destination, buckle up in the backseat and your driver (robo adviser) will get there. You, the passenger, can’t easily slam the breaks if you fear your driver is leading you in the wrong direction. Nor can you put your foot on the gas pedal if you’re in a rush and want to get to your destination faster.</p><p><blockquote>你输入你的目的地，在后座系好安全带，你的司机（机器人顾问）就会到达那里。作为乘客，如果你担心你的司机把你引向错误的方向，你就不能轻易刹车。如果您赶时间并想更快地到达目的地，也不能踩油门。</blockquote></p><p> Robo-investing platforms use advanced-trading algorithm software to design investment portfolios based on factors such as an individual’s appetite for risk-taking and desired short-term and long-term returns.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资平台使用先进的交易算法软件，根据个人的风险偏好以及期望的短期和长期回报等因素来设计投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> There are over 200 platforms that provide these services charging typically no more than a 0.5% annual advisory fee, compared to the 1% annual fee human investment advisors charge.</p><p><blockquote>有200多个平台提供这些服务，每年收取的咨询费通常不超过0.5%，而人力投资顾问收取的年费为1%。</blockquote></p><p> And rather than investing entirely on your own, which can become a second job and lead to emotional investment decisions, robo advisers handle buying and selling assets.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问处理资产的买卖，而不是完全自己投资，这可能成为第二份工作并导致情绪化的投资决策。</blockquote></p><p> Cynthia Loh, Schwab vice president of Digital Advice and Innovation, disagrees, and argues that robo investing doesn’t mean giving technology control of your money. Schwab, she said, has a team of investment experts who oversee investment strategy and keep watch during periods of market volatility, although some services have more input from humans than others.</p><p><blockquote>嘉信理财数字咨询和创新副总裁辛西娅·洛(Cynthia Loh)不同意这种观点，她认为机器人投资并不意味着让技术控制你的资金。她说，嘉信理财拥有一支投资专家团队，负责监督投资策略并在市场波动期间进行监控，尽管有些服务比其他服务有更多的人工输入。</blockquote></p><p> As she recently wrote on MarketWatch: “One common misconception about automated investing is that choosing a robo adviser essentially means handing control of your money over to robots. The truth is that robo solutions have a combination of automated and human components running things behind the scenes.”</p><p><blockquote>正如她最近在MarketWatch上所写：“关于自动化投资的一个常见误解是，选择机器人顾问本质上意味着将资金的控制权交给机器人。事实是，机器人解决方案结合了自动化和人工组件，在幕后运行事物。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robos appeal to inexperienced investors</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人吸引缺乏经验的投资者</b></blockquote></p><p> Robo investing tends to appeal to inexperienced investors or ones who don’t have the time or energy to manage their own portfolios. These investors can take comfort in the “set it and forget it approach to investing and overtime let the markets do their thing,” Barse said.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资往往吸引缺乏经验的投资者或没有时间或精力管理自己投资组合的投资者。巴尔斯说，这些投资者可以对“一劳永逸”的投资方法感到放心，随着时间的推移，让市场做自己的事情”。</blockquote></p><p> That makes it much easier to stomach market volatility knowing that you don’t necessarily have to make spur-of-the-moment decisions to buy or sell assets, said Tiffany Lam-Balfour, an investing and retirement specialist at NerdWallet.</p><p><blockquote>NerdWallet的投资和退休专家蒂芙尼·拉姆-贝尔福(Tiffany Lam-Balfour)表示，这使得你更容易承受市场波动，因为你不一定必须做出购买或出售资产的冲动决定。</blockquote></p><p> “When you’re investing, you don’t want to keep looking at the market and going ‘Oh I need to get out of this,’” she said. “You want to leave it to the professionals to get you through it because they know what your time horizon is, and they’ll adjust your portfolio automatically for you.”</p><p><blockquote>“当你投资时，你不会想一直关注市场并说‘哦，我需要摆脱困境’，”她说。“你想让专业人士来帮你度过难关，因为他们知道你的时间范围，他们会自动为你调整你的投资组合。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> That said, “you can’t just expect your investments will only go up. Even if you had the world’s best human financial adviser you can’t expect that.”</p><p><blockquote>也就是说，“你不能指望你的投资只会上涨。即使你有世界上最好的人类财务顾问，你也不能指望这一点。”</blockquote></p><p> Others disagree, and say robo advisers appeal to older investors. “Planning for and paying yourself in retirement is complex. There are many options out there to help investors through it, and robo investing is one of them,” Loh said.</p><p><blockquote>其他人不同意，并表示机器人顾问对老年投资者有吸引力。“退休后的规划和支付费用很复杂。有很多选择可以帮助投资者度过难关，机器人投资就是其中之一，”Loh说。</blockquote></p><p> “Many thoughtful, long-term investors have discovered that they want a more modern, streamlined, and inexpensive way to invest, and robo investing fits the bill. They are happy to let technology handle the mundane activities that are harder and more time-consuming for investors to do themselves,” she added.</p><p><blockquote>“许多深思熟虑的长期投资者发现，他们想要一种更现代、更简化、更便宜的投资方式，而机器人投资正好符合这一要求。他们很乐意让技术来处理更困难、更耗时的日常活动。投资者自己做，”她补充道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>There is often no door to knock on</b></p><p><blockquote><b>常常无门可敲</b></blockquote></p><p> Your robo adviser only knows what you tell it. The simplistic questionnaire you’re required to fill out will on most robo-investing platforms will collect information on your annual income, desired age to retire and the level of risk you’re willing to take on.</p><p><blockquote>你的机器人顾问只知道你告诉它什么。大多数机器人投资平台上要求您填写的简单问卷将收集有关您的年收入、期望退休年龄以及您愿意承担的风险水平的信息。</blockquote></p><p> It won’t however know if you just had a child and would like to begin saving for their education down the road or if you recently lost your job.</p><p><blockquote>然而，它不会知道你是否刚刚有了一个孩子，并想开始为他们的教育存钱，或者你是否最近失业了。</blockquote></p><p> “The question then becomes to whom does that person go to for advice and does that platform offer that and if so, to what level of complexity?” said Barse.</p><p><blockquote>“那么问题就变成了那个人向谁寻求建议？该平台是否提供建议？如果提供，复杂程度如何？”巴斯说。</blockquote></p><p> Not all platforms give individualized investment advice and the hybrid models that do offer advice from a human tend to charge higher annual fees.</p><p><blockquote>并非所有平台都提供个性化投资建议，提供人工建议的混合模式往往会收取更高的年费。</blockquote></p><p> Additionally, a robo adviser won’t necessarily “manage your money with tax efficiency at front of mind,” said Roger Ma, a certified financial planner at Lifelaidout, a New York City-based financial advisory group.</p><p><blockquote>此外，纽约市财务咨询集团Lifelaidout的注册财务规划师罗杰·马(Roger Ma)表示，机器人顾问不一定“在管理资金时首先考虑税收效率”。