Freeman99的个人主页 - 老虎社区

Freeman99

Freeman99

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

6关注

1粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-03-24

Market adjustment...

Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday<blockquote>为什么电动汽车股周二下跌</blockquote>

2021-03-23

Hmmm...

Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>

2021-03-23

🤔

Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>

2021-03-19

Clueless???

Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next<blockquote>美联储令市场失望，让 SLR 救济到期：接下来会发生什么</blockquote>

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3577158388817239","uuid":"3577158388817239","gmtCreate":1614493688292,"gmtModify":1616203130114,"name":"Freeman99","pinyin":"freeman99","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":6,"tweetSize":4,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-3","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"偶像虎友","description":"加入老虎社区1500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2026.04.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":351209057,"gmtCreate":1616595592079,"gmtModify":1634525007010,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Market adjustment...","listText":"Market adjustment...","text":"Market adjustment...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/351209057","repostId":"1197372595","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1197372595","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616507295,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1197372595?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-23 21:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday<blockquote>为什么电动汽车股周二下跌</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1197372595","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Moto","content":"<p>EV Stocks are&nbsp;slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The&nbsp;shares&nbsp;of Li Auto&nbsp;fell&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;3%,Xpeng Motors&nbsp;and&nbsp;NIO&nbsp;stock&nbsp;are&nbsp;down&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;1%.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车股票在周二早盘交易中下滑。理想汽车股价下跌超过3%，小鹏汽车和蔚来股价下跌超过1%。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p><blockquote>周二，中国工业和信息化部发布了两份此前享受税收优惠待遇的新能源汽车目录，其中理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏和比亚迪均有车型上榜。</blockquote></p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p><blockquote>对此，理想汽车表示，理想one车型已经停售，因此在申报一年后被工信部自动撤回。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday<blockquote>为什么电动汽车股周二下跌</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday<blockquote>为什么电动汽车股周二下跌</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-23 21:48</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>EV Stocks are&nbsp;slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The&nbsp;shares&nbsp;of Li Auto&nbsp;fell&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;3%,Xpeng Motors&nbsp;and&nbsp;NIO&nbsp;stock&nbsp;are&nbsp;down&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;1%.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车股票在周二早盘交易中下滑。理想汽车股价下跌超过3%，小鹏汽车和蔚来股价下跌超过1%。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p><blockquote>周二，中国工业和信息化部发布了两份此前享受税收优惠待遇的新能源汽车目录，其中理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏和比亚迪均有车型上榜。</blockquote></p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p><blockquote>对此，理想汽车表示，理想one车型已经停售，因此在申报一年后被工信部自动撤回。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NIO":"蔚来","TSLA":"特斯拉","LI":"理想汽车","XPEV":"小鹏集团"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1197372595","content_text":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9,"NIO":0.9,"XPEV":0.9,"LI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1974,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353431611,"gmtCreate":1616511292733,"gmtModify":1634525416157,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hmmm...","listText":"Hmmm...","text":"Hmmm...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/353431611","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1129536243?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-23 22:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_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":{"WFC":"富国银行","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"WFC":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9,"BRK.A":0.9,"MTB":0.9,"PNC":0.9,"GS":0.9,"BAC":0.9,"JPM":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2464,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353431062,"gmtCreate":1616511257356,"gmtModify":1634525416638,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"🤔","listText":"🤔","text":"🤔","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/353431062","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1129536243?