3a9ede5b的个人主页 - 老虎社区

3a9ede5b

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

9关注

1粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-08-03

Nice

Alibaba EPS beats by RMB2.27, misses on revenue<blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW每股收益超过预期人民币2.27元、营收不及预期</blockquote>

2021-08-03

Yoooooo

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-28

Stonks

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-25

Kool

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-22

Juju

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Ooek

Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In "Heat-Seeking Missiles": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis<blockquote>鲍威尔刚刚发射了2万亿美元的“热寻导弹”：Zoltan解释美联储如何开启下一次回购危机</blockquote>

2021-06-19

K

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-19

K

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-18

Heh

Crypto Mining Could Give Huge Boost to Seagate and Western Digital Stock<blockquote>加密货币挖矿可能会极大提振希捷和西部数据的股票</blockquote>

2021-06-17

K

AMC: Take Profits<blockquote>AMC：获利了结</blockquote>

2021-06-16

Wow

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-15

Ok can

Quad-Witch Quandary: How Will Friday's $2 Trillion Gamma Expiration Impact Markets<blockquote>四女巫困境：周五2万亿美元伽马到期将如何影响市场</blockquote>

2021-06-12

Cool

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-12

Nooooooo

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-12

Whut

Chinese education stocks fell again<blockquote>中国教育股再次下跌</blockquote>

2021-06-12

Very nice article

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-12

Kk

AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>

2021-06-12

Ok

Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3581771143434296","uuid":"3581771143434296","gmtCreate":1618677992177,"gmtModify":1618677992177,"name":"3a9ede5b","pinyin":"ray19","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":9,"tweetSize":18,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d-1","templateUuid":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d","name":"投资经理虎","description":"证券账户累计交易金额达到10万美元","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8dfc27c1ee0e25db1c93e9d0b641101","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f43908c142f8a33c78f5bdf0e2897488","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82165ff19cb8a786e8919f92acee5213","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.08.06","exceedPercentage":"60.31%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-2","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"宗师交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到100次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ad22cfbe2d05aa393b18e9226e4b0307","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36702e6ff3ffe46acafee66cc85273ca","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d52eb88fa385cf5abe2616ed63781765","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.08.06","exceedPercentage":"80.09%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37-1","templateUuid":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37","name":"博闻投资者","description":"累计交易超过10只正股","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.09.27","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.09.18","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":12,"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":807020184,"gmtCreate":1627989995148,"gmtModify":1633754613904,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/807020184","repostId":"1169635195","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1169635195","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":1627988246,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1169635195?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-03 18:57","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Alibaba EPS beats by RMB2.27, misses on revenue<blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW每股收益超过预期人民币2.27元、营收不及预期</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1169635195","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":" $Alibaba$ posted financial result in premarket, which showed that:. Alibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.Alibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.Revenue was RMB205,740 million , an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million .Annual active consumersof the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached app","content":"<p>(August 3)&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a> posted&nbsp;financial&nbsp;result&nbsp;in&nbsp;premarket,&nbsp;which&nbsp;showed&nbsp;that:</p><p><blockquote>（8月3日）<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">阿里巴巴-SW</a>盘前公布的财务业绩显示：</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度营收为人民币2057.4亿元，去年同期为人民币1537.5亿元；FactSet共识为人民币2091.1亿元。</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度调整后。每股收益为人民币16.60元，去年同期为人民币14.82元；FactSet共识人民币14.33元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS</b></p><p><blockquote><b>业务亮点</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>In the quarter ended June 30, 2021:</b></p><p><blockquote><b>截至2021年6月30日的季度：</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Revenue</b>&nbsp;was RMB205,740 million (US$31,865 million), an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million (US$29,010 million).</li>  <li><b>Annual active consumers</b>of the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached approximately 1.18 billion for the twelve months ended June 30, 2021, an increase of 45 million from the twelve months ended March 31, 2021. This includes 912 million consumers in China1and 265 million consumers overseas served by Lazada, AliExpress, Trendyol and Daraz.</li>  <li><b>Income from operations</b>&nbsp;was RMB30,847 million (US$4,778 million), a decrease of 11% year-over-year.<b>Adjusted EBITDA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 5% year-over-year to RMB48,628 million (US$7,532 million).<b>Adjusted EBITA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 8% year-over-year to RMB41,731 million (US$6,463 million). The year-over-year decreases were primarily due to our investments in strategic areas to capture incremental opportunities, such as Community Marketplaces, Taobao Deals, Local Consumer Services and Lazada, as well as our increased spending on growth initiatives within China retail marketplaces, such as Idle Fish and Taobao Live, and our support to merchants.</li>  <li><b>Net income attributable to ordinary shareholders</b>&nbsp;was RMB45,141 million (US$6,991 million),and<b>net income</b>was RMB42,835 million (US$6,634 million).<b>Non-GAAP net income</b>&nbsp;was RMB43,441 million (US$6,728 million), an increase of 10% year-over-year, mainly due to an increase in share of profit of equity method investees.</li>  <li><b>Diluted earnings per ADS</b>&nbsp;was RMB16.38 (US$2.54) and<b>diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.05 (US$0.32 or HK$2.46).<b>Non-GAAP diluted earnings per ADS</b>was RMB16.60 (US$2.57), an increase of 12% year-over-year and<b>non-GAAP diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.08 (US$0.32 or HK$2.50), an increase of 12% year-over-year.</li>  <li><b>Net cashprovided by operating activities</b>&nbsp;was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million).<b>Non-GAAP free cash flow</b>was RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), a decrease compared to RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020, mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million fine levied earlier this year by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation pursuant to China’s Anti-monopoly Law (the “Anti-monopoly Fine”) and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas.</li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11aa08a1ccb4f80e6867c7e7631297c8\" tg-width=\"719\" tg-height=\"863\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>收入</b>为人民币2,057.40百万元（318.65亿美元），同比增长34%。如果不包括合并高鑫，我们的收入将同比增长22%至人民币1,873.06亿元（290.1亿美元）。</li><li><b>年度活跃消费者</b>截至2021年6月30日止十二个月，全球阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的总用户数达到约11.8亿，较截至2021年3月31日止十二个月增加4500万。这包括Lazada、全球速卖通、Trendyol和Daraz服务的中国9.12亿消费者1和海外2.65亿消费者。</li><li><b>营业收入</b>为人民币308.47亿元（47.78亿美元），同比下降11%。<b>调整后EBITDA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降5%至人民币486.28亿元（75.32亿美元）。