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, one common way investors offset the taxes they pay on long-term investments is by selling assets that have accrued losses. Traditional advisers often specialize in constructing portfolios that lead to the most tax-efficient outcomes, said Ma, who is the author of “Work Your Money, Not Your Life”.</p><p><blockquote>例如，投资者抵消长期投资税款的一种常见方式是出售已累计亏损的资产。《工作你的钱，而不是你的生活》一书的作者马说，传统顾问通常专注于构建能带来最节税结果的投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> But with robo investing, the trades that are made for you are the same ones that are being made for a slew of other investors who may fall under a different tax-bracket than you.</p><p><blockquote>但通过机器人投资，为您进行的交易与为许多其他投资者进行的交易是相同的，这些投资者可能属于与您不同的税级。</blockquote></p><p> On top of that, while robo investing may feel like a simplistic way to get into investing, especially for beginners it can “overcomplicate investing,” Ma said.</p><p><blockquote>最重要的是，虽然机器人投资可能感觉像是一种简单的投资方式，特别是对于初学者来说，它可能会“使投资过于复杂”，马云说。</blockquote></p><p> “If you are just looking to dip your toe in and you want to feel like you’re invested in a diversified portfolio, I wouldn’t say definitely don’t do a robo adviser,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你只是想尝试一下，并且想感觉自己投资于多元化的投资组合，我不会说绝对不要聘请机器人顾问，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t rule out investing through a target-date fund that selects a single fund to invest in and adjusts the position over time based on their investment goals, he added.</p><p><blockquote>他补充说，不要排除通过目标日期基金进行投资，该基金选择单一基金进行投资，并根据投资目标随着时间的推移调整头寸。</blockquote></p><p> But not everyone can tell the difference between robo advice and advice from a human being. In 2015, MarketWatch asked four prominent robo advisers and four of the traditional, flesh-and-blood variety to construct portfolios for a hypothetical 35-year-old investor with $40,000 to invest.</p><p><blockquote>但并不是每个人都能区分机器人的建议和人类的建议。2015年，MarketWatch请四位著名的机器人顾问和四位传统的有血有肉的机器人顾问为一位假设的35岁投资者构建投资组合，投资金额为40,000美元。</blockquote></p><p> The results were, perhaps, surprising for critics of robo advisers. The robots’ suggestions were “not massively different” from what the human advisers proposed, said Michael Kitces, Pinnacle Advisory Group’s research director, after reviewing the results.</p><p><blockquote>对于机器人顾问的批评者来说，结果或许令人惊讶。Pinnacle Advisory Group的研究总监Michael Kitces在审查结果后表示，机器人的建议与人类顾问的建议“没有太大不同”。</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>Goldman Sachs is joining the robo-investing party — should you?<blockquote>高盛正在加入机器人投资行列——你应该加入吗？</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\">\nGoldman Sachs is joining the robo-investing party — should you?<blockquote>高盛正在加入机器人投资行列——你应该加入吗？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Marketwatch</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-02-19 19:24</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  ‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.  Robo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.</p><p><blockquote>加州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯说，就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜。他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。机器人投资在几乎每个经纪平台上都变得越来越普遍。直到周二，高盛GS(-0.91%)将其机器人咨询服务Marcus限制为至少有1000万美元可投资的人。</blockquote></p><p> Now anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by some of Goldman Sachs’ wealthiest clients for a 0.35% annual advisory fee. But investing experts say there are more costs to consider before jumping on the robo-investing train.</p><p><blockquote>现在，任何拥有至少1,000美元可投资的人都可以使用高盛一些最富有的客户使用的相同交易算法，每年只需支付0.35%的咨询费。但投资专家表示，在跳上机器人投资列车之前，需要考虑更多成本。</blockquote></p><p> “Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.</p><p><blockquote>“就像在拉斯维加斯一样，众议院通常会获胜，”加利福尼亚州圣地亚哥的财务顾问万斯·巴斯(Vance Barse)说，他经营着一家名为Your Dedicated Fiduciary的公司。</blockquote></p><p> Although the 35 basis-point price tag is a “loss leader” to Goldman Sachs, he said companies typically make such offers in order to attract clients to cross-sell them banking products.</p><p><blockquote>尽管35个基点的价格标签对高盛来说是一个“亏损领头羊”，但他表示，公司通常会提出这样的报价，以吸引客户向他们交叉销售银行产品。</blockquote></p><p> “People forget that banks are ultimately in the business of making money,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“人们忘记了银行最终是为了赚钱，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Goldman Sachs declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>高盛拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p> The company is among other major financial-services firms offering digital advisers, including Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab SCHW, +1.03% and startups such as Betterment and Wealthfront.</p><p><blockquote>该公司是其他提供数字顾问的主要金融服务公司之一，包括Vanguard、Fidelity和Schwab SCHW，+1.03%，以及Betterment和Wealthfront等初创公司。</blockquote></p><p> Fees for robo advisers can start at around 0.25%, and increase to 1% and above for traditional brokers. A survey of nearly 1,000 financial planners by Inside Information, a trade publication, found that the bigger the portfolio, the lower the percentage clients paid in fees.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问的费用从0.25%左右开始，传统经纪商的费用会增加到1%及以上。行业出版物Inside Information对近1,000名理财规划师进行的一项调查发现，投资组合越大，客户支付的费用比例就越低。</blockquote></p><p> The median annual charge hovered at around 1% for portfolios of $1 million or less, and 0.5% for portfolios worth $5 million to $10 million.</p><p><blockquote>对于100万美元或以下的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在1%左右，对于价值500万至1000万美元的投资组合，年费中位数徘徊在0.5%左右。</blockquote></p><p> Robo advisers like those on offer from Goldman Sachs and Betterment differ from robo platforms like Robinhood. The former suggest portfolios focused on exchange-traded funds, while Robinhood allows users to invest in individual ETFs, stocks, options and even cryptocurrencies.</p><p><blockquote>高盛和Betterment提供的机器人顾问与Robinhood等机器人平台不同。前者建议投资组合专注于交易所交易基金，而Robinhood允许用户投资个人ETF、股票、期权甚至加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robo investing as a self-driving car</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人投资作为自动驾驶汽车</b></blockquote></p><p> Consumers have turned to robo-investing at unprecedented levels during the pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在疫情期间，消费者以前所未有的水平转向机器人投资。