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-23 22:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_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":{"WFC":"富国银行","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"WFC":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9,"BRK.A":0.9,"MTB":0.9,"PNC":0.9,"GS":0.9,"BAC":0.9,"JPM":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2212,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350124209,"gmtCreate":1616168208801,"gmtModify":1634526883036,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Clueless???","listText":"Clueless???","text":"Clueless???","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/350124209","repostId":"1199154789","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199154789","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616164372,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1199154789?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-19 22:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next<blockquote>美联储令市场失望，让 SLR 救济到期：接下来会发生什么</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199154789","media":"zerohedge","summary":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio  exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on ","content":"<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><p><blockquote>正如这里所讨论和深入讨论的那样，在伊丽莎白·沃伦和谢罗德·布朗等进步民主党人的政治压力下，美联储决定让临时补充杠杆率（SLR）豁免如期于3月31日到期，即规则变更一周年纪念日。</blockquote></p><p>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p><blockquote>美联储银行监管机构今天宣布，2020年5月15日发布的存款机构补充杠杆率（SLR）临时变更将于2021年3月31日如期到期。鉴于 COVID-19 事件，做出临时改变是为了让存款机构能够灵活地向家庭和企业提供信贷。纽约联储前大师佐尔坦-波萨尔（Zoltan Pozsar）（再次）正确预测了这一结果，他在联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）之后表示，“事实上，美联储做出这一调整实际上是先发制人的--o/n RRP工具目前没有被使用，因此还没有能力限制，而回购和票据收益率还没有出现负值交易--<b>这表明美联储正在为终止 SLR 豁免“铺平道路”</b>.\"</blockquote></p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><p><blockquote>美联储深知这对市场来说将是一个非常热门的问题，因此发表了以下声明以缓解交易员的紧张情绪，指出虽然 SLR 特殊待遇将于 3 月 31 日到期，但美联储正在“邀请公众对几项潜在的 SLR 修改发表评论”，此外，“<b>随着时间的推移，董事会可能需要解决 SLR 的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力</b>“——简而言之，如果收益率飙升，美联储将立即重新推出 SLR：</blockquote></p><p>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储周五宣布，银行控股公司补充杠杆率（SLR）的临时变化将于3月31日如期到期。<b>此外，董事会将很快就调整SLR的措施征求意见。董事会将采取适当行动，确保SLR的任何变更不会削弱银行资本要求的整体实力。</b>为了缓解新冠肺炎疫情造成的国债市场压力，并促进对家庭和企业的贷款，董事会去年暂时修改了SLR，将美国国债和央行储备排除在外。此后，国债市场趋于稳定。<b>然而，由于最近央行储备供应和国债发行的增加，董事会可能需要随着时间的推移解决SLR的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力。为了确保 SLR（作为额外资本要求于 2014 年设立）在储备较高的环境下仍然有效，董事会将很快就几项潜在的 SLR 修改征求公众意见。</b>该提案和意见将有助于与财政部和其他监管机构就未来确保国债市场弹性的工作进行持续讨论。尽管美联储提出了宽慰的要求，<b>在为有利的结果做好准备后，美联储令人失望的声明几乎不是交易员所希望的消息，股市暴跌……</b></blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率飙升……</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><blockquote>...而摩根大通的股票是最容易受到SLR减免的银行（正如昨天在“面临摩根大通杠杆减免威胁”中所指出的）...</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><blockquote>....崩溃了。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><p><blockquote>如果您一直生活在岩石下，以下是您应该关心 SLR 决定的原因：首先，对于那些阅读我们有关该问题的入门读物的人来说，摩根大通的一些背景（具有讽刺意味的是，摩根大通是一家因美联储的决定而损失最大的银行）底线是，如果没有 SLR 救济，<b>银行可能不得不去杠杆化、筹集新资本、停止回购、出售优先股、拒绝存款并普遍减少准备金（不一定是所有这些，也不是按顺序），就像美联储正在向市场注入数千亿美元的储备随着财政部耗尽其 TGA 账户。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储资产负债表的大幅扩张意味着联邦储备银行持有的银行存款也将大幅增长。<b>监管救济的到期将使 8 个 GSIB 增加约 2.1 万亿美元的杠杆风险。此外，TGA 的减少和持续的量化宽松可能会在 2021 年为系统增加约 2.35 万亿美元的存款。</b>虽然 3 月 31 日豁免到期不会对 GSIB 产生直接影响，但全年杠杆资产的持续增长将增加长期债务 (LTD) 和优先要求。在此，摩根大通持乐观态度并写道<b>“即使是‘最坏’的案例发行情况也是非常可控的，LTD 需要 350 亿美元来满足 TLAC 要求，而优先需要 150 亿至 200 亿美元才能将全行业 SLR 的比例维持在 5.6%。</b></blockquote></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><blockquote>银行实体的限制更大，以 6.2% 的 SLR 计算，增加杠杆风险的能力约为 7,650 亿美元。”高盛的做法更令人不安：该银行估计，在持续的量化宽松制度下，将出现约 2 万亿美元的储备能力缺口，主要以银行无法接受的存款形式作为正在进行的量化宽松的一部分（高盛对 SLR 困境的全面理解要多得多）。</blockquote></p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那么接下来会发生什么呢？</b></blockquote></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><p><blockquote>昨天Curvature的Scott Skyrm在谈到这个话题时写道：<i>最大的银行享有更大的资产负债表，但华盛顿有政治因素反对延长豁免…….以下是几个场景及其对回购市场的影响</i>:</blockquote></p><p>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p><blockquote>豁免延长3个月或6个月——对回购市场没有影响。它已经全价了。准备金的豁免继续，但国债的豁免结束。<b>由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性增加。准备金和国库的豁免都结束了。同上。</b>换句话说，Skyrm持相对悲观的观点，警告称“由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。”此外，随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性可能会增加……</blockquote></p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><p><blockquote>也许有点太严厉了？那么，上周摩根大通为SLR布局了5种情景，其中两种情景预测SLR救济将在3月31日结束，具体如下：</blockquote></p><p><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital &amp; de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote><u><b>3.救助3月31日结束，银行全面募资</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b><u><b>4.救助3月31日结束，银行增资去杠杆</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b>回到佐尔坦，让我们回顾一下，回购大师还警告说，“结束准备金和国债在 SLR 计算中的豁免可能意味着美国银行将拒绝保证金存款和准备金（而不是国债），以留出更多空间进行做市活动，<b>这些资金流动将进一步扩大 TGA 提款带来的货币资金流入。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>更重要的是，佐尔坦预计回购或更广泛的市场不会出现大范围的混乱，而是对单反相机已经产生的微不足道的影响（如果被淘汰，将会产生）提供了更温和的观点，正如他在周二的一份报告中所解释的那样。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><p><blockquote>如何确定佐尔坦的良性观点是否正确？他在笔记的最后写道：“鉴于我们在 6 月底之前将 FRA-OIS 利差从零变为负的看涨期权是基于 SLR 延期结束，以及美联储将试图用价格而非数量来解决数量问题的假设，今天的调整意味着 FRA-OIS 不会一路跌至零或负区域”。</blockquote></p><p>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，FRA-OIS将取决于外汇掉期相对于OIS的交易强度，但以远低于零的利率交易的国库券不再是一种风险……虽然法案偶尔会陷入负值区域，但到目前为止，它们已经避免了NIRP的全面暴跌，这可能只是市场正在等待的积极迹象，以缓解与SLR豁免突然且基本上出乎意料的结束相关的紧张情绪。