<b>调整后EBITA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降8%至人民币417.31亿元（64.63亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于我们在战略领域的投资以捕捉增量机会，例如社区市场、淘宝交易、本地消费者服务和Lazada，以及我们在中国零售市场增长计划上的支出增加，例如闲鱼和淘宝直播，以及我们对商家的支持。</li><li><b>归属于普通股股东的净利润</b>为人民币451.41亿元（69.91亿美元），及<b>净收入</b>为人民币428.35亿元（66.34亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则净利润</b>为人民币434.41亿元（67.28亿美元），同比增长10%，主要是由于权益法被投资方利润份额增加。</li><li><b>每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.38元（2.54美元）<b>每股摊薄盈利</b>为人民币2.05元（0.32美元或2.46港元）。<b>非公认会计准则每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.60元（2.57美元），同比增长12%<b>非公认会计准则稀释每股收益</b>为人民币2.08元（0.32美元或2.50港元），同比增长12%。</li><li><b>经营活动提供的现金净额</b>为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则自由现金流</b>为人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币365.70亿元有所下降，主要是由于部分结清了今年早些时候中国国家市场监督管理总局根据中国反垄断法征收的人民币182.28亿元罚款（“反垄断法罚款”）中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元）以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。</li></ul></blockquote></p><p> <b>China Retail Marketplaces</b></p><p><blockquote><b>中国零售市场</b></blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, Alibaba's China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，阿里巴巴-SW中国零售市场的移动月活跃用户数为9.39亿，季度净增1400万。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cloud Computing</b></p><p><blockquote><b>云计算</b></blockquote></p><p> In the June 2021 quarter, our cloud computing revenue grew 29% year-over-year to RMB16,051 million (US$2,486 million), primarily driven by robust growth in revenue from customers in the Internet, financial services and retail industries.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月季度，我们的云计算收入同比增长29%至人民币160.51亿元（24.86亿美元），主要得益于互联网、金融服务和零售行业客户收入的强劲增长。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cash Flow from Operating Activities and Free Cash Flow</b></p><p><blockquote><b>经营活动产生的现金流量和自由现金流量</b></blockquote></p><p> In the quarter ended June 30, 2021, net cash provided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million), a decrease compared to RMB50,099 million in the same quarter of 2020. Free cash flow, a non-GAAP measurement of liquidity, decreased to RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), from RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020. The year-over-year decreases were mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million Anti-monopoly Fine and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas. A reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow is included at the end of this results announcement.</p><p><blockquote>截至2021年6月30日的季度，经营活动提供的净现金为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币500.99亿元有所下降。自由现金流（衡量流动性的非公认会计准则衡量标准）从2020年同季度的人民币365.7亿元下降至人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于部分和解了人民币182.28亿元的反垄断罚款中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元），以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。经营活动提供的净现金与自由现金流的调节表包含在本业绩公告的末尾。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Increasing Share Repurchases</b></p><p><blockquote><b>增加股票回购</b></blockquote></p><p> Since April 1, 2021 and through the publication of this results announcement, we repurchased approximately 18.1 million of our ADSs (the equivalent of approximately 144.5 million of our ordinary shares) for approximately US$3,680 million under our share repurchase program. In addition, on August 2, 2021, our board of directors authorized the Company to upsize our Company's share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion. This share repurchase program will be effective through the end of 2022.</p><p><blockquote>自2021年4月1日起及透过刊发本业绩公告，我们根据股份回购计划以约36.8亿美元回购约18.1百万股美国存讬股（相当于约144.5百万股普通股）。此外，2021年8月2日，我们的董事会授权公司将我们公司的股票回购计划规模从100亿美元扩大到150亿美元。该股票回购计划将于2022年底生效。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/58bf53593de78f5f6e4fa1096d7aae94\" tg-width=\"757\" tg-height=\"793\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, our China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million. We continue to increase penetration in less-developed areas, reflecting our success in broadening product offerings to meet diverse consumer demand.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，我们的中国零售市场拥有9.39亿移动月活跃用户数，季度净增1400万。我们继续提高在欠发达地区的渗透率，反映我们在扩大产品供应以满足多样化消费者需求方面取得的成功。</blockquote></p><p> “Alibaba started the new fiscal year by delivering a healthy quarter. For the June quarter, global annual active consumers across the Alibaba Ecosystem reached 1.18 billion, an increase of 45 million from the March quarter, which includes 912 million consumers in China. Over more than twenty years of growth, we have developed a company that spans across both consumer and industrial Internet, with multiple engines driving our long-term growth,” said Daniel Zhang, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Alibaba Group. “We believe in the growth of the Chinese economy and long-term value creation of Alibaba, and we will continue to strengthen our technology advantage in improving the consumer experience and helping our enterprise customers to accomplish successful digital transformations.”</p><p><blockquote>张勇集团董事长兼首席执行官阿里巴巴-SW表示：“阿里巴巴-SW以健康的季度开局新财年。在6月季度，阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的全球年度活跃消费者达到11.8亿，比3月季度增加了4500万，其中包括9.12亿中国消费者。经过二十多年的增长，我们已经发展出一家横跨消费互联网和工业互联网的公司，多个引擎推动我们的长期增长。”“我们相信中国经济的增长和阿里巴巴-SW的长期价值创造，我们将继续加强我们在改善消费者体验和帮助企业客户成功完成数字化转型方面的技术优势。”</blockquote></p><p> “We delivered strong revenue growth of 34% year-over-year. As we said in last quarter's results announcement, we are investing our excess profits and additional capital to support our merchants and invest in strategic areas to better serve customers and penetrate into new addressable markets,” said Maggie Wu, Chief Financial Officer of Alibaba Group. “We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>“我们实现了34%的强劲收入增长。正如我们在上季度业绩公告中所说，我们正在投资超额利润和额外资本来支持我们的商家，并投资于战略领域，以更好地服务客户并渗透到新的潜在市场，”阿里巴巴-SW集团首席财务官Maggie Wu表示。“我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已经回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</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>Alibaba EPS beats by RMB2.27, misses on revenue<blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW每股收益超过预期人民币2.27元、营收不及预期</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\">\nAlibaba EPS beats by RMB2.27, misses on revenue<blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW每股收益超过预期人民币2.27元、营收不及预期</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\">2021-08-03 18:57</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(August 3)&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a> posted&nbsp;financial&nbsp;result&nbsp;in&nbsp;premarket,&nbsp;which&nbsp;showed&nbsp;that:</p><p><blockquote>（8月3日）<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">阿里巴巴-SW</a>盘前公布的财务业绩显示：</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度营收为人民币2057.4亿元，去年同期为人民币1537.5亿元；FactSet共识为人民币2091.1亿元。</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度调整后。每股收益为人民币16.60元，去年同期为人民币14.82元；FactSet共识人民币14.33元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS</b></p><p><blockquote><b>业务亮点</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>In the quarter ended June 30, 2021:</b></p><p><blockquote><b>截至2021年6月30日的季度：</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Revenue</b>&nbsp;was RMB205,740 million (US$31,865 million), an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million (US$29,010 million).</li>  <li><b>Annual active consumers</b>of the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached approximately 1.18 billion for the twelve months ended June 30, 2021, an increase of 45 million from the twelve months ended March 31, 2021. This includes 912 million consumers in China1and 265 million consumers overseas served by Lazada, AliExpress, Trendyol and Daraz.</li>  <li><b>Income from operations</b>&nbsp;was RMB30,847 million (US$4,778 million), a decrease of 11% year-over-year.<b>Adjusted EBITDA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 5% year-over-year to RMB48,628 million (US$7,532 million).<b>Adjusted EBITA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 8% year-over-year to RMB41,731 million (US$6,463 million). The year-over-year decreases were primarily due to our investments in strategic areas to capture incremental opportunities, such as Community Marketplaces, Taobao Deals, Local Consumer Services and Lazada, as well as our increased spending on growth initiatives within China retail marketplaces, such as Idle Fish and Taobao Live, and our support to merchants.