</blockquote></p><p> The rate of new accounts opened jumped between 50% and 300% during the first quarter of 2020 compared to the fourth quarter of last year, according to a May report published by research and advisory firm Aite Group.</p><p><blockquote>根据研究和咨询公司艾特集团5月份发布的一份报告，与去年第四季度相比，2020年第一季度的新开户率跃升了50%至300%。</blockquote></p><p> So what is rob-investing? Think of it like a self-driving car.</p><p><blockquote>那么什么是rob投资呢？把它想象成一辆自动驾驶汽车。</blockquote></p><p> You put in your destination, buckle up in the backseat and your driver (robo adviser) will get there. You, the passenger, can’t easily slam the breaks if you fear your driver is leading you in the wrong direction. Nor can you put your foot on the gas pedal if you’re in a rush and want to get to your destination faster.</p><p><blockquote>你输入你的目的地，在后座系好安全带，你的司机（机器人顾问）就会到达那里。作为乘客，如果你担心你的司机把你引向错误的方向，你就不能轻易刹车。如果您赶时间并想更快地到达目的地，也不能踩油门。</blockquote></p><p> Robo-investing platforms use advanced-trading algorithm software to design investment portfolios based on factors such as an individual’s appetite for risk-taking and desired short-term and long-term returns.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资平台使用先进的交易算法软件，根据个人的风险偏好以及期望的短期和长期回报等因素来设计投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> There are over 200 platforms that provide these services charging typically no more than a 0.5% annual advisory fee, compared to the 1% annual fee human investment advisors charge.</p><p><blockquote>有200多个平台提供这些服务，每年收取的咨询费通常不超过0.5%，而人力投资顾问收取的年费为1%。</blockquote></p><p> And rather than investing entirely on your own, which can become a second job and lead to emotional investment decisions, robo advisers handle buying and selling assets.</p><p><blockquote>机器人顾问处理资产的买卖，而不是完全自己投资，这可能成为第二份工作并导致情绪化的投资决策。</blockquote></p><p> Cynthia Loh, Schwab vice president of Digital Advice and Innovation, disagrees, and argues that robo investing doesn’t mean giving technology control of your money. Schwab, she said, has a team of investment experts who oversee investment strategy and keep watch during periods of market volatility, although some services have more input from humans than others.</p><p><blockquote>嘉信理财数字咨询和创新副总裁辛西娅·洛(Cynthia Loh)不同意这种观点，她认为机器人投资并不意味着让技术控制你的资金。她说，嘉信理财拥有一支投资专家团队，负责监督投资策略并在市场波动期间进行监控，尽管有些服务比其他服务有更多的人工输入。</blockquote></p><p> As she recently wrote on MarketWatch: “One common misconception about automated investing is that choosing a robo adviser essentially means handing control of your money over to robots. The truth is that robo solutions have a combination of automated and human components running things behind the scenes.”</p><p><blockquote>正如她最近在MarketWatch上所写：“关于自动化投资的一个常见误解是，选择机器人顾问本质上意味着将资金的控制权交给机器人。事实是，机器人解决方案结合了自动化和人工组件，在幕后运行事物。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>Robos appeal to inexperienced investors</b></p><p><blockquote><b>机器人吸引缺乏经验的投资者</b></blockquote></p><p> Robo investing tends to appeal to inexperienced investors or ones who don’t have the time or energy to manage their own portfolios. These investors can take comfort in the “set it and forget it approach to investing and overtime let the markets do their thing,” Barse said.</p><p><blockquote>机器人投资往往吸引缺乏经验的投资者或没有时间或精力管理自己投资组合的投资者。巴尔斯说，这些投资者可以对“一劳永逸”的投资方法感到放心，随着时间的推移，让市场做自己的事情”。</blockquote></p><p> That makes it much easier to stomach market volatility knowing that you don’t necessarily have to make spur-of-the-moment decisions to buy or sell assets, said Tiffany Lam-Balfour, an investing and retirement specialist at NerdWallet.</p><p><blockquote>NerdWallet的投资和退休专家蒂芙尼·拉姆-贝尔福(Tiffany Lam-Balfour)表示，这使得你更容易承受市场波动，因为你不一定必须做出购买或出售资产的冲动决定。</blockquote></p><p> “When you’re investing, you don’t want to keep looking at the market and going ‘Oh I need to get out of this,’” she said. “You want to leave it to the professionals to get you through it because they know what your time horizon is, and they’ll adjust your portfolio automatically for you.”</p><p><blockquote>“当你投资时，你不会想一直关注市场并说‘哦，我需要摆脱困境’，”她说。“你想让专业人士来帮你度过难关，因为他们知道你的时间范围，他们会自动为你调整你的投资组合。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> That said, “you can’t just expect your investments will only go up. Even if you had the world’s best human financial adviser you can’t expect that.”</p><p><blockquote>也就是说，“你不能指望你的投资只会上涨。即使你有世界上最好的人类财务顾问，你也不能指望这一点。”</blockquote></p><p> Others disagree, and say robo advisers appeal to older investors. “Planning for and paying yourself in retirement is complex. There are many options out there to help investors through it, and robo investing is one of them,” Loh said.</p><p><blockquote>其他人不同意，并表示机器人顾问对老年投资者有吸引力。“退休后的规划和支付费用很复杂。有很多选择可以帮助投资者度过难关，机器人投资就是其中之一，”Loh说。</blockquote></p><p> “Many thoughtful, long-term investors have discovered that they want a more modern, streamlined, and inexpensive way to invest, and robo investing fits the bill. They are happy to let technology handle the mundane activities that are harder and more time-consuming for investors to do themselves,” she added.</p><p><blockquote>“许多深思熟虑的长期投资者发现，他们想要一种更现代、更简化、更便宜的投资方式，而机器人投资正好符合这一要求。他们很乐意让技术来处理更困难、更耗时的日常活动。投资者自己做，”她补充道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>There is often no door to knock on</b></p><p><blockquote><b>常常无门可敲</b></blockquote></p><p> Your robo adviser only knows what you tell it. The simplistic questionnaire you’re required to fill out will on most robo-investing platforms will collect information on your annual income, desired age to retire and the level of risk you’re willing to take on.</p><p><blockquote>你的机器人顾问只知道你告诉它什么。大多数机器人投资平台上要求您填写的简单问卷将收集有关您的年收入、期望退休年龄以及您愿意承担的风险水平的信息。</blockquote></p><p> It won’t however know if you just had a child and would like to begin saving for their education down the road or if you recently lost your job.</p><p><blockquote>然而，它不会知道你是否刚刚有了一个孩子，并想开始为他们的教育存钱，或者你是否最近失业了。</blockquote></p><p> “The question then becomes to whom does that person go to for advice and does that platform offer that and if so, to what level of complexity?” said Barse.</p><p><blockquote>“那么问题就变成了那个人向谁寻求建议？该平台是否提供建议？如果提供，复杂程度如何？”巴斯说。</blockquote></p><p> Not all platforms give individualized investment advice and the hybrid models that do offer advice from a human tend to charge higher annual fees.