</blockquote></p><p>* *&nbsp; *</p><p><blockquote>** *</blockquote></p><p></p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p><blockquote>最后，对于那些好奇会对市场产生什么直接影响的人来说，NatWest 策略师布莱克-格温（Blake Gwinn）写道，美联储宣布将让银行的监管豁免在本月底到期，“确实穿针引线，并 “缓解了对市场潜在长期影响的担忧”。<b>SLR“结束了它，但化解了许多下意识的市场反应”，承诺解决补充杠杆率的当前设计和校准问题，以防止应变发展</b>.</blockquote></p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p><blockquote>“格温说：”我从来没有担心过银行会在一天之内抛售国债，或者在不续签的情况下提取回购或类似的事情。格温总结说，“我担心的是，从长远来看，”随着外汇储备的继续上升，SLR 是否会 “成为一种麻烦，拖累国债和利差”。<b>“真正面对这些恐惧，基本上是在说，‘别担心，我们会做到的’。”</b></blockquote></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</p><p><blockquote>好吧，随着收益率在早期四巫交易中飙升至 HOD，市场似乎对美联储的任何行动都相当怀疑。</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>Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next<blockquote>美联储令市场失望，让 SLR 救济到期：接下来会发生什么</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\">\nFed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next<blockquote>美联储令市场失望，让 SLR 救济到期：接下来会发生什么</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-19 22:32</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><p><blockquote>正如这里所讨论和深入讨论的那样，在伊丽莎白·沃伦和谢罗德·布朗等进步民主党人的政治压力下，美联储决定让临时补充杠杆率（SLR）豁免如期于3月31日到期，即规则变更一周年纪念日。</blockquote></p><p>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p><blockquote>美联储银行监管机构今天宣布，2020年5月15日发布的存款机构补充杠杆率（SLR）临时变更将于2021年3月31日如期到期。鉴于 COVID-19 事件，做出临时改变是为了让存款机构能够灵活地向家庭和企业提供信贷。纽约联储前大师佐尔坦-波萨尔（Zoltan Pozsar）（再次）正确预测了这一结果，他在联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）之后表示，“事实上，美联储做出这一调整实际上是先发制人的--o/n RRP工具目前没有被使用，因此还没有能力限制，而回购和票据收益率还没有出现负值交易--<b>这表明美联储正在为终止 SLR 豁免“铺平道路”</b>.\"</blockquote></p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><p><blockquote>美联储深知这对市场来说将是一个非常热门的问题，因此发表了以下声明以缓解交易员的紧张情绪，指出虽然 SLR 特殊待遇将于 3 月 31 日到期，但美联储正在“邀请公众对几项潜在的 SLR 修改发表评论”，此外，“<b>随着时间的推移，董事会可能需要解决 SLR 的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力</b>“——简而言之，如果收益率飙升，美联储将立即重新推出 SLR：</blockquote></p><p>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储周五宣布，银行控股公司补充杠杆率（SLR）的临时变化将于3月31日如期到期。<b>此外，董事会将很快就调整SLR的措施征求意见。董事会将采取适当行动，确保SLR的任何变更不会削弱银行资本要求的整体实力。</b>为了缓解新冠肺炎疫情造成的国债市场压力，并促进对家庭和企业的贷款，董事会去年暂时修改了SLR，将美国国债和央行储备排除在外。此后，国债市场趋于稳定。<b>然而，由于最近央行储备供应和国债发行的增加，董事会可能需要随着时间的推移解决SLR的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力。为了确保 SLR（作为额外资本要求于 2014 年设立）在储备较高的环境下仍然有效，董事会将很快就几项潜在的 SLR 修改征求公众意见。</b>该提案和意见将有助于与财政部和其他监管机构就未来确保国债市场弹性的工作进行持续讨论。尽管美联储提出了宽慰的要求，<b>在为有利的结果做好准备后，美联储令人失望的声明几乎不是交易员所希望的消息，股市暴跌……</b></blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率飙升……</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><blockquote>...而摩根大通的股票是最容易受到SLR减免的银行（正如昨天在“面临摩根大通杠杆减免威胁”中所指出的）...</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><blockquote>....崩溃了。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><p><blockquote>如果您一直生活在岩石下，以下是您应该关心 SLR 决定的原因：首先，对于那些阅读我们有关该问题的入门读物的人来说，摩根大通的一些背景（具有讽刺意味的是，摩根大通是一家因美联储的决定而损失最大的银行）底线是，如果没有 SLR 救济，<b>银行可能不得不去杠杆化、筹集新资本、停止回购、出售优先股、拒绝存款并普遍减少准备金（不一定是所有这些，也不是按顺序），就像美联储正在向市场注入数千亿美元的储备随着财政部耗尽其 TGA 账户。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储资产负债表的大幅扩张意味着联邦储备银行持有的银行存款也将大幅增长。<b>监管救济的到期将使 8 个 GSIB 增加约 2.1 万亿美元的杠杆风险。此外，TGA 的减少和持续的量化宽松可能会在 2021 年为系统增加约 2.35 万亿美元的存款。</b>虽然 3 月 31 日豁免到期不会对 GSIB 产生直接影响，但全年杠杆资产的持续增长将增加长期债务 (LTD) 和优先要求。在此，摩根大通持乐观态度并写道<b>“即使是‘最坏’的案例发行情况也是非常可控的，LTD 需要 350 亿美元来满足 TLAC 要求，而优先需要 150 亿至 200 亿美元才能将全行业 SLR 的比例维持在 5.6%。</b></blockquote></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><blockquote>银行实体的限制更大，以 6.2% 的 SLR 计算，增加杠杆风险的能力约为 7,650 亿美元。”高盛的做法更令人不安：该银行估计，在持续的量化宽松制度下，将出现约 2 万亿美元的储备能力缺口，主要以银行无法接受的存款形式作为正在进行的量化宽松的一部分（高盛对 SLR 困境的全面理解要多得多）。</blockquote></p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那么接下来会发生什么呢？</b></blockquote></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><p><blockquote>昨天Curvature的Scott Skyrm在谈到这个话题时写道：<i>最大的银行享有更大的资产负债表，但华盛顿有政治因素反对延长豁免…….以下是几个场景及其对回购市场的影响</i>:</blockquote></p><p>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p><blockquote>豁免延长3个月或6个月——对回购市场没有影响。它已经全价了。准备金的豁免继续，但国债的豁免结束。<b>由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性增加。准备金和国库的豁免都结束了。同上。</b>换句话说，Skyrm持相对悲观的观点，警告称“由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。”此外，随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性可能会增加……</blockquote></p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><p><blockquote>也许有点太严厉了？那么，上周摩根大通为SLR布局了5种情景，其中两种情景预测SLR救济将在3月31日结束，具体如下：</blockquote></p><p><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital &amp; de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote><u><b>3.救助3月31日结束，银行全面募资</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b><u><b>4.救助3月31日结束，银行增资去杠杆</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b>回到佐尔坦，让我们回顾一下，回购大师还警告说，“结束准备金和国债在 SLR 计算中的豁免可能意味着美国银行将拒绝保证金存款和准备金（而不是国债），以留出更多空间进行做市活动，<b>这些资金流动将进一步扩大 TGA 提款带来的货币资金流入。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>更重要的是，佐尔坦预计回购或更广泛的市场不会出现大范围的混乱，而是对单反相机已经产生的微不足道的影响（如果被淘汰，将会产生）提供了更温和的观点，正如他在周二的一份报告中所解释的那样。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><p><blockquote>如何确定佐尔坦的良性观点是否正确？他在笔记的最后写道：“鉴于我们在 6 月底之前将 FRA-OIS 利差从零变为负的看涨期权是基于 SLR 延期结束，以及美联储将试图用价格而非数量来解决数量问题的假设，今天的调整意味着 FRA-OIS 不会一路跌至零或负区域”。</blockquote></p><p>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，FRA-OIS将取决于外汇掉期相对于OIS的交易强度，但以远低于零的利率交易的国库券不再是一种风险……虽然法案偶尔会陷入负值区域，但到目前为止，它们已经避免了NIRP的全面暴跌，这可能只是市场正在等待的积极迹象，以缓解与SLR豁免突然且基本上出乎意料的结束相关的紧张情绪。