</li>  <li><b>Net income attributable to ordinary shareholders</b>&nbsp;was RMB45,141 million (US$6,991 million),and<b>net income</b>was RMB42,835 million (US$6,634 million).<b>Non-GAAP net income</b>&nbsp;was RMB43,441 million (US$6,728 million), an increase of 10% year-over-year, mainly due to an increase in share of profit of equity method investees.</li>  <li><b>Diluted earnings per ADS</b>&nbsp;was RMB16.38 (US$2.54) and<b>diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.05 (US$0.32 or HK$2.46).<b>Non-GAAP diluted earnings per ADS</b>was RMB16.60 (US$2.57), an increase of 12% year-over-year and<b>non-GAAP diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.08 (US$0.32 or HK$2.50), an increase of 12% year-over-year.</li>  <li><b>Net cashprovided by operating activities</b>&nbsp;was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million).<b>Non-GAAP free cash flow</b>was RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), a decrease compared to RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020, mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million fine levied earlier this year by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation pursuant to China’s Anti-monopoly Law (the “Anti-monopoly Fine”) and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas.</li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11aa08a1ccb4f80e6867c7e7631297c8\" tg-width=\"719\" tg-height=\"863\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>收入</b>为人民币2,057.40百万元（318.65亿美元），同比增长34%。如果不包括合并高鑫，我们的收入将同比增长22%至人民币1,873.06亿元（290.1亿美元）。</li><li><b>年度活跃消费者</b>截至2021年6月30日止十二个月，全球阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的总用户数达到约11.8亿，较截至2021年3月31日止十二个月增加4500万。这包括Lazada、全球速卖通、Trendyol和Daraz服务的中国9.12亿消费者1和海外2.65亿消费者。</li><li><b>营业收入</b>为人民币308.47亿元（47.78亿美元），同比下降11%。<b>调整后EBITDA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降5%至人民币486.28亿元（75.32亿美元）。<b>调整后EBITA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降8%至人民币417.31亿元（64.63亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于我们在战略领域的投资以捕捉增量机会，例如社区市场、淘宝交易、本地消费者服务和Lazada，以及我们在中国零售市场增长计划上的支出增加，例如闲鱼和淘宝直播，以及我们对商家的支持。</li><li><b>归属于普通股股东的净利润</b>为人民币451.41亿元（69.91亿美元），及<b>净收入</b>为人民币428.35亿元（66.34亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则净利润</b>为人民币434.41亿元（67.28亿美元），同比增长10%，主要是由于权益法被投资方利润份额增加。</li><li><b>每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.38元（2.54美元）<b>每股摊薄盈利</b>为人民币2.05元（0.32美元或2.46港元）。<b>非公认会计准则每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.60元（2.57美元），同比增长12%<b>非公认会计准则稀释每股收益</b>为人民币2.08元（0.32美元或2.50港元），同比增长12%。</li><li><b>经营活动提供的现金净额</b>为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则自由现金流</b>为人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币365.70亿元有所下降，主要是由于部分结清了今年早些时候中国国家市场监督管理总局根据中国反垄断法征收的人民币182.28亿元罚款（“反垄断法罚款”）中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元）以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。</li></ul></blockquote></p><p> <b>China Retail Marketplaces</b></p><p><blockquote><b>中国零售市场</b></blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, Alibaba's China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，阿里巴巴-SW中国零售市场的移动月活跃用户数为9.39亿，季度净增1400万。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cloud Computing</b></p><p><blockquote><b>云计算</b></blockquote></p><p> In the June 2021 quarter, our cloud computing revenue grew 29% year-over-year to RMB16,051 million (US$2,486 million), primarily driven by robust growth in revenue from customers in the Internet, financial services and retail industries.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月季度，我们的云计算收入同比增长29%至人民币160.51亿元（24.86亿美元），主要得益于互联网、金融服务和零售行业客户收入的强劲增长。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cash Flow from Operating Activities and Free Cash Flow</b></p><p><blockquote><b>经营活动产生的现金流量和自由现金流量</b></blockquote></p><p> In the quarter ended June 30, 2021, net cash provided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million), a decrease compared to RMB50,099 million in the same quarter of 2020. Free cash flow, a non-GAAP measurement of liquidity, decreased to RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), from RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020. The year-over-year decreases were mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million Anti-monopoly Fine and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas. A reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow is included at the end of this results announcement.</p><p><blockquote>截至2021年6月30日的季度，经营活动提供的净现金为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币500.99亿元有所下降。自由现金流（衡量流动性的非公认会计准则衡量标准）从2020年同季度的人民币365.7亿元下降至人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于部分和解了人民币182.28亿元的反垄断罚款中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元），以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。经营活动提供的净现金与自由现金流的调节表包含在本业绩公告的末尾。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Increasing Share Repurchases</b></p><p><blockquote><b>增加股票回购</b></blockquote></p><p> Since April 1, 2021 and through the publication of this results announcement, we repurchased approximately 18.1 million of our ADSs (the equivalent of approximately 144.5 million of our ordinary shares) for approximately US$3,680 million under our share repurchase program. In addition, on August 2, 2021, our board of directors authorized the Company to upsize our Company's share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion. This share repurchase program will be effective through the end of 2022.</p><p><blockquote>自2021年4月1日起及透过刊发本业绩公告，我们根据股份回购计划以约36.8亿美元回购约18.1百万股美国存讬股（相当于约144.5百万股普通股）。此外，2021年8月2日，我们的董事会授权公司将我们公司的股票回购计划规模从100亿美元扩大到150亿美元。该股票回购计划将于2022年底生效。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/58bf53593de78f5f6e4fa1096d7aae94\" tg-width=\"757\" tg-height=\"793\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, our China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million. We continue to increase penetration in less-developed areas, reflecting our success in broadening product offerings to meet diverse consumer demand.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，我们的中国零售市场拥有9.39亿移动月活跃用户数，季度净增1400万。我们继续提高在欠发达地区的渗透率，反映我们在扩大产品供应以满足多样化消费者需求方面取得的成功。</blockquote></p><p> “Alibaba started the new fiscal year by delivering a healthy quarter. For the June quarter, global annual active consumers across the Alibaba Ecosystem reached 1.18 billion, an increase of 45 million from the March quarter, which includes 912 million consumers in China. Over more than twenty years of growth, we have developed a company that spans across both consumer and industrial Internet, with multiple engines driving our long-term growth,” said Daniel Zhang, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Alibaba Group. “We believe in the growth of the Chinese economy and long-term value creation of Alibaba, and we will continue to strengthen our technology advantage in improving the consumer experience and helping our enterprise customers to accomplish successful digital transformations.”</p><p><blockquote>张勇集团董事长兼首席执行官阿里巴巴-SW表示：“阿里巴巴-SW以健康的季度开局新财年。在6月季度，阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的全球年度活跃消费者达到11.8亿，比3月季度增加了4500万，其中包括9.12亿中国消费者。经过二十多年的增长，我们已经发展出一家横跨消费互联网和工业互联网的公司，多个引擎推动我们的长期增长。”“我们相信中国经济的增长和阿里巴巴-SW的长期价值创造，我们将继续加强我们在改善消费者体验和帮助企业客户成功完成数字化转型方面的技术优势。”</blockquote></p><p> “We delivered strong revenue growth of 34% year-over-year. As we said in last quarter's results announcement, we are investing our excess profits and additional capital to support our merchants and invest in strategic areas to better serve customers and penetrate into new addressable markets,” said Maggie Wu, Chief Financial Officer of Alibaba Group. “We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>“我们实现了34%的强劲收入增长。正如我们在上季度业绩公告中所说，我们正在投资超额利润和额外资本来支持我们的商家，并投资于战略领域，以更好地服务客户并渗透到新的潜在市场，”阿里巴巴-SW集团首席财务官Maggie Wu表示。“我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已经回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"09988":"阿里巴巴-W","BABA":"阿里巴巴"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1169635195","content_text":"(August 3) Alibaba posted financial result in premarket, which showed that:\nAlibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.\nAlibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.\nBUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS\nIn the quarter ended June 30, 2021:\n\nRevenue was RMB205,740 million (US$31,865 million), an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million (US$29,010 million).\nAnnual active consumersof the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached approximately 1.18 billion for the twelve months ended June 30, 2021, an increase of 45 million from the twelve months ended March 31, 2021. This includes 912 million consumers in China1and 265 million consumers overseas served by Lazada, AliExpress, Trendyol and Daraz.\nIncome from operations was RMB30,847 million (US$4,778 million), a decrease of 11% year-over-year.Adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 5% year-over-year to RMB48,628 million (US$7,532 million).Adjusted EBITA, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 8% year-over-year to RMB41,731 million (US$6,463 million). The year-over-year decreases were primarily due to our investments in strategic areas to capture incremental opportunities, such as Community Marketplaces, Taobao Deals, Local Consumer Services and Lazada, as well as our increased spending on growth initiatives within China retail marketplaces, such as Idle Fish and Taobao Live, and our support to merchants.\nNet income attributable to ordinary shareholders was RMB45,141 million (US$6,991 million),andnet incomewas RMB42,835 million (US$6,634 million).Non-GAAP net income was RMB43,441 million (US$6,728 million), an increase of 10% year-over-year, mainly due to an increase in share of profit of equity method investees.\nDiluted earnings per ADS was RMB16.38 (US$2.54) anddiluted earnings per sharewas RMB2.05 (US$0.32 or HK$2.46).Non-GAAP diluted earnings per ADSwas RMB16.60 (US$2.57), an increase of 12% year-over-year andnon-GAAP diluted earnings per sharewas RMB2.08 (US$0.32 or HK$2.50), an increase of 12% year-over-year.\nNet cashprovided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million).Non-GAAP free cash flowwas RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), a decrease compared to RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020, mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million fine levied earlier this year by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation pursuant to China’s Anti-monopoly Law (the “Anti-monopoly Fine”) and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas.\n\n\nChina Retail Marketplaces\nIn June 2021, Alibaba's China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million.\nCloud Computing\nIn the June 2021 quarter, our cloud computing revenue grew 29% year-over-year to RMB16,051 million (US$2,486 million), primarily driven by robust growth in revenue from customers in the Internet, financial services and retail industries.\nCash Flow from Operating Activities and Free Cash Flow\nIn the quarter ended June 30, 2021, net cash provided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million), a decrease compared to RMB50,099 million in the same quarter of 2020. Free cash flow, a non-GAAP measurement of liquidity, decreased to RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), from RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020. The year-over-year decreases were mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million Anti-monopoly Fine and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas. A reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow is included at the end of this results announcement.\nIncreasing Share Repurchases\nSince April 1, 2021 and through the publication of this results announcement, we repurchased approximately 18.1 million of our ADSs (the equivalent of approximately 144.5 million of our ordinary shares) for approximately US$3,680 million under our share repurchase program. In addition, on August 2, 2021, our board of directors authorized the Company to upsize our Company's share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion. This share repurchase program will be effective through the end of 2022.\n\nWe are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”\nIn June 2021, our China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million. We continue to increase penetration in less-developed areas, reflecting our success in broadening product offerings to meet diverse consumer demand.\n“Alibaba started the new fiscal year by delivering a healthy quarter. For the June quarter, global annual active consumers across the Alibaba Ecosystem reached 1.18 billion, an increase of 45 million from the March quarter, which includes 912 million consumers in China. Over more than twenty years of growth, we have developed a company that spans across both consumer and industrial Internet, with multiple engines driving our long-term growth,” said Daniel Zhang, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Alibaba Group. “We believe in the growth of the Chinese economy and long-term value creation of Alibaba, and we will continue to strengthen our technology advantage in improving the consumer experience and helping our enterprise customers to accomplish successful digital transformations.”\n“We delivered strong revenue growth of 34% year-over-year. As we said in last quarter's results announcement, we are investing our excess profits and additional capital to support our merchants and invest in strategic areas to better serve customers and penetrate into new addressable markets,” said Maggie Wu, Chief Financial Officer of Alibaba Group. “We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BABA":0.9,"09988":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1502,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":807067764,"gmtCreate":1627989956358,"gmtModify":1633754614248,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yoooooo","listText":"Yoooooo","text":"Yoooooo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/807067764","repostId":"2156140231","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2577,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150154643,"gmtCreate":1624890737382,"gmtModify":1633947402868,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Stonks&nbsp;","listText":"Stonks&nbsp;","text":"Stonks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/150154643","repostId":"2146835880","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2321,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122726179,"gmtCreate":1624634073791,"gmtModify":1633950241052,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Kool","listText":"Kool","text":"Kool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122726179","repostId":"1100357819","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1432,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129694884,"gmtCreate":1624370448248,"gmtModify":1634007139009,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Juju","listText":"Juju","text":"Juju","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129694884","repostId":"1158992528","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1396,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167623082,"gmtCreate":1624266314946,"gmtModify":1634008685985,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ooek","listText":"Ooek","text":"Ooek","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167623082","repostId":"1146982088","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1146982088","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624259620,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1146982088?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 15:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis<blockquote>鲍威尔刚刚发射了2万亿美元的“热寻导弹”：Zoltan解释美联储如何开启下一次回购危机</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1146982088","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpect","content":"<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.</p><p><blockquote>上周，在市场对美联储意外鹰派转向的震惊反应中，我们注意到有两个切实但不太引人注目的变化：美联储调整了两个关键的“管理”利率，将IOER和RRP利率都提高了5个基点（正如美国银行、摩根大通、莱特森、德意志银行和富国银行正确预测的那样，而花旗、牛津经济研究院、杰富瑞、瑞士信贷、渣打银行、蒙特利尔银行错误地预测利率不会变化），以推动有效联邦基金利率走高，远离即将到来的0%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e3c93e7ae558cd9f2fdb7e4a2769f1\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"377\">What does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP&nbsp; facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.