</p><p><blockquote>并非所有平台都提供个性化投资建议，提供人工建议的混合模式往往会收取更高的年费。</blockquote></p><p> Additionally, a robo adviser won’t necessarily “manage your money with tax efficiency at front of mind,” said Roger Ma, a certified financial planner at Lifelaidout, a New York City-based financial advisory group.</p><p><blockquote>此外，纽约市财务咨询集团Lifelaidout的注册财务规划师罗杰·马(Roger Ma)表示，机器人顾问不一定“在管理资金时首先考虑税收效率”。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, one common way investors offset the taxes they pay on long-term investments is by selling assets that have accrued losses. Traditional advisers often specialize in constructing portfolios that lead to the most tax-efficient outcomes, said Ma, who is the author of “Work Your Money, Not Your Life”.</p><p><blockquote>例如，投资者抵消长期投资税款的一种常见方式是出售已累计亏损的资产。《工作你的钱，而不是你的生活》一书的作者马说，传统顾问通常专注于构建能带来最节税结果的投资组合。</blockquote></p><p> But with robo investing, the trades that are made for you are the same ones that are being made for a slew of other investors who may fall under a different tax-bracket than you.</p><p><blockquote>但通过机器人投资，为您进行的交易与为许多其他投资者进行的交易是相同的，这些投资者可能属于与您不同的税级。</blockquote></p><p> On top of that, while robo investing may feel like a simplistic way to get into investing, especially for beginners it can “overcomplicate investing,” Ma said.</p><p><blockquote>最重要的是，虽然机器人投资可能感觉像是一种简单的投资方式，特别是对于初学者来说，它可能会“使投资过于复杂”，马云说。</blockquote></p><p> “If you are just looking to dip your toe in and you want to feel like you’re invested in a diversified portfolio, I wouldn’t say definitely don’t do a robo adviser,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你只是想尝试一下，并且想感觉自己投资于多元化的投资组合，我不会说绝对不要聘请机器人顾问，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t rule out investing through a target-date fund that selects a single fund to invest in and adjusts the position over time based on their investment goals, he added.</p><p><blockquote>他补充说，不要排除通过目标日期基金进行投资，该基金选择单一基金进行投资，并根据投资目标随着时间的推移调整头寸。</blockquote></p><p> But not everyone can tell the difference between robo advice and advice from a human being. In 2015, MarketWatch asked four prominent robo advisers and four of the traditional, flesh-and-blood variety to construct portfolios for a hypothetical 35-year-old investor with $40,000 to invest.</p><p><blockquote>但并不是每个人都能区分机器人的建议和人类的建议。2015年，MarketWatch请四位著名的机器人顾问和四位传统的有血有肉的机器人顾问为一位假设的35岁投资者构建投资组合，投资金额为40,000美元。</blockquote></p><p> The results were, perhaps, surprising for critics of robo advisers. The robots’ suggestions were “not massively different” from what the human advisers proposed, said Michael Kitces, Pinnacle Advisory Group’s research director, after reviewing the results.</p><p><blockquote>对于机器人顾问的批评者来说，结果或许令人惊讶。Pinnacle Advisory Group的研究总监Michael Kitces在审查结果后表示，机器人的建议与人类顾问的建议“没有太大不同”。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-sachs-is-joining-the-robo-investing-party-should-you-11613658128?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":{},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-sachs-is-joining-the-robo-investing-party-should-you-11613658128?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1161529893","content_text":"‘Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.\n\nRobo investing has become increasingly ubiquitous on practically every brokerage platform. Until Tuesday, Goldman Sachs GS, -0.91% restricted its robo-advisory service, Marcus, to people who had at least $10 million to invest.\nNow anyone with at least $1,000 to invest in can access the same trading algorithms that have been used by some of Goldman Sachs’ wealthiest clients for a 0.35% annual advisory fee. But investing experts say there are more costs to consider before jumping on the robo-investing train.\n“Much like in Vegas, the house generally wins,” said Vance Barse, a San Diego, California-based financial advisor who runs a company called Your Dedicated Fiduciary.\nAlthough the 35 basis-point price tag is a “loss leader” to Goldman Sachs, he said companies typically make such offers in order to attract clients to cross-sell them banking products.\n“People forget that banks are ultimately in the business of making money,” he said.\nGoldman Sachs declined to comment.\nThe company is among other major financial-services firms offering digital advisers, including Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab SCHW, +1.03% and startups such as Betterment and Wealthfront.\nFees for robo advisers can start at around 0.25%, and increase to 1% and above for traditional brokers. A survey of nearly 1,000 financial planners by Inside Information, a trade publication, found that the bigger the portfolio, the lower the percentage clients paid in fees.\nThe median annual charge hovered at around 1% for portfolios of $1 million or less, and 0.5% for portfolios worth $5 million to $10 million.\nRobo advisers like those on offer from Goldman Sachs and Betterment differ from robo platforms like Robinhood. The former suggest portfolios focused on exchange-traded funds, while Robinhood allows users to invest in individual ETFs, stocks, options and even cryptocurrencies.\nRobo investing as a self-driving car\nConsumers have turned to robo-investing at unprecedented levels during the pandemic.\nThe rate of new accounts opened jumped between 50% and 300% during the first quarter of 2020 compared to the fourth quarter of last year, according to a May report published by research and advisory firm Aite Group.\nSo what is rob-investing? Think of it like a self-driving car.\nYou put in your destination, buckle up in the backseat and your driver (robo adviser) will get there. You, the passenger, can’t easily slam the breaks if you fear your driver is leading you in the wrong direction. Nor can you put your foot on the gas pedal if you’re in a rush and want to get to your destination faster.\nRobo-investing platforms use advanced-trading algorithm software to design investment portfolios based on factors such as an individual’s appetite for risk-taking and desired short-term and long-term returns.\nThere are over 200 platforms that provide these services charging typically no more than a 0.5% annual advisory fee, compared to the 1% annual fee human investment advisors charge.