</blockquote></p><p>* *&nbsp; *</p><p><blockquote>** *</blockquote></p><p></p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p><blockquote>最后，对于那些好奇会对市场产生什么直接影响的人来说，NatWest 策略师布莱克-格温（Blake Gwinn）写道，美联储宣布将让银行的监管豁免在本月底到期，“确实穿针引线，并 “缓解了对市场潜在长期影响的担忧”。<b>SLR“结束了它，但化解了许多下意识的市场反应”，承诺解决补充杠杆率的当前设计和校准问题，以防止应变发展</b>.</blockquote></p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p><blockquote>“格温说：”我从来没有担心过银行会在一天之内抛售国债，或者在不续签的情况下提取回购或类似的事情。格温总结说，“我担心的是，从长远来看，”随着外汇储备的继续上升，SLR 是否会 “成为一种麻烦，拖累国债和利差”。<b>“真正面对这些恐惧，基本上是在说，‘别担心，我们会做到的’。”</b></blockquote></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</p><p><blockquote>好吧，随着收益率在早期四巫交易中飙升至 HOD，市场似乎对美联储的任何行动都相当怀疑。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199154789","content_text":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption.\"Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...Bond yields spiked...... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")....... slumped.In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).So what happens next?Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market:The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates 4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever Impact on BanksRatesFront-End RatesGoing back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.\"More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.* *  *Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" asthe SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing.“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2520,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":353431611,"gmtCreate":1616511292733,"gmtModify":1634525416157,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Hmmm...","listText":"Hmmm...","text":"Hmmm...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/353431611","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1129536243?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-23 22:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_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":{"WFC":"富国银行","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"WFC":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9,"BRK.A":0.9,"MTB":0.9,"PNC":0.9,"GS":0.9,"BAC":0.9,"JPM":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2464,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353431062,"gmtCreate":1616511257356,"gmtModify":1634525416638,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"🤔","listText":"🤔","text":"🤔","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/353431062","repostId":"1129536243","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129536243","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616509898,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1129536243?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-23 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129536243","media":"Barrons","summary":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berks","content":"<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</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>Warren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</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\">\nWarren Buffett’s $10 Billion Mistake<blockquote>沃伦·巴菲特的100亿美元错误</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-23 22:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司首席执行官沃伦·巴菲特去年对许多银行股感到不满。据《巴伦周刊》估计，鉴于近几个月来该行业的强劲反弹，这一决定将使伯克希尔公司损失约 100 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&amp;T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).</p><p><blockquote>2020 年期间，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（股票代码：BRK.A 和 BRK.B）出售了摩根大通 (JPM)、高盛集团 (GS)、PNC 金融服务集团 (PNC) 和 M&amp;T 银行 (MTB) 的头寸，同时大幅减少了长期持有的富国银行 (WFC)。</blockquote></p><p> The sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.</p><p><blockquote>出售银行股是巴菲特在失误和错失良机的一年中的投资失误之一。伯克希尔还在去年 4 月该行业低点附近抛售了约 60 亿美元的航空股票。此后，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司之前持有的四大航空公司股票大约翻了一番。</blockquote></p><p> Buffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.</p><p><blockquote>巴菲特监管伯克希尔2900亿美元的股票投资组合。伯克希尔未能利用市场动荡进行任何重大收购，该公司去年净卖出了超过80亿美元的股票。</blockquote></p><p> During 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in&nbsp;Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in&nbsp;Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.</p><p><blockquote>2020 年，伯克希尔对 Verizon Communications (VZ) 进行了 80 亿美元的大量投资，对雪佛龙 (CVX) 进行了 50 亿美元的大量投资。它购买了三种不同的药品股票，价值约 20 亿美元。只有雪佛龙显示出显着的增长。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of&nbsp;Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in&nbsp;U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in&nbsp;American Express(AXP).</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔仍持有超过10亿股美国银行（BAC）股票，价值约380亿美元，并在美国持有较小的股份。Bancorp(USB) 和纽约梅隆银行 (BK)。伯克希尔拥有美国运通 (AXP) 价值 210 亿美元的大量长期持有股份。</blockquote></p><p> Before the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.</p><p><blockquote>在去年出售银行股之前，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司大量涉足该行业，持有除花旗集团和摩根士丹利以外的所有美国主要银行的权益。鉴于去年经济疲软，巴菲特可能认为伯克希尔哈撒韦公司过于涉足该行业。他没有立即发表评论。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通和富国银行的出售值得注意，因为它们是出售的最大头寸。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔持有约 6000 万股摩根大通股票，2020 年初价值约 80 亿美元，以及 3.45 亿股富国银行股票，价值 180 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.