</p><p><blockquote>这是什么意思？正如Curvature Securities回购专家Scott Skyrm上周写道，“显然，美联储打算将隔夜利率提高到零以上，并耗尽RRP工具的现金。”不幸的是，最终结果将与美联储想要达到的目标完全相反。</blockquote></p><p> But what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.</p><p><blockquote>但这对于隔夜利率和建议零售价交易量到底意味着什么？正如Skyrm进一步指出的那样，IOER的上升应该会将每日联邦基金利率拉高5个基点，进而给回购GC带来上行压力。结合RRP增加5个基点，GC应该会大幅上涨5个基点，事实也确实如此。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8b99df7af1731b4bdcbcf072dcf39ce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\">The problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:</p><p><blockquote>正如Skyrm警告的那样，问题在于美联储的技术调整无助于缓解建议零售额：</blockquote></p><p>   When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.  Bottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"<i>the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"</i></p><p><blockquote>当市场回购利率为0%且RRP利率为零时，约5000亿美元进入RRP。好吧，如果市场回购利率和RRP利率都高出5个基点，就没有理由从RRP中提取现金。例如，如果GC利率升至0.05%，而RRP利率保持在零，投资者以更高利率投资的偏好将从RRP中移除现金。底线：由于市场利率和建议零售价均为0.05%，现金投资者确实没有经济动机将现金转移到回购市场。或者，正如我们总结的那样，“<i>美联储的利率变化可能对美联储的逆回购工具或创纪录的5000亿现金产生零影响。”</i></blockquote></p><p> In retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.</p><p><blockquote>回想起来，这是一种轻描淡写的说法，因为仅仅一天后，美联储逆回购工具的使用量就飙升了创纪录的50%，随着GSE的出现，飙升至惊人的7560亿美元（周五收盘价为7470亿美元）。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0fba18d7808300abc3bdf4ffaa3d5fb6\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\">Needless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"<b>the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:</b><b><u>the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market</u></b><b>).\"</b></p><p><blockquote>不用说，淹没美联储的建议零售价工具和冲销准备金几乎不是美联储的本意，正如瑞士信贷自己的回购专家（前纽约联储工作人员）Zoltan Pozsar在他的事后分析中所写的那样，“<b>重新定价的建议零售价融资将很快成为银行系统的一个问题：</b><b><u>银行体系正在从资产约束（存款大量涌入，但除了美联储之外无处可贷）转变为负债约束（存款不断流失，除了货币市场之外无处可替代）</u></b><b>).\"</b></blockquote></p><p> What he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did not<i>reward</i>allocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.</p><p><blockquote>他的意思是，以前0.00%的RRP利率没有<i>奖励</i>分配惰性的超额准备金，但只是提供了一个存放它们的地方，现在美联储提供的收益率与数万亿票据提供的利率相比大幅上升，我们即将看到隔夜货币市场发生翻天覆地的变化，数万亿资本从传统投资重新分配到美联储的建议零售价。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fed<i><b>also</b></i>made a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “<b>yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>换句话说，正如Pozsar所说，“RRP设施开始对储备进行消毒……还会有更多储备。”而就在德意志银行向Pozsar解释为什么美联储的信号是一个r*政策错误时，美联储<i><b>也</b></i>犯了一个政策错误——只是这次是技术利率——冲销准备金，因为“当严格来说没有必要提高RRP设施的利率时，提高RRP设施的利率是一回事，而将其提高到‘过高’是另一回事——正如一位货币基金经理所说，”<b>昨天，我们一年甚至拿不到一个基点；以五个基点从最值得信赖的交易对手那里获得无尽的票据是梦想成真。”</b></blockquote></p><p> He's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),<b>5bps is too generous</b>, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo rate<b>will upset the state of \"singularity\"</b>and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –<b>at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>他是对的：虽然许多人可能认为0个基点太低，但目前这很难说是灾难性的（瑞士信贷是预测不会有管理加息的机构之一），<b>5bps太慷慨了</b>Pozsar警告说，新的逆回购利率<b>将颠覆“奇点”状态</b>“就像热寻的导弹一样，货币市场投资者转移了数千亿美元，急转弯90度，在零边界寻找哪怕一个基点的收益率——<b>在5个基点的利率下，货币基金有动力出售所有国库券并将现金存放在RRP设施中。”</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Indeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,<b>and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.</b>They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.<b>So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.</b></p><p><blockquote>事实上，如下图所示，6个月的票据收益率不到5个基点，<b>货币基金拥有超过2万亿美元的票据。</b>他们有卖出的动机，而其他人有买入的动机：那些存款一直被银行“容忍”到目前为止赚取零利息的机构有动力获得票据曲线提供的0-5个基点的范围。将现金以一个基点存入票据比零存款要好。<b>因此，准备金冲销开始了，因此o/n RRP工具从一个为大型银行一直在推走的存款提供利率下限的基本上被动的工具，变成了一个“吸走”银行决定保留的存款的主动工具。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bf593f7b1d2d665f39384ed6a998d3bf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"403\">To help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves with<i><b>too few</b></i>intraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.</p><p><blockquote>为了帮助读者直观地了解正在发生的事情，瑞士信贷策略师建议进行以下“极端”的思想实验：目前银行的大部分“Covid-19”存款都进入了利率更好的票据市场。货币基金向目前将现金存放在银行的机构投资者出售票据，货币基金将票据交换为o/N RRP。（有点）简单地说，虽然美联储以前为银行提供了一个方便的存放准备金的地方，但现在它将积极耗尽准备金，以至于我们可能最终会陷入另一场2019年式的回购危机，因为大多数金融机构突然发现自己与<i><b>太少</b></i>日内储备，迫使它们使用美联储的其他融资工具（如外汇掉期额度）来保持持续的偿付能力。</blockquote></p><p> This process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.</p><p><blockquote>这个过程不是一蹴而就的。需要几周时间才能观察到美联储准备金冲销的影响。</blockquote></p><p> And here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,<b>some bond-heavy banks cannot.</b>As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who can<i><b>not</b></i>handle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么这个问题与2019年的回购危机类似：很快我们就会发现，虽然现金充裕的银行可以应对资金外流，<b>一些债券密集型银行则不能。</b>因此，Zoltan预测，接下来“我们将注意到一些银行（那些能够<i><b>不</b></i>处理资金外流）正在从FHLB借入预付款，现金充裕的银行停止在外汇掉期市场放贷，因为RRP工具从它们那里抽走了准备金，美联储不得不重新启动外汇掉期额度来抵消。”</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line:<i><b>whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>底线：<i><b>尽管之前我们看到Libor-OIS崩溃，但这一关键资金利差将不得不从这里扩大，除非美联储再次将o/n RRP利率降低到以前的水平。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Or, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,<b>in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"</b>While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,<b>the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.</b></p><p><blockquote>或者，正如Zoltan总结的那样，“要么是数量，要么是价格”——事实上，<b>2019年，美联储选择了价格而不是数量，这适得其反，并导致了回购危机，结束了美联储的加息周期，并开始了“非量化宽松”。</b>虽然美联储在2月份进行了自我救赎，但上周三，它在没有使其负债受到限制的情况下扩大了建议零售价的使用范围，因为它选择了数量而不是价格——这一点效果很好——<b>美联储将“无限”的数量变成了“免费的钱”，并开始冲销储备。</b></blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：“我们正在目睹最后手段交易商（DoLR）学习交易艺术，犯非受迫性错误——如果美联储通过定价过高的o/n RRP工具进行冲销，它必须准备好通过掉期增加流动性线……”</blockquote></p><p> Translation:&nbsp;<b>by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.</b></p><p><blockquote>翻译：<b>通过支付数万亿美元的准备金5个基点，美联储刚刚播下了下一场流动性危机的种子。</b></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>Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis<blockquote>鲍威尔刚刚发射了2万亿美元的“热寻导弹”：Zoltan解释美联储如何开启下一次回购危机</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\">\nPowell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis<blockquote>鲍威尔刚刚发射了2万亿美元的“热寻导弹”：Zoltan解释美联储如何开启下一次回购危机</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-21 15:13</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.</p><p><blockquote>上周，在市场对美联储意外鹰派转向的震惊反应中，我们注意到有两个切实但不太引人注目的变化：美联储调整了两个关键的“管理”利率，将IOER和RRP利率都提高了5个基点（正如美国银行、摩根大通、莱特森、德意志银行和富国银行正确预测的那样，而花旗、牛津经济研究院、杰富瑞、瑞士信贷、渣打银行、蒙特利尔银行错误地预测利率不会变化），以推动有效联邦基金利率走高，远离即将到来的0%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e3c93e7ae558cd9f2fdb7e4a2769f1\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"377\">What does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP&nbsp; facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.</p><p><blockquote>这是什么意思？正如Curvature Securities回购专家Scott Skyrm上周写道，“显然，美联储打算将隔夜利率提高到零以上，并耗尽RRP工具的现金。”不幸的是，最终结果将与美联储想要达到的目标完全相反。</blockquote></p><p> But what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.</p><p><blockquote>但这对于隔夜利率和建议零售价交易量到底意味着什么？正如Skyrm进一步指出的那样，IOER的上升应该会将每日联邦基金利率拉高5个基点，进而给回购GC带来上行压力。结合RRP增加5个基点，GC应该会大幅上涨5个基点，事实也确实如此。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8b99df7af1731b4bdcbcf072dcf39ce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\">The problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:</p><p><blockquote>正如Skyrm警告的那样，问题在于美联储的技术调整无助于缓解建议零售额：</blockquote></p><p>   When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.  Bottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"<i>the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"</i></p><p><blockquote>当市场回购利率为0%且RRP利率为零时，约5000亿美元进入RRP。好吧，如果市场回购利率和RRP利率都高出5个基点，就没有理由从RRP中提取现金。例如，如果GC利率升至0.05%，而RRP利率保持在零，投资者以更高利率投资的偏好将从RRP中移除现金。底线：由于市场利率和建议零售价均为0.05%，现金投资者确实没有经济动机将现金转移到回购市场。或者，正如我们总结的那样，“<i>美联储的利率变化可能对美联储的逆回购工具或创纪录的5000亿现金产生零影响。”</i></blockquote></p><p> In retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.</p><p><blockquote>回想起来，这是一种轻描淡写的说法，因为仅仅一天后，美联储逆回购工具的使用量就飙升了创纪录的50%，随着GSE的出现，飙升至惊人的7560亿美元（周五收盘价为7470亿美元）。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0fba18d7808300abc3bdf4ffaa3d5fb6\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\">Needless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"<b>the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:</b><b><u>the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market</u></b><b>).