\nAnd rather than investing entirely on your own, which can become a second job and lead to emotional investment decisions, robo advisers handle buying and selling assets.\nCynthia Loh, Schwab vice president of Digital Advice and Innovation, disagrees, and argues that robo investing doesn’t mean giving technology control of your money. Schwab, she said, has a team of investment experts who oversee investment strategy and keep watch during periods of market volatility, although some services have more input from humans than others.\nAs she recently wrote on MarketWatch: “One common misconception about automated investing is that choosing a robo adviser essentially means handing control of your money over to robots. The truth is that robo solutions have a combination of automated and human components running things behind the scenes.”\nRobos appeal to inexperienced investors\nRobo investing tends to appeal to inexperienced investors or ones who don’t have the time or energy to manage their own portfolios. These investors can take comfort in the “set it and forget it approach to investing and overtime let the markets do their thing,” Barse said.\nThat makes it much easier to stomach market volatility knowing that you don’t necessarily have to make spur-of-the-moment decisions to buy or sell assets, said Tiffany Lam-Balfour, an investing and retirement specialist at NerdWallet.\n“When you’re investing, you don’t want to keep looking at the market and going ‘Oh I need to get out of this,’” she said. “You want to leave it to the professionals to get you through it because they know what your time horizon is, and they’ll adjust your portfolio automatically for you.”\nThat said, “you can’t just expect your investments will only go up. Even if you had the world’s best human financial adviser you can’t expect that.”\nOthers disagree, and say robo advisers appeal to older investors. “Planning for and paying yourself in retirement is complex. There are many options out there to help investors through it, and robo investing is one of them,” Loh said.\n“Many thoughtful, long-term investors have discovered that they want a more modern, streamlined, and inexpensive way to invest, and robo investing fits the bill. They are happy to let technology handle the mundane activities that are harder and more time-consuming for investors to do themselves,” she added.\nThere is often no door to knock on\nYour robo adviser only knows what you tell it. The simplistic questionnaire you’re required to fill out will on most robo-investing platforms will collect information on your annual income, desired age to retire and the level of risk you’re willing to take on.\nIt won’t however know if you just had a child and would like to begin saving for their education down the road or if you recently lost your job.\n“The question then becomes to whom does that person go to for advice and does that platform offer that and if so, to what level of complexity?” said Barse.\nNot all platforms give individualized investment advice and the hybrid models that do offer advice from a human tend to charge higher annual fees.\nAdditionally, a robo adviser won’t necessarily “manage your money with tax efficiency at front of mind,” said Roger Ma, a certified financial planner at Lifelaidout, a New York City-based financial advisory group.\nFor instance, one common way investors offset the taxes they pay on long-term investments is by selling assets that have accrued losses. Traditional advisers often specialize in constructing portfolios that lead to the most tax-efficient outcomes, said Ma, who is the author of “Work Your Money, Not Your Life”.\nBut with robo investing, the trades that are made for you are the same ones that are being made for a slew of other investors who may fall under a different tax-bracket than you.\nOn top of that, while robo investing may feel like a simplistic way to get into investing, especially for beginners it can “overcomplicate investing,” Ma said.\n“If you are just looking to dip your toe in and you want to feel like you’re invested in a diversified portfolio, I wouldn’t say definitely don’t do a robo adviser,” he said.\nDon’t rule out investing through a target-date fund that selects a single fund to invest in and adjusts the position over time based on their investment goals, he added.\nBut not everyone can tell the difference between robo advice and advice from a human being. In 2015, MarketWatch asked four prominent robo advisers and four of the traditional, flesh-and-blood variety to construct portfolios for a hypothetical 35-year-old investor with $40,000 to invest.\nThe results were, perhaps, surprising for critics of robo advisers. The robots’ suggestions were “not massively different” from what the human advisers proposed, said Michael Kitces, Pinnacle Advisory Group’s research director, after reviewing the results.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":550,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":382497125,"gmtCreate":1613473328267,"gmtModify":1634553537460,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/382497125","repostId":"1108705396","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108705396","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1613469786,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108705396?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-16 18:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy<blockquote>随着拜登的崛起，华尔街经济学家越来越看好美国经济</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108705396","media":"CNN Business","summary":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a doubl","content":"<p><b>New York (CNN Business)&nbsp;</b>The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington&nbsp;and millions of families were about to&nbsp;lose crucial benefits.</p><p><blockquote><b>纽约（CNN商业）</b>2020年底，饱受新冠疫情蹂躏的美国经济濒临陷入双底衰退。疫情正在加剧，僵局使华盛顿陷入瘫痪，数百万家庭即将失去重要福利。</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward two months, and the&nbsp;economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.</p><p><blockquote>快进两个月，经济仍在挣扎，但对复苏的信心正在迅速增长。</blockquote></p><p> Economists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家正在迅速上调GDP和失业率预测，并将美联储能够提高最低利率的日期提前。