</p><p><blockquote>摩根大通的头寸已经消失，在第二季度和第三季度大部分被出售，当时该股平均股价低于每股 100 美元。目前股价约为 150 美元。伯克希尔的投资副手之一托德-库姆斯（Todd Combs）是摩根大通董事会成员。库姆斯和特德·韦施勒估计合计约占伯克希尔股票投资组合的 10%。</blockquote></p><p> Berkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.</p><p><blockquote>伯克希尔从第二季度开始稳步出售富国银行股份，截至2020年底仅持有5200万股。在此期间，该股平均价格约为每股 26 美元，而最近的价格为每股 39 美元。伯克希尔曾持有富国银行 30 年。</blockquote></p><p> In February 2019, Buffett&nbsp;explained to CNBC&nbsp;why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>2019 年 2 月，巴菲特向 CNBC 解释了他为什么喜欢银行和其他金融机构。“在我看来，这些都是价格合理的非常好的投资。而且它们比其他同样是好企业的企业便宜一些，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> He was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.</p><p><blockquote>他当时对摩根大通特别着迷，他告诉 CNBC，鉴于他对首席执行官杰米-戴蒙（Jamie Dimon）和摩根大通的钦佩，他没有尽快收购摩根大通是 “愚蠢的”。他还建议，考虑到该银行的财务业绩--该银行在 2018 年以 17% 的有形股本回报率领先竞争对手--这些股票的交易价格应至少是有形账面价值的三倍，这将使其股价高于 170 美元。巴菲特当时正处于这一目标，该股最近触及创纪录的 161 美元。</blockquote></p><p> Unfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.</p><p><blockquote>对伯克希尔来说不幸的是，它并没有从这一举措和其他银行问题中受益。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_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":{"WFC":"富国银行","MTB":"美国制商银行","GS":"高盛","BAC":"美国银行","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","JPM":"摩根大通","PNC":"PNC金融"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-pared-down-its-bank-holdings-that-looks-like-a-10-billion-mistake-51616500847?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_1_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129536243","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett soured on many bank stocks last year. That decision cost Berkshire about $10 billion, given the strong rally in the sector in recent months, Barron’s estimates.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRK.A and BRK.B) sold positions in JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC), and M&T Bank (MTB), while sharply reducing a longstanding holding in Wells Fargo (WFC).\nThe sales of bank stocks were one of Buffett’s investment miscues during a year of mistakes and missed opportunities. Berkshire also sold about $6 billion of airline stocks near the sector’s low last April. The four major airline stocks formerly held by Berkshire have since roughly doubled.\nBuffett oversees Berkshire’s $290 billion equity portfolio. Berkshire failed to capitalize on the market turmoil to make any major acquisitions, and the company was a net seller of more than $8 billion of stocks last year.\nDuring 2020, Berkshire made sizable investments of $8 billion in Verizon Communications(VZ) and $5 billion in Chevron(CVX). And it bought about $2 billion in three different drug stocks. Only Chevron is showing a notable gain.\nBerkshire still has a big holding of more than one billion shares of Bank of America(BAC) worth about $38 billion and smaller holdings in U.S. Bancorp(USB) andBank of New York Mellon(BK). Berkshire owns a large and long-held stake of $21 billion in American Express(AXP).\nBefore the sales of bank stocks last year, Berkshire was heavily exposed to the sector, holding an interest in all the major U.S. banks, except forCitigroupandMorgan Stanley.Buffett may have felt that Berkshire was too exposed to the sector given the weak economy last year. He had no immediate comment.\nThe JPMorgan and Wells Fargo sales are notable because they were the largest positions sold.\nBerkshire held about 60 million shares of JPMorgan, worth around $8 billion at the start of 2020, and 345 million shares of Wells Fargo, worth $18 billion.\nThe JPMorgan position is gone, having been sold largely in the second and third quarters when the stock averaged less than $100 a share. The shares are now around $150. One of Berkshire’s investment lieutenants, Todd Combs, is on the board of JPMorgan. Combs and Ted Weschler run an estimated total of about 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio.\nBerkshire steadily sold down its Wells Fargo stake starting in the second quarter, and held just 52 million shares at year-end 2020. The stock averaged about $26 a share during that period against a recent price of $39. Berkshire had held Wells Fargo for 30 years.\nIn February 2019, Buffett explained to CNBC why he liked banks and other financials. “They’re very good investments at sensible prices, based on my thinking. And they’re cheaper than other businesses that are also good businesses by some margin,” he said.\nHe was particularly enamored of JPMorgan then, telling CNBC that he had been “dumb” for not buying JPMorgan sooner, given his admiration for CEO Jamie Dimon and the franchise. And he suggested that, considering the bank’s financial performance—it topped rivals with a 17% return on tangible equity in 2018—the shares should trade for at least three times tangible book value, which would put them above $170. Buffett was on the mark then as the stock recently hit a record $161.\nUnfortunately for Berkshire, it’s not benefiting from that move and those in other bank issues.