\"</b></p><p><blockquote>不用说，淹没美联储的建议零售价工具和冲销准备金几乎不是美联储的本意，正如瑞士信贷自己的回购专家（前纽约联储工作人员）Zoltan Pozsar在他的事后分析中所写的那样，“<b>重新定价的建议零售价融资将很快成为银行系统的一个问题：</b><b><u>银行体系正在从资产约束（存款大量涌入，但除了美联储之外无处可贷）转变为负债约束（存款不断流失，除了货币市场之外无处可替代）</u></b><b>).\"</b></blockquote></p><p> What he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did not<i>reward</i>allocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.</p><p><blockquote>他的意思是，以前0.00%的RRP利率没有<i>奖励</i>分配惰性的超额准备金，但只是提供了一个存放它们的地方，现在美联储提供的收益率与数万亿票据提供的利率相比大幅上升，我们即将看到隔夜货币市场发生翻天覆地的变化，数万亿资本从传统投资重新分配到美联储的建议零售价。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fed<i><b>also</b></i>made a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “<b>yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>换句话说，正如Pozsar所说，“RRP设施开始对储备进行消毒……还会有更多储备。”而就在德意志银行向Pozsar解释为什么美联储的信号是一个r*政策错误时，美联储<i><b>也</b></i>犯了一个政策错误——只是这次是技术利率——冲销准备金，因为“当严格来说没有必要提高RRP设施的利率时，提高RRP设施的利率是一回事，而将其提高到‘过高’是另一回事——正如一位货币基金经理所说，”<b>昨天，我们一年甚至拿不到一个基点；以五个基点从最值得信赖的交易对手那里获得无尽的票据是梦想成真。”</b></blockquote></p><p> He's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),<b>5bps is too generous</b>, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo rate<b>will upset the state of \"singularity\"</b>and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –<b>at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>他是对的：虽然许多人可能认为0个基点太低，但目前这很难说是灾难性的（瑞士信贷是预测不会有管理加息的机构之一），<b>5bps太慷慨了</b>Pozsar警告说，新的逆回购利率<b>将颠覆“奇点”状态</b>“就像热寻的导弹一样，货币市场投资者转移了数千亿美元，急转弯90度，在零边界寻找哪怕一个基点的收益率——<b>在5个基点的利率下，货币基金有动力出售所有国库券并将现金存放在RRP设施中。”</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Indeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,<b>and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.</b>They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.<b>So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.</b></p><p><blockquote>事实上，如下图所示，6个月的票据收益率不到5个基点，<b>货币基金拥有超过2万亿美元的票据。</b>他们有卖出的动机，而其他人有买入的动机：那些存款一直被银行“容忍”到目前为止赚取零利息的机构有动力获得票据曲线提供的0-5个基点的范围。将现金以一个基点存入票据比零存款要好。<b>因此，准备金冲销开始了，因此o/n RRP工具从一个为大型银行一直在推走的存款提供利率下限的基本上被动的工具，变成了一个“吸走”银行决定保留的存款的主动工具。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bf593f7b1d2d665f39384ed6a998d3bf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"403\">To help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves with<i><b>too few</b></i>intraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.</p><p><blockquote>为了帮助读者直观地了解正在发生的事情，瑞士信贷策略师建议进行以下“极端”的思想实验：目前银行的大部分“Covid-19”存款都进入了利率更好的票据市场。货币基金向目前将现金存放在银行的机构投资者出售票据，货币基金将票据交换为o/N RRP。（有点）简单地说，虽然美联储以前为银行提供了一个方便的存放准备金的地方，但现在它将积极耗尽准备金，以至于我们可能最终会陷入另一场2019年式的回购危机，因为大多数金融机构突然发现自己与<i><b>太少</b></i>日内储备，迫使它们使用美联储的其他融资工具（如外汇掉期额度）来保持持续的偿付能力。</blockquote></p><p> This process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.</p><p><blockquote>这个过程不是一蹴而就的。需要几周时间才能观察到美联储准备金冲销的影响。</blockquote></p><p> And here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,<b>some bond-heavy banks cannot.</b>As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who can<i><b>not</b></i>handle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么这个问题与2019年的回购危机类似：很快我们就会发现，虽然现金充裕的银行可以应对资金外流，<b>一些债券密集型银行则不能。</b>因此，Zoltan预测，接下来“我们将注意到一些银行（那些能够<i><b>不</b></i>处理资金外流）正在从FHLB借入预付款，现金充裕的银行停止在外汇掉期市场放贷，因为RRP工具从它们那里抽走了准备金，美联储不得不重新启动外汇掉期额度来抵消。”</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line:<i><b>whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>底线：<i><b>尽管之前我们看到Libor-OIS崩溃，但这一关键资金利差将不得不从这里扩大，除非美联储再次将o/n RRP利率降低到以前的水平。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Or, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,<b>in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"</b>While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,<b>the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.</b></p><p><blockquote>或者，正如Zoltan总结的那样，“要么是数量，要么是价格”——事实上，<b>2019年，美联储选择了价格而不是数量，这适得其反，并导致了回购危机，结束了美联储的加息周期，并开始了“非量化宽松”。</b>虽然美联储在2月份进行了自我救赎，但上周三，它在没有使其负债受到限制的情况下扩大了建议零售价的使用范围，因为它选择了数量而不是价格——这一点效果很好——<b>美联储将“无限”的数量变成了“免费的钱”，并开始冲销储备。</b></blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：“我们正在目睹最后手段交易商（DoLR）学习交易艺术，犯非受迫性错误——如果美联储通过定价过高的o/n RRP工具进行冲销，它必须准备好通过掉期增加流动性线……”</blockquote></p><p> Translation:&nbsp;<b>by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.</b></p><p><blockquote>翻译：<b>通过支付数万亿美元的准备金5个基点，美联储刚刚播下了下一场流动性危机的种子。</b></blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1146982088","content_text":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.\nWhat does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP  facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.\nBut what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.\nThe problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:\n\n When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.\n\nBottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"\nIn retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.\nNeedless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market).\"\nWhat he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did notrewardallocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.\nIn other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fedalsomade a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"\nHe's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),5bps is too generous, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo ratewill upset the state of \"singularity\"and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"\nIndeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.\nTo help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves withtoo fewintraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.\nThis process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.\nAnd here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,some bond-heavy banks cannot.As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who cannothandle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"\nBottom line:whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.\nOr, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.\nBottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"\nTranslation: by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1492,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":162735054,"gmtCreate":1624075278578,"gmtModify":1634011015558,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"K","listText":"K","text":"K","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/162735054","repostId":"1199331995","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1907,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":162732178,"gmtCreate":1624075264994,"gmtModify":1634011016025,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"K","listText":"K","text":"K","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/162732178","repostId":"1199331995","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1701,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166938243,"gmtCreate":1623987469682,"gmtModify":1634024558580,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Heh","listText":"Heh","text":"Heh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166938243","repostId":"1112448941","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1112448941","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623984287,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1112448941?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Crypto Mining Could Give Huge Boost to Seagate and Western Digital Stock<blockquote>加密货币挖矿可能会极大提振希捷和西部数据的股票</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1112448941","media":"Barrons","summary":"Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies","content":"<p>Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies on large capacity drives to “farm” new coins.</p><p><blockquote>磁盘驱动器的需求继续被Chia的快速采用所扭曲，Chia是一种依赖大容量驱动器来“培育”新硬币的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> , Chia uses a different model than other cryptocurrencies to create new coins. Most cryptocurrencies rely on a “proof of work” model to verify transactions: Miners solve complex mathematical problems that require lots of computational power to earn coins, which explains why traditional mining is so energy-intensive.</p><p><blockquote>，Chia使用不同于其他加密货币的模式来创造新的硬币。大多数加密货币依赖于“工作量证明”模型来验证交易：矿工解决复杂的数学问题，需要大量的计算能力来赚取硬币，这解释了为什么传统挖矿如此耗能。</blockquote></p><p> Chia’s approach, by contrast, is tied to storage capacity committed to being used on the blockchain, rather than computational might. And that is warping demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，Chia的方法与致力于在区块链上使用的存储容量有关，而不是计算能力。