高盛预测美国经济将以三十多年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> The renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the&nbsp;health crisis is easing&nbsp;and Uncle Sam is&nbsp;coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.</p><p><blockquote>重新燃起的乐观情绪是由两个主要因素推动的：健康危机正在缓解，山姆大叔正在提供惊人数量的援助——比几个月前似乎多了数千亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> After supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.</p><p><blockquote>根据穆迪分析公司的数据，继去年提供4万亿美元的救助后，华盛顿预计将在2021年再提供2万亿美元的赤字融资支持。这相当于美国年度GDP的四分之一以上。</blockquote></p><p> \"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪分析公司首席经济学家马克·赞迪(Mark Zandi)告诉CNN Business：“这是大量的经济动力。”</blockquote></p><p> The turning point happened last month&nbsp;when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for&nbsp;President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.</p><p><blockquote>转折点发生在上个月，当时民主党在佐治亚州的决选中以微弱优势控制了美国参议院。这为乔·拜登总统1.9万亿美元的美国救援计划开辟了道路，该计划包括1400美元的刺激支票、提高失业救济金以及向州和地方政府提供3500亿美元的生命线。</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Summer mini-boom'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“夏季迷你热潮”</b></blockquote></p><p> Before the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a&nbsp;forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.</p><p><blockquote>在佐治亚州选举之前，赞迪认为美国经济要到2023年春季或夏季才能恢复充分就业（强劲的劳动力市场，失业率为4%）。现在，他预计这一成就将在明年春天实现，这与财政部长珍妮特·耶伦的预测相呼应。</blockquote></p><p> \"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行经济学家在最近给客户的一份报告中写道，“超级财政政策”意味着美国经济增长快于其他国家的论点“似乎日益强烈”。</blockquote></p><p> Oxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>牛津经济研究院首席美国经济学家Gregory Daco呼吁美国出现“夏季小繁荣”，2021年GDP增长5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> Likewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"</p><p><blockquote>同样，杰富瑞(Jefferies)经济学家表示，“爆炸性的收入增长（得益于财政刺激）可能会推动美国GDP今年增长6.4%，明年增长近5%。”</blockquote></p><p> \"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.</p><p><blockquote>杰富瑞在最近的一份报告中告诉客户：“如果说有什么不同的话，那就是我们的预测可能过于保守。”他指出，其观点仅纳入了拜登计划的1万亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Indeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.</p><p><blockquote>事实上，高盛本周早些时候将2021年GDP预期上调至6.8%，因为这家华尔街银行现在假设额外财政救助为1.5万亿美元，高于此前的1.1万亿美元。根据圣路易斯联储的数据，如果高盛的预测成真，这将是美国自1989年以来最快的年度GDP增长。</blockquote></p><p> The rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.</p><p><blockquote>乐观的GDP预测远高于美联储的要求。去年12月，美联储预计2021年GDP增长仅为4.2%，并表示失业率要到2023年才会降至4%以下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Double-dip recession averted</b></p><p><blockquote><b>避免了双底衰退</b></blockquote></p><p> The Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.</p><p><blockquote>美联储对经济预测趋于保守。而且，至关重要的是，美联储的预测是在DC政治功能失调给美国经济蒙上阴影之际发布的。</blockquote></p><p> For months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.</p><p><blockquote>几个月来，共和党和民主党试图就延长计划失效的关键失业和驱逐福利以及向小企业提供更多可原谅贷款达成协议，但未能达成协议。然后当最终达成协议时，前总统唐纳德·特朗普威胁要炸毁它。</blockquote></p><p> At the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.</p><p><blockquote>在最后一刻，特朗普将9000亿美元的救助计划签署成为法律，避免了经济灾难。</blockquote></p><p> \"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“如果没有这一点，我们将陷入双底衰退。”</blockquote></p><p> Slammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States&nbsp;added just 49,000 jobs in January.</p><p><blockquote>受疫情冲击，美国经济一瘸一拐地走到2020年底，今年开局缓慢。12月，雇主自春季以来首次裁员。美国1月份仅增加了49,000个就业岗位。</blockquote></p><p> Jobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.</p><p><blockquote>申请失业救济人数仍然高得惊人。仅上周就有793,000名美国人首次申请失业救济。就背景而言，这高于大衰退的最严重水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Vaccines to the rescue</b></p><p><blockquote><b>疫苗拯救生命</b></blockquote></p><p> But there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.</p><p><blockquote>但疫情仍有一线希望。尽管Covid死亡人数仍然高得难以想象，但住院人数和病例数已经下降。</blockquote></p><p> Critically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.</p><p><blockquote>至关重要的是，冠状病毒疫苗的推出正在加速。据摩根士丹利称，在总共分发的6600万支疫苗中，约70%已经接种。</blockquote></p><p> And Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday&nbsp;that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.</p><p><blockquote>美国顶级传染病专家安东尼·福奇博士周四告诉NBC新闻，美国可能能够在夏季中期或结束前为大多数美国人接种疫苗。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> All of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些使得包括加利福尼亚、纽约和新泽西在内的州放松了对餐馆和其他小企业的健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> That's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants&nbsp;force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.</p><p><blockquote>这并不是说疫情已经结束。事实上，一个风险是，新的Covid-19变种迫使美国各州和城市再次收紧健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Low-wage workers are still hurting badly</b></p><p><blockquote><b>低薪工人仍然受到严重伤害</b></blockquote></p><p> Against this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>在此背景下，许多经济学家敦促华盛顿推进激进的财政刺激计划。</blockquote></p><p> \"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“请把脚平放在油门上。”“政策制定101说，错误在于做得太多，而不是做得太少。”</blockquote></p><p> Doing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.</p><p><blockquote>做得太少可能会加剧美国的不平等问题。这是因为与之前的衰退相比，这次衰退对餐馆、儿童保育和酒店业等遭受重创行业的低收入工人造成了不成比例的伤害。</blockquote></p><p> Employment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.</p><p><blockquote>根据Opportunity Insights经济跟踪系统的数据，低工资工人（年收入低于27,000美元的人）的就业水平仍下降了20%以上。相比之下，年收入超过6万美元的人的就业水平高于危机前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> \"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行的经济学家在给客户的一份报告中写道：“如果收入和种族群体之间的充分就业情况不明显，拜登的团队就不太可能为实现充分就业而开香槟。”</blockquote></p><p> However, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>然而，前美联储官员、现任Quill Intelligence首席执行官丹妮尔·迪马蒂诺·布斯(Danielle DiMartino Booth)担心，专注于提供收入，而不是投资基础设施和再培训工人，会让该国沉迷于刺激措施。</blockquote></p><p> \"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯说：“经济将变成这个依赖患者，总是等待下一次注射。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Bring it on'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“来吧”</b></blockquote></p><p> Some economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington&nbsp;overheats the economy by injecting too much support.</p><p><blockquote>包括前财政部长拉里·萨默斯在内的一些经济学家警告说，华盛顿注入过多支持可能会导致经济过热。</blockquote></p><p> \"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯表示：“未来几个月可能会出现相当大的通胀恐慌，这将考验债券市场和美联储。”