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"WFC":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9,"BRK.A":0.9,"MTB":0.9,"PNC":0.9,"GS":0.9,"BAC":0.9,"JPM":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2212,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350124209,"gmtCreate":1616168208801,"gmtModify":1634526883036,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Clueless???","listText":"Clueless???","text":"Clueless???","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/350124209","repostId":"1199154789","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199154789","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616164372,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1199154789?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-19 22:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next<blockquote>美联储令市场失望，让 SLR 救济到期：接下来会发生什么</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199154789","media":"zerohedge","summary":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio  exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on ","content":"<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><p><blockquote>正如这里所讨论和深入讨论的那样，在伊丽莎白·沃伦和谢罗德·布朗等进步民主党人的政治压力下，美联储决定让临时补充杠杆率（SLR）豁免如期于3月31日到期，即规则变更一周年纪念日。</blockquote></p><p>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p><blockquote>美联储银行监管机构今天宣布，2020年5月15日发布的存款机构补充杠杆率（SLR）临时变更将于2021年3月31日如期到期。鉴于 COVID-19 事件，做出临时改变是为了让存款机构能够灵活地向家庭和企业提供信贷。纽约联储前大师佐尔坦-波萨尔（Zoltan Pozsar）（再次）正确预测了这一结果，他在联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）之后表示，“事实上，美联储做出这一调整实际上是先发制人的--o/n RRP工具目前没有被使用，因此还没有能力限制，而回购和票据收益率还没有出现负值交易--<b>这表明美联储正在为终止 SLR 豁免“铺平道路”</b>.\"</blockquote></p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><p><blockquote>美联储深知这对市场来说将是一个非常热门的问题，因此发表了以下声明以缓解交易员的紧张情绪，指出虽然 SLR 特殊待遇将于 3 月 31 日到期，但美联储正在“邀请公众对几项潜在的 SLR 修改发表评论”，此外，“<b>随着时间的推移，董事会可能需要解决 SLR 的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力</b>“——简而言之，如果收益率飙升，美联储将立即重新推出 SLR：</blockquote></p><p>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储周五宣布，银行控股公司补充杠杆率（SLR）的临时变化将于3月31日如期到期。<b>此外，董事会将很快就调整SLR的措施征求意见。董事会将采取适当行动，确保SLR的任何变更不会削弱银行资本要求的整体实力。</b>为了缓解新冠肺炎疫情造成的国债市场压力，并促进对家庭和企业的贷款，董事会去年暂时修改了SLR，将美国国债和央行储备排除在外。此后，国债市场趋于稳定。<b>然而，由于最近央行储备供应和国债发行的增加，董事会可能需要随着时间的推移解决SLR的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力。为了确保 SLR（作为额外资本要求于 2014 年设立）在储备较高的环境下仍然有效，董事会将很快就几项潜在的 SLR 修改征求公众意见。</b>该提案和意见将有助于与财政部和其他监管机构就未来确保国债市场弹性的工作进行持续讨论。尽管美联储提出了宽慰的要求，<b>在为有利的结果做好准备后，美联储令人失望的声明几乎不是交易员所希望的消息，股市暴跌……</b></blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率飙升……</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><blockquote>...而摩根大通的股票是最容易受到SLR减免的银行（正如昨天在“面临摩根大通杠杆减免威胁”中所指出的）...</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><blockquote>....崩溃了。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><p><blockquote>如果您一直生活在岩石下，以下是您应该关心 SLR 决定的原因：首先，对于那些阅读我们有关该问题的入门读物的人来说，摩根大通的一些背景（具有讽刺意味的是，摩根大通是一家因美联储的决定而损失最大的银行）底线是，如果没有 SLR 救济，<b>银行可能不得不去杠杆化、筹集新资本、停止回购、出售优先股、拒绝存款并普遍减少准备金（不一定是所有这些，也不是按顺序），就像美联储正在向市场注入数千亿美元的储备随着财政部耗尽其 TGA 账户。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储资产负债表的大幅扩张意味着联邦储备银行持有的银行存款也将大幅增长。<b>监管救济的到期将使 8 个 GSIB 增加约 2.1 万亿美元的杠杆风险。此外，TGA 的减少和持续的量化宽松可能会在 2021 年为系统增加约 2.35 万亿美元的存款。</b>虽然 3 月 31 日豁免到期不会对 GSIB 产生直接影响，但全年杠杆资产的持续增长将增加长期债务 (LTD) 和优先要求。在此，摩根大通持乐观态度并写道<b>“即使是‘最坏’的案例发行情况也是非常可控的，LTD 需要 350 亿美元来满足 TLAC 要求，而优先需要 150 亿至 200 亿美元才能将全行业 SLR 的比例维持在 5.6%。</b></blockquote></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><blockquote>银行实体的限制更大，以 6.2% 的 SLR 计算，增加杠杆风险的能力约为 7,650 亿美元。”高盛的做法更令人不安：该银行估计，在持续的量化宽松制度下，将出现约 2 万亿美元的储备能力缺口，主要以银行无法接受的存款形式作为正在进行的量化宽松的一部分（高盛对 SLR 困境的全面理解要多得多）。</blockquote></p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那么接下来会发生什么呢？</b></blockquote></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><p><blockquote>昨天Curvature的Scott Skyrm在谈到这个话题时写道：<i>最大的银行享有更大的资产负债表，但华盛顿有政治因素反对延长豁免…….以下是几个场景及其对回购市场的影响</i>:</blockquote></p><p>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p><blockquote>豁免延长3个月或6个月——对回购市场没有影响。它已经全价了。准备金的豁免继续，但国债的豁免结束。<b>由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性增加。准备金和国库的豁免都结束了。同上。</b>换句话说，Skyrm持相对悲观的观点，警告称“由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。”此外，随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性可能会增加……</blockquote></p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><p><blockquote>也许有点太严厉了？那么，上周摩根大通为SLR布局了5种情景，其中两种情景预测SLR救济将在3月31日结束，具体如下：</blockquote></p><p><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital &amp; de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote><u><b>3.救助3月31日结束，银行全面募资</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b><u><b>4.救助3月31日结束，银行增资去杠杆</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b>回到佐尔坦，让我们回顾一下，回购大师还警告说，“结束准备金和国债在 SLR 计算中的豁免可能意味着美国银行将拒绝保证金存款和准备金（而不是国债），以留出更多空间进行做市活动，<b>这些资金流动将进一步扩大 TGA 提款带来的货币资金流入。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>更重要的是，佐尔坦预计回购或更广泛的市场不会出现大范围的混乱，而是对单反相机已经产生的微不足道的影响（如果被淘汰，将会产生）提供了更温和的观点，正如他在周二的一份报告中所解释的那样。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><p><blockquote>如何确定佐尔坦的良性观点是否正确？他在笔记的最后写道：“鉴于我们在 6 月底之前将 FRA-OIS 利差从零变为负的看涨期权是基于 SLR 延期结束，以及美联储将试图用价格而非数量来解决数量问题的假设，今天的调整意味着 FRA-OIS 不会一路跌至零或负区域”。</blockquote></p><p>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，FRA-OIS将取决于外汇掉期相对于OIS的交易强度，但以远低于零的利率交易的国库券不再是一种风险……虽然法案偶尔会陷入负值区域，但到目前为止，它们已经避免了NIRP的全面暴跌，这可能只是市场正在等待的积极迹象，以缓解与SLR豁免突然且基本上出乎意料的结束相关的紧张情绪。