这扭曲了对高容量驱动器的需求。</blockquote></p><p> In a research note on Thursday, Loop Capital analyst&nbsp;Ananda Baruah&nbsp;asserts that both&nbsp;SeagateTechnology Holdings (ticker: STX) and&nbsp;Western Digital(WDC)—which together control most of the world’s disk-drive production—could see a sustained boost to both pricing and profits from the Chia-driven acceleration in demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>Loop Capital分析师Ananda Baruah在周四的一份研究报告中断言，希捷科技控股公司（股票代码：STX）和西部数据（WDC）——这两家公司共同控制着全球大部分磁盘驱动器生产——的定价和利润可能会持续上涨来自Chia推动的高容量驱动器需求加速。</blockquote></p><p> If that demand is sustained, he asserts, Seagate’s annualized earnings could reach $12 a share, well above the Street’s consensus forecasts of profits of $5.52 a share for the June 2021 fiscal year, $7.48 for fiscal 2022, and $7.71 for fiscal 2023. For Western Digital, he writes, profits could reach the $10-$12-per-share range, which compares to Street estimates of $3.83 for the June 2021 fiscal year, $8.87 for fiscal 2022, and $10.54 for fiscal 2023.</p><p><blockquote>他断言，如果这种需求持续下去，希捷的年化收益可能达到每股12美元，远高于华尔街普遍预测的2021年6月财年每股利润5.52美元、2022财年每股利润7.48美元和2023财年每股利润7.71美元。他写道，对于西部数据来说，每股利润可能达到10-12美元，而华尔街预计2021年6月财年为3.83美元，2022财年为8.87美元，2023财年为10.54美元。</blockquote></p><p> While the impact on drive pricing from Chia farming has largely been at the retail level and through distributors, Baruah sees the trend overflowing to contract pricing if the Chia trend is sustained, with higher prices possible for drives sold to both cloud-computing companies and major data-storage systems companies like Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE),Dell Technologies‘ (DELL) EMC unit, and&nbsp;NetApp(NTAP).</p><p><blockquote>虽然Chia farming对驱动器定价的影响主要是在零售层面和通过分销商，但Baruah认为，如果Chia趋势持续下去，这种趋势将蔓延到合同定价，销售给云计算公司和主要数据的驱动器价格可能会更高-慧与(HPE)、戴尔科技(DELL)EMC部门和NetApp(NTAP)等存储系统公司。</blockquote></p><p> He contends that both Seagate and Western Digital have begun holding conversations on shifting average selling prices higher. And he adds that “if all of this holds, gross margin expansion could have a long way to go.”</p><p><blockquote>他认为，希捷和西部数据已经开始就提高平均售价进行对话。他补充道，“如果所有这些都成立，毛利率扩张可能还有很长的路要走。”</blockquote></p><p> With distributor inventories depleted, Baruah adds, the hard-drive suppliers are “in prime position” heading into the calendar second half to see elevated pricing. He notes that the last time there was an event-driven price reset in the drive market was 10 years ago, when severe flooding in Thailand knocked out a substantial portion of drive manufacturing capacity. This time, he says, there is less excess capacity in the system, with limited suppliers of both recording heads and magnetic media constraining the ability to satisfy demand.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah补充说，随着分销商库存的耗尽，硬盘供应商在进入下半年时“处于有利地位”，可以看到价格上涨。他指出，驱动器市场上上一次出现事件驱动的价格重置是在10年前，当时泰国的严重洪水摧毁了很大一部分驱动器制造能力。他说，这一次，系统中的过剩容量减少了，记录头和磁介质的供应商有限，限制了满足需求的能力。</blockquote></p><p> Baruah maintains his Buy ratings on both Seagate and Western Digital. He has price targets of $100 on Seagate and $90 on Western. Both stocks are lower in recent trading, with Seagate off 4.2%, at $88.82, and Western Digital down 3.4%, at $70.77. The&nbsp;S&amp;P 500&nbsp;index is down 0.04%.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah维持对希捷和西部数据的买入评级。他对希捷的目标价为100美元，对西部航空的目标价为90美元。两只股票在近期交易中均走低，希捷下跌4.2%，至88.82美元，西部数据下跌3.4%，至70.77美元。标准普尔500指数下跌0.04%。</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>Crypto Mining Could Give Huge Boost to Seagate and Western Digital Stock<blockquote>加密货币挖矿可能会极大提振希捷和西部数据的股票</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\">\nCrypto Mining Could Give Huge Boost to Seagate and Western Digital Stock<blockquote>加密货币挖矿可能会极大提振希捷和西部数据的股票</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 10:44</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies on large capacity drives to “farm” new coins.</p><p><blockquote>磁盘驱动器的需求继续被Chia的快速采用所扭曲，Chia是一种依赖大容量驱动器来“培育”新硬币的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> , Chia uses a different model than other cryptocurrencies to create new coins. Most cryptocurrencies rely on a “proof of work” model to verify transactions: Miners solve complex mathematical problems that require lots of computational power to earn coins, which explains why traditional mining is so energy-intensive.</p><p><blockquote>，Chia使用不同于其他加密货币的模式来创造新的硬币。大多数加密货币依赖于“工作量证明”模型来验证交易：矿工解决复杂的数学问题，需要大量的计算能力来赚取硬币，这解释了为什么传统挖矿如此耗能。</blockquote></p><p> Chia’s approach, by contrast, is tied to storage capacity committed to being used on the blockchain, rather than computational might. And that is warping demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，Chia的方法与致力于在区块链上使用的存储容量有关，而不是计算能力。这扭曲了对高容量驱动器的需求。</blockquote></p><p> In a research note on Thursday, Loop Capital analyst&nbsp;Ananda Baruah&nbsp;asserts that both&nbsp;SeagateTechnology Holdings (ticker: STX) and&nbsp;Western Digital(WDC)—which together control most of the world’s disk-drive production—could see a sustained boost to both pricing and profits from the Chia-driven acceleration in demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>Loop Capital分析师Ananda Baruah在周四的一份研究报告中断言，希捷科技控股公司（股票代码：STX）和西部数据（WDC）——这两家公司共同控制着全球大部分磁盘驱动器生产——的定价和利润可能会持续上涨来自Chia推动的高容量驱动器需求加速。</blockquote></p><p> If that demand is sustained, he asserts, Seagate’s annualized earnings could reach $12 a share, well above the Street’s consensus forecasts of profits of $5.52 a share for the June 2021 fiscal year, $7.48 for fiscal 2022, and $7.71 for fiscal 2023. For Western Digital, he writes, profits could reach the $10-$12-per-share range, which compares to Street estimates of $3.83 for the June 2021 fiscal year, $8.87 for fiscal 2022, and $10.54 for fiscal 2023.</p><p><blockquote>他断言，如果这种需求持续下去，希捷的年化收益可能达到每股12美元，远高于华尔街普遍预测的2021年6月财年每股利润5.52美元、2022财年每股利润7.48美元和2023财年每股利润7.71美元。他写道，对于西部数据来说，每股利润可能达到10-12美元，而华尔街预计2021年6月财年为3.83美元，2022财年为8.87美元，2023财年为10.54美元。</blockquote></p><p> While the impact on drive pricing from Chia farming has largely been at the retail level and through distributors, Baruah sees the trend overflowing to contract pricing if the Chia trend is sustained, with higher prices possible for drives sold to both cloud-computing companies and major data-storage systems companies like Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE),Dell Technologies‘ (DELL) EMC unit, and&nbsp;NetApp(NTAP).</p><p><blockquote>虽然Chia farming对驱动器定价的影响主要是在零售层面和通过分销商，但Baruah认为，如果Chia趋势持续下去，这种趋势将蔓延到合同定价，销售给云计算公司和主要数据的驱动器价格可能会更高-慧与(HPE)、戴尔科技(DELL)EMC部门和NetApp(NTAP)等存储系统公司。</blockquote></p><p> He contends that both Seagate and Western Digital have begun holding conversations on shifting average selling prices higher. And he adds that “if all of this holds, gross margin expansion could have a long way to go.”</p><p><blockquote>他认为，希捷和西部数据已经开始就提高平均售价进行对话。他补充道，“如果所有这些都成立，毛利率扩张可能还有很长的路要走。”</blockquote></p><p> With distributor inventories depleted, Baruah adds, the hard-drive suppliers are “in prime position” heading into the calendar second half to see elevated pricing. He notes that the last time there was an event-driven price reset in the drive market was 10 years ago, when severe flooding in Thailand knocked out a substantial portion of drive manufacturing capacity. This time, he says, there is less excess capacity in the system, with limited suppliers of both recording heads and magnetic media constraining the ability to satisfy demand.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah补充说，随着分销商库存的耗尽，硬盘供应商在进入下半年时“处于有利地位”，可以看到价格上涨。他指出，驱动器市场上上一次出现事件驱动的价格重置是在10年前，当时泰国的严重洪水摧毁了很大一部分驱动器制造能力。他说，这一次，系统中的过剩容量减少了，记录头和磁介质的供应商有限，限制了满足需求的能力。</blockquote></p><p> Baruah maintains his Buy ratings on both Seagate and Western Digital. He has price targets of $100 on Seagate and $90 on Western. Both stocks are lower in recent trading, with Seagate off 4.2%, at $88.82, and Western Digital down 3.4%, at $70.77. The&nbsp;S&amp;P 500&nbsp;index is down 0.04%.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah维持对希捷和西部数据的买入评级。他对希捷的目标价为100美元，对西部航空的目标价为90美元。两只股票在近期交易中均走低，希捷下跌4.2%，至88.82美元，西部数据下跌3.4%，至70.77美元。标准普尔500指数下跌0.04%。