</blockquote></p><p> And that in turn would spook the&nbsp;red-hot stock market.</p><p><blockquote>这反过来又会惊动炙手可热的股市。</blockquote></p><p> Fed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.</p><p><blockquote>美联储观察人士正在提前确定美联储何时能够结束紧急政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p> Citing \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.</p><p><blockquote>高盛援引“通胀前景走强的迹象”，目前预计美联储将在2022年初开始“缩减”资产购买规模，并在2024年上半年加息。</blockquote></p><p> Zandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.</p><p><blockquote>赞迪并没有因为通货膨胀而失眠，主要是因为美国还远未实现充分就业。</blockquote></p><p> \"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"</p><p><blockquote>“这是一种被大大夸大的担忧，”他说。“来吧。十多年来，我们最大的问题一直是低通胀。更高的通胀将是一个高级问题。”</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>With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy<blockquote>随着拜登的崛起，华尔街经济学家越来越看好美国经济</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\">\nWith Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy<blockquote>随着拜登的崛起，华尔街经济学家越来越看好美国经济</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">CNN Business</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-02-16 18:03</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>New York (CNN Business)&nbsp;</b>The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington&nbsp;and millions of families were about to&nbsp;lose crucial benefits.</p><p><blockquote><b>纽约（CNN商业）</b>2020年底，饱受新冠疫情蹂躏的美国经济濒临陷入双底衰退。疫情正在加剧，僵局使华盛顿陷入瘫痪，数百万家庭即将失去重要福利。</blockquote></p><p> Fast forward two months, and the&nbsp;economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.</p><p><blockquote>快进两个月，经济仍在挣扎，但对复苏的信心正在迅速增长。</blockquote></p><p> Economists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家正在迅速上调GDP和失业率预测，并将美联储能够提高最低利率的日期提前。高盛预测美国经济将以三十多年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> The renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the&nbsp;health crisis is easing&nbsp;and Uncle Sam is&nbsp;coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.</p><p><blockquote>重新燃起的乐观情绪是由两个主要因素推动的：健康危机正在缓解，山姆大叔正在提供惊人数量的援助——比几个月前似乎多了数千亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> After supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.</p><p><blockquote>根据穆迪分析公司的数据，继去年提供4万亿美元的救助后，华盛顿预计将在2021年再提供2万亿美元的赤字融资支持。这相当于美国年度GDP的四分之一以上。</blockquote></p><p> \"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪分析公司首席经济学家马克·赞迪(Mark Zandi)告诉CNN Business：“这是大量的经济动力。”</blockquote></p><p> The turning point happened last month&nbsp;when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for&nbsp;President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.</p><p><blockquote>转折点发生在上个月，当时民主党在佐治亚州的决选中以微弱优势控制了美国参议院。这为乔·拜登总统1.9万亿美元的美国救援计划开辟了道路，该计划包括1400美元的刺激支票、提高失业救济金以及向州和地方政府提供3500亿美元的生命线。</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Summer mini-boom'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“夏季迷你热潮”</b></blockquote></p><p> Before the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a&nbsp;forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.</p><p><blockquote>在佐治亚州选举之前，赞迪认为美国经济要到2023年春季或夏季才能恢复充分就业（强劲的劳动力市场，失业率为4%）。现在，他预计这一成就将在明年春天实现，这与财政部长珍妮特·耶伦的预测相呼应。</blockquote></p><p> \"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行经济学家在最近给客户的一份报告中写道，“超级财政政策”意味着美国经济增长快于其他国家的论点“似乎日益强烈”。</blockquote></p><p> Oxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>牛津经济研究院首席美国经济学家Gregory Daco呼吁美国出现“夏季小繁荣”，2021年GDP增长5.9%。</blockquote></p><p> Likewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"</p><p><blockquote>同样，杰富瑞(Jefferies)经济学家表示，“爆炸性的收入增长（得益于财政刺激）可能会推动美国GDP今年增长6.4%，明年增长近5%。”</blockquote></p><p> \"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.</p><p><blockquote>杰富瑞在最近的一份报告中告诉客户：“如果说有什么不同的话，那就是我们的预测可能过于保守。”他指出，其观点仅纳入了拜登计划的1万亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Indeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.</p><p><blockquote>事实上，高盛本周早些时候将2021年GDP预期上调至6.8%，因为这家华尔街银行现在假设额外财政救助为1.5万亿美元，高于此前的1.1万亿美元。根据圣路易斯联储的数据，如果高盛的预测成真，这将是美国自1989年以来最快的年度GDP增长。</blockquote></p><p> The rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.</p><p><blockquote>乐观的GDP预测远高于美联储的要求。去年12月，美联储预计2021年GDP增长仅为4.2%，并表示失业率要到2023年才会降至4%以下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Double-dip recession averted</b></p><p><blockquote><b>避免了双底衰退</b></blockquote></p><p> The Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.</p><p><blockquote>美联储对经济预测趋于保守。而且，至关重要的是，美联储的预测是在DC政治功能失调给美国经济蒙上阴影之际发布的。</blockquote></p><p> For months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.</p><p><blockquote>几个月来，共和党和民主党试图就延长计划失效的关键失业和驱逐福利以及向小企业提供更多可原谅贷款达成协议，但未能达成协议。然后当最终达成协议时，前总统唐纳德·特朗普威胁要炸毁它。</blockquote></p><p> At the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.</p><p><blockquote>在最后一刻，特朗普将9000亿美元的救助计划签署成为法律，避免了经济灾难。</blockquote></p><p> \"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“如果没有这一点，我们将陷入双底衰退。”</blockquote></p><p> Slammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States&nbsp;added just 49,000 jobs in January.</p><p><blockquote>受疫情冲击，美国经济一瘸一拐地走到2020年底，今年开局缓慢。12月，雇主自春季以来首次裁员。美国1月份仅增加了49,000个就业岗位。</blockquote></p><p> Jobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.</p><p><blockquote>申请失业救济人数仍然高得惊人。仅上周就有793,000名美国人首次申请失业救济。就背景而言，这高于大衰退的最严重水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Vaccines to the rescue</b></p><p><blockquote><b>疫苗拯救生命</b></blockquote></p><p> But there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.</p><p><blockquote>但疫情仍有一线希望。尽管Covid死亡人数仍然高得难以想象，但住院人数和病例数已经下降。</blockquote></p><p> Critically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.</p><p><blockquote>至关重要的是，冠状病毒疫苗的推出正在加速。据摩根士丹利称，在总共分发的6600万支疫苗中，约70%已经接种。</blockquote></p><p> And Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday&nbsp;that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.</p><p><blockquote>美国顶级传染病专家安东尼·福奇博士周四告诉NBC新闻，美国可能能够在夏季中期或结束前为大多数美国人接种疫苗。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> All of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些使得包括加利福尼亚、纽约和新泽西在内的州放松了对餐馆和其他小企业的健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> That's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants&nbsp;force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.</p><p><blockquote>这并不是说疫情已经结束。事实上，一个风险是，新的Covid-19变种迫使美国各州和城市再次收紧健康限制。