</blockquote></p><p>* *&nbsp; *</p><p><blockquote>** *</blockquote></p><p></p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p><blockquote>最后，对于那些好奇会对市场产生什么直接影响的人来说，NatWest 策略师布莱克-格温（Blake Gwinn）写道，美联储宣布将让银行的监管豁免在本月底到期，“确实穿针引线，并 “缓解了对市场潜在长期影响的担忧”。<b>SLR“结束了它，但化解了许多下意识的市场反应”，承诺解决补充杠杆率的当前设计和校准问题，以防止应变发展</b>.</blockquote></p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p><blockquote>“格温说：”我从来没有担心过银行会在一天之内抛售国债，或者在不续签的情况下提取回购或类似的事情。格温总结说，“我担心的是，从长远来看，”随着外汇储备的继续上升，SLR 是否会 “成为一种麻烦，拖累国债和利差”。<b>“真正面对这些恐惧，基本上是在说，‘别担心，我们会做到的’。”</b></blockquote></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</p><p><blockquote>好吧，随着收益率在早期四巫交易中飙升至 HOD，市场似乎对美联储的任何行动都相当怀疑。</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>Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next<blockquote>美联储令市场失望，让 SLR 救济到期：接下来会发生什么</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\">\nFed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next<blockquote>美联储令市场失望，让 SLR 救济到期：接下来会发生什么</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-19 22:32</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><p><blockquote>正如这里所讨论和深入讨论的那样，在伊丽莎白·沃伦和谢罗德·布朗等进步民主党人的政治压力下，美联储决定让临时补充杠杆率（SLR）豁免如期于3月31日到期，即规则变更一周年纪念日。</blockquote></p><p>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p><blockquote>美联储银行监管机构今天宣布，2020年5月15日发布的存款机构补充杠杆率（SLR）临时变更将于2021年3月31日如期到期。鉴于 COVID-19 事件，做出临时改变是为了让存款机构能够灵活地向家庭和企业提供信贷。纽约联储前大师佐尔坦-波萨尔（Zoltan Pozsar）（再次）正确预测了这一结果，他在联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）之后表示，“事实上，美联储做出这一调整实际上是先发制人的--o/n RRP工具目前没有被使用，因此还没有能力限制，而回购和票据收益率还没有出现负值交易--<b>这表明美联储正在为终止 SLR 豁免“铺平道路”</b>.\"</blockquote></p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><p><blockquote>美联储深知这对市场来说将是一个非常热门的问题，因此发表了以下声明以缓解交易员的紧张情绪，指出虽然 SLR 特殊待遇将于 3 月 31 日到期，但美联储正在“邀请公众对几项潜在的 SLR 修改发表评论”，此外，“<b>随着时间的推移，董事会可能需要解决 SLR 的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力</b>“——简而言之，如果收益率飙升，美联储将立即重新推出 SLR：</blockquote></p><p>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储周五宣布，银行控股公司补充杠杆率（SLR）的临时变化将于3月31日如期到期。<b>此外，董事会将很快就调整SLR的措施征求意见。董事会将采取适当行动，确保SLR的任何变更不会削弱银行资本要求的整体实力。</b>为了缓解新冠肺炎疫情造成的国债市场压力，并促进对家庭和企业的贷款，董事会去年暂时修改了SLR，将美国国债和央行储备排除在外。此后，国债市场趋于稳定。<b>然而，由于最近央行储备供应和国债发行的增加，董事会可能需要随着时间的推移解决SLR的当前设计和校准问题，以防止出现可能制约经济增长和破坏金融稳定的压力。为了确保 SLR（作为额外资本要求于 2014 年设立）在储备较高的环境下仍然有效，董事会将很快就几项潜在的 SLR 修改征求公众意见。</b>该提案和意见将有助于与财政部和其他监管机构就未来确保国债市场弹性的工作进行持续讨论。尽管美联储提出了宽慰的要求，<b>在为有利的结果做好准备后，美联储令人失望的声明几乎不是交易员所希望的消息，股市暴跌……</b></blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率飙升……</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><blockquote>...而摩根大通的股票是最容易受到SLR减免的银行（正如昨天在“面临摩根大通杠杆减免威胁”中所指出的）...</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><blockquote>....崩溃了。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><p><blockquote>如果您一直生活在岩石下，以下是您应该关心 SLR 决定的原因：首先，对于那些阅读我们有关该问题的入门读物的人来说，摩根大通的一些背景（具有讽刺意味的是，摩根大通是一家因美联储的决定而损失最大的银行）底线是，如果没有 SLR 救济，<b>银行可能不得不去杠杆化、筹集新资本、停止回购、出售优先股、拒绝存款并普遍减少准备金（不一定是所有这些，也不是按顺序），就像美联储正在向市场注入数千亿美元的储备随着财政部耗尽其 TGA 账户。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p><blockquote>美联储资产负债表的大幅扩张意味着联邦储备银行持有的银行存款也将大幅增长。<b>监管救济的到期将使 8 个 GSIB 增加约 2.1 万亿美元的杠杆风险。此外，TGA 的减少和持续的量化宽松可能会在 2021 年为系统增加约 2.35 万亿美元的存款。</b>虽然 3 月 31 日豁免到期不会对 GSIB 产生直接影响，但全年杠杆资产的持续增长将增加长期债务 (LTD) 和优先要求。在此，摩根大通持乐观态度并写道<b>“即使是‘最坏’的案例发行情况也是非常可控的，LTD 需要 350 亿美元来满足 TLAC 要求，而优先需要 150 亿至 200 亿美元才能将全行业 SLR 的比例维持在 5.6%。</b></blockquote></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><blockquote>银行实体的限制更大，以 6.2% 的 SLR 计算，增加杠杆风险的能力约为 7,650 亿美元。”高盛的做法更令人不安：该银行估计，在持续的量化宽松制度下，将出现约 2 万亿美元的储备能力缺口，主要以银行无法接受的存款形式作为正在进行的量化宽松的一部分（高盛对 SLR 困境的全面理解要多得多）。</blockquote></p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那么接下来会发生什么呢？</b></blockquote></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><p><blockquote>昨天Curvature的Scott Skyrm在谈到这个话题时写道：<i>最大的银行享有更大的资产负债表，但华盛顿有政治因素反对延长豁免…….以下是几个场景及其对回购市场的影响</i>:</blockquote></p><p>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p><blockquote>豁免延长3个月或6个月——对回购市场没有影响。它已经全价了。准备金的豁免继续，但国债的豁免结束。<b>由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性增加。准备金和国库的豁免都结束了。同上。</b>换句话说，Skyrm持相对悲观的观点，警告称“由于大型银行是回购市场上最大的现金提供者，因此进入市场的现金减少，回购利率上升。”此外，随着回购资产从最大的银行转移到其他回购市场参与者，波动性可能会增加……</blockquote></p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><p><blockquote>也许有点太严厉了？那么，上周摩根大通为SLR布局了5种情景，其中两种情景预测SLR救济将在3月31日结束，具体如下：</blockquote></p><p><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital &amp; de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p><blockquote><u><b>3.救助3月31日结束，银行全面募资</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b><u><b>4.救助3月31日结束，银行增资去杠杆</b></u><b>对银行利率的影响前端利率</b>回到佐尔坦，让我们回顾一下，回购大师还警告说，“结束准备金和国债在 SLR 计算中的豁免可能意味着美国银行将拒绝保证金存款和准备金（而不是国债），以留出更多空间进行做市活动，<b>这些资金流动将进一步扩大 TGA 提款带来的货币资金流入。</b>\"</blockquote></p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>更重要的是，佐尔坦预计回购或更广泛的市场不会出现大范围的混乱，而是对单反相机已经产生的微不足道的影响（如果被淘汰，将会产生）提供了更温和的观点，正如他在周二的一份报告中所解释的那样。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><p><blockquote>如何确定佐尔坦的良性观点是否正确？他在笔记的最后写道：“鉴于我们在 6 月底之前将 FRA-OIS 利差从零变为负的看涨期权是基于 SLR 延期结束，以及美联储将试图用价格而非数量来解决数量问题的假设，今天的调整意味着 FRA-OIS 不会一路跌至零或负区域”。</blockquote></p><p>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，FRA-OIS将取决于外汇掉期相对于OIS的交易强度，但以远低于零的利率交易的国库券不再是一种风险……虽然法案偶尔会陷入负值区域，但到目前为止，它们已经避免了NIRP的全面暴跌，这可能只是市场正在等待的积极迹象，以缓解与SLR豁免突然且基本上出乎意料的结束相关的紧张情绪。