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Low-wage workers are still hurting badly</b></p><p><blockquote><b>低薪工人仍然受到严重伤害</b></blockquote></p><p> Against this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>在此背景下，许多经济学家敦促华盛顿推进激进的财政刺激计划。</blockquote></p><p> \"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"</p><p><blockquote>穆迪经济学家赞迪表示：“请把脚平放在油门上。”“政策制定101说，错误在于做得太多，而不是做得太少。”</blockquote></p><p> Doing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.</p><p><blockquote>做得太少可能会加剧美国的不平等问题。这是因为与之前的衰退相比，这次衰退对餐馆、儿童保育和酒店业等遭受重创行业的低收入工人造成了不成比例的伤害。</blockquote></p><p> Employment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.</p><p><blockquote>根据Opportunity Insights经济跟踪系统的数据，低工资工人（年收入低于27,000美元的人）的就业水平仍下降了20%以上。相比之下，年收入超过6万美元的人的就业水平高于危机前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> \"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.</p><p><blockquote>美国银行的经济学家在给客户的一份报告中写道：“如果收入和种族群体之间的充分就业情况不明显，拜登的团队就不太可能为实现充分就业而开香槟。”</blockquote></p><p> However, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.</p><p><blockquote>然而，前美联储官员、现任Quill Intelligence首席执行官丹妮尔·迪马蒂诺·布斯(Danielle DiMartino Booth)担心，专注于提供收入，而不是投资基础设施和再培训工人，会让该国沉迷于刺激措施。</blockquote></p><p> \"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯说：“经济将变成这个依赖患者，总是等待下一次注射。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Bring it on'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“来吧”</b></blockquote></p><p> Some economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington&nbsp;overheats the economy by injecting too much support.</p><p><blockquote>包括前财政部长拉里·萨默斯在内的一些经济学家警告说，华盛顿注入过多支持可能会导致经济过热。</blockquote></p><p> \"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.</p><p><blockquote>布斯表示：“未来几个月可能会出现相当大的通胀恐慌，这将考验债券市场和美联储。”</blockquote></p><p> And that in turn would spook the&nbsp;red-hot stock market.</p><p><blockquote>这反过来又会惊动炙手可热的股市。</blockquote></p><p> Fed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.</p><p><blockquote>美联储观察人士正在提前确定美联储何时能够结束紧急政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p> Citing \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.</p><p><blockquote>高盛援引“通胀前景走强的迹象”，目前预计美联储将在2022年初开始“缩减”资产购买规模，并在2024年上半年加息。</blockquote></p><p> Zandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.</p><p><blockquote>赞迪并没有因为通货膨胀而失眠，主要是因为美国还远未实现充分就业。</blockquote></p><p> \"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"</p><p><blockquote>“这是一种被大大夸大的担忧，”他说。“来吧。十多年来，我们最大的问题一直是低通胀。更高的通胀将是一个高级问题。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html\">CNN Business</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":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108705396","content_text":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington and millions of families were about to lose crucial benefits.\nFast forward two months, and the economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.\nEconomists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.\nThe renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the health crisis is easing and Uncle Sam is coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.\nAfter supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.\n\"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.\nThe turning point happened last month when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.\n'Summer mini-boom'\nBefore the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.\n\"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.\nOxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.\nLikewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"\n\"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.\nIndeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.\nThe rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.\nDouble-dip recession averted\nThe Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.\nFor months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.\nAt the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.\n\"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.\nSlammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States added just 49,000 jobs in January.\nJobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.\nVaccines to the rescue\nBut there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.\nCritically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.\nAnd Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.\nAll of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.\nThat's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.\nLow-wage workers are still hurting badly\nAgainst this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.\n\"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"\nDoing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.\nEmployment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.\n\"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.\nHowever, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.\n\"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.\n'Bring it on'\nSome economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington overheats the economy by injecting too much support.\n\"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.\nAnd that in turn would spook the red-hot stock market.\nFed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.\nCiting \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.\nZandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.\n\"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":558,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388678544,"gmtCreate":1613055778688,"gmtModify":1703768947525,"author":{"id":"3571554572709564","authorId":"3571554572709564","name":"68da9cf2","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3571554572709564","authorIdStr":"3571554572709564"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03086\">$BMO NASDAQ100(03086)$</a>Good","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03086\">$BMO NASDAQ100(03086)$</a>Good","text":"$BMO NASDAQ100(03086)$Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/388678544","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":313,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}