</blockquote></p><p>* *&nbsp; *</p><p><blockquote>** *</blockquote></p><p></p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p><blockquote>最后，对于那些好奇会对市场产生什么直接影响的人来说，NatWest 策略师布莱克-格温（Blake Gwinn）写道，美联储宣布将让银行的监管豁免在本月底到期，“确实穿针引线，并 “缓解了对市场潜在长期影响的担忧”。<b>SLR“结束了它，但化解了许多下意识的市场反应”，承诺解决补充杠杆率的当前设计和校准问题，以防止应变发展</b>.</blockquote></p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p><blockquote>“格温说：”我从来没有担心过银行会在一天之内抛售国债，或者在不续签的情况下提取回购或类似的事情。格温总结说，“我担心的是，从长远来看，”随着外汇储备的继续上升，SLR 是否会 “成为一种麻烦，拖累国债和利差”。<b>“真正面对这些恐惧，基本上是在说，‘别担心，我们会做到的’。”</b></blockquote></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</p><p><blockquote>好吧，随着收益率在早期四巫交易中飙升至 HOD，市场似乎对美联储的任何行动都相当怀疑。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199154789","content_text":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption.\"Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...Bond yields spiked...... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")....... slumped.In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).So what happens next?Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market:The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates 4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever Impact on BanksRatesFront-End RatesGoing back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.\"More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.* *  *Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" asthe SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing.“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2520,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":351209057,"gmtCreate":1616595592079,"gmtModify":1634525007010,"author":{"id":"3577158388817239","authorId":"3577158388817239","name":"Freeman99","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f348541bc7aefa19000f5baef9a2b000","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577158388817239","authorIdStr":"3577158388817239"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Market adjustment...","listText":"Market adjustment...","text":"Market adjustment...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/351209057","repostId":"1197372595","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1197372595","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1616507295,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1197372595?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-23 21:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday<blockquote>为什么电动汽车股周二下跌</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1197372595","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Moto","content":"<p>EV Stocks are&nbsp;slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The&nbsp;shares&nbsp;of Li Auto&nbsp;fell&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;3%,Xpeng Motors&nbsp;and&nbsp;NIO&nbsp;stock&nbsp;are&nbsp;down&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;1%.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车股票在周二早盘交易中下滑。理想汽车股价下跌超过3%，小鹏汽车和蔚来股价下跌超过1%。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p><blockquote>周二，中国工业和信息化部发布了两份此前享受税收优惠待遇的新能源汽车目录，其中理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏和比亚迪均有车型上榜。</blockquote></p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p><blockquote>对此，理想汽车表示，理想one车型已经停售，因此在申报一年后被工信部自动撤回。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday<blockquote>为什么电动汽车股周二下跌</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy EV Stocks slipped on Tuesday<blockquote>为什么电动汽车股周二下跌</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-03-23 21:48</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>EV Stocks are&nbsp;slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The&nbsp;shares&nbsp;of Li Auto&nbsp;fell&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;3%,Xpeng Motors&nbsp;and&nbsp;NIO&nbsp;stock&nbsp;are&nbsp;down&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;1%.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车股票在周二早盘交易中下滑。理想汽车股价下跌超过3%，小鹏汽车和蔚来股价下跌超过1%。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9135010bf40c0cab06c12f27c0e9640f\" tg-width=\"375\" tg-height=\"228\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.</p><p><blockquote>周二，中国工业和信息化部发布了两份此前享受税收优惠待遇的新能源汽车目录，其中理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏和比亚迪均有车型上榜。</blockquote></p><p>In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.</p><p><blockquote>对此，理想汽车表示，理想one车型已经停售，因此在申报一年后被工信部自动撤回。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NIO":"蔚来","TSLA":"特斯拉","LI":"理想汽车","XPEV":"小鹏集团"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1197372595","content_text":"EV Stocks are slipping in Tuesday morning trading.The shares of Li Auto fell more than 3%,Xpeng Motors and NIO stock are down more than 1%.On Tuesday, China's Ministry of industry and information technology released two catalogues of new energy vehicles that previously enjoyed preferential tax treatment, among which Li Auto, Nio,Xpeng and BYD all had models on the list.In this regard, Li Auto said that the model ideal one was no longer on sale, so it was automatically withdrawn by the Ministry of industry and information technology one year after the declaration.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9,"NIO":0.9,"XPEV":0.9,"LI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1974,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}