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/crypto-mining-could-give-huge-boost-to-seagate-and-western-digital-stock-51623944488?mod=hp_DAY_7\">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":{"STX":"希捷科技","WDC":"西部数据"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/crypto-mining-could-give-huge-boost-to-seagate-and-western-digital-stock-51623944488?mod=hp_DAY_7","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1112448941","content_text":"Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies on large capacity drives to “farm” new coins.\n, Chia uses a different model than other cryptocurrencies to create new coins. Most cryptocurrencies rely on a “proof of work” model to verify transactions: Miners solve complex mathematical problems that require lots of computational power to earn coins, which explains why traditional mining is so energy-intensive.\nChia’s approach, by contrast, is tied to storage capacity committed to being used on the blockchain, rather than computational might. And that is warping demand for high-capacity drives.\nIn a research note on Thursday, Loop Capital analyst Ananda Baruah asserts that both SeagateTechnology Holdings (ticker: STX) and Western Digital(WDC)—which together control most of the world’s disk-drive production—could see a sustained boost to both pricing and profits from the Chia-driven acceleration in demand for high-capacity drives.\nIf that demand is sustained, he asserts, Seagate’s annualized earnings could reach $12 a share, well above the Street’s consensus forecasts of profits of $5.52 a share for the June 2021 fiscal year, $7.48 for fiscal 2022, and $7.71 for fiscal 2023. For Western Digital, he writes, profits could reach the $10-$12-per-share range, which compares to Street estimates of $3.83 for the June 2021 fiscal year, $8.87 for fiscal 2022, and $10.54 for fiscal 2023.\nWhile the impact on drive pricing from Chia farming has largely been at the retail level and through distributors, Baruah sees the trend overflowing to contract pricing if the Chia trend is sustained, with higher prices possible for drives sold to both cloud-computing companies and major data-storage systems companies like Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE),Dell Technologies‘ (DELL) EMC unit, and NetApp(NTAP).\nHe contends that both Seagate and Western Digital have begun holding conversations on shifting average selling prices higher. And he adds that “if all of this holds, gross margin expansion could have a long way to go.”\nWith distributor inventories depleted, Baruah adds, the hard-drive suppliers are “in prime position” heading into the calendar second half to see elevated pricing. He notes that the last time there was an event-driven price reset in the drive market was 10 years ago, when severe flooding in Thailand knocked out a substantial portion of drive manufacturing capacity. This time, he says, there is less excess capacity in the system, with limited suppliers of both recording heads and magnetic media constraining the ability to satisfy demand.\nBaruah maintains his Buy ratings on both Seagate and Western Digital. He has price targets of $100 on Seagate and $90 on Western. Both stocks are lower in recent trading, with Seagate off 4.2%, at $88.82, and Western Digital down 3.4%, at $70.77. The S&P 500 index is down 0.04%.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"STX":0.9,"WDC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1655,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":163779289,"gmtCreate":1623894839841,"gmtModify":1634026242823,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"K","listText":"K","text":"K","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/163779289","repostId":"1157739738","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1157739738","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623891796,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1157739738?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-17 09:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Take Profits<blockquote>AMC：获利了结</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1157739738","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"After emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.Important short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.Given the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.When I look at AMC’s cha","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>After emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.</li>  <li>Important short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.</li>  <li>Given the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fd621cec481d173c0f0d3b9be49ed335\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1241\"><span>BCFC/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>在成为第二波“模因”或动量股的领头羊后，AMC的举动与游戏驿站一月份的举动类似，表明可能会出现大幅下跌。</li><li>技术面、动量和搜索兴趣等重要短期指标开始形成类似于1月下旬GME的看跌模式。</li><li>鉴于7日和50日移动平均线之间的巨大差距，风险/回报似乎建议获利了结，启动对冲或空头/看跌头寸。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>BCFC/iStock社论来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Introduction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>介绍</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the past two weeks or so, AMC(NYSE:AMC)has undergone a historic rise in its stock price. Due in part to elevated levels of short interest, the use of options, and actions taken by AMC, the equities price has risen ~485% in the last month. For the year, AMC has risen by ~763.5% to a price of ~$55 a share and a market cap of $28.4B, despite a fundamentally destructive year to the company and its long-term business prospects. After rising earlier this year amongst the short and gamma squeeze of GameStop(NYSE:GMEand other “reddit” fueled equities, AMC has gained momentum again and has separated itself from the group with its performance. This piece will compare GME’s leadership in the February fiasco with AMC’s current leadership and will evaluate the catalysts driving the moves and their lifespans. Given the nature of this equities price action, it is important to consistently reconsider your investment thesis and re-evaluate what is driving price action. In my opinion, technical analysis takes over in these scenarios, and I will point to many factors that indicate this might be the time to take profit or initiate a position in anticipation of a sell-off.</p><p><blockquote>在过去两周左右的时间里，AMC（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）的股价经历了历史性的上涨。部分由于空头兴趣水平上升、期权的使用以及AMC采取的行动，股价在上个月上涨了约485%。今年，AMC上涨了约763.5%，至每股约55美元，市值为$28.4 B，尽管这一年对公司及其长期业务前景来说是根本性的破坏性。在今年早些时候游戏驿站（纽约证券交易所代码：GME和其他“reddit”推动的股票的空头和伽马挤压中上涨后，AMC再次获得了动力，并以其表现从该集团中脱颖而出。这篇文章将比较GME在2月份惨败中的领导地位与AMC目前的领导地位，并将评估推动这些举措的催化剂及其寿命。鉴于这种股票价格走势的性质，不断重新考虑你的投资论点并重新评估是什么推动了价格走势是很重要的。在我看来，在这些情况下，技术分析占据了主导地位，我将指出许多因素表明现在可能是获利了结或在预期抛售的情况下建仓的时候了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Technical Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>技术分析</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d813be28f7a34550ff50814b55a68e45\" tg-width=\"608\" tg-height=\"308\"><span>Source: CNBC(GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Consider the run-up in GME earlier this year when it had leadership amongst the pack of momentum or “meme” stocks. The top red band on the chart indicates the 7-day moving average, while the blue indicates the 50-day moving average and the green the 200-day moving average. As you can see from the chart, breakthroughs of the 7-day moving average are consistently followed by large moves in both directions. It seems, with these drastically volatile moves, the 7-day moving average is the most useful indicator for price action. As you can see in the chart, in February, March, and June, when GME’s price broke through the 7-day moving average, stark downside followed.</p><p><blockquote>想想今年早些时候GME的上涨，当时它在一群动量或“模因”股票中处于领先地位。图表上顶部的红色带表示7日移动平均线，蓝色表示50日移动平均线，绿色表示200日移动平均线。从图表中可以看出，突破7日移动平均线之后总是会出现两个方向的大幅波动。在这些剧烈波动的情况下，7日移动平均线似乎是价格走势最有用的指标。正如您在图表中看到的，在2月、3月和6月，当GME价格突破7日移动平均线时，随之而来的是大幅下跌。</blockquote></p><p> Interestingly enough, the 50-day moving average (blue line) has seemed to provide some level of consistent support in this upward trend, providing a level of support for a couple bounces along the move. And as this upward trend has continued, the gap between the 50-day and the 7-day has contracted, thus providing less volatility and greater predictability in terms of levels of resistance and support.</p><p><blockquote>有趣的是，50日移动平均线（蓝线）似乎在这一上升趋势中提供了一定程度的一致支撑，为走势中的几次反弹提供了一定程度的支撑。随着这种上升趋势的持续，50天和7天之间的差距已经缩小，从而在阻力和支撑位方面提供了更小的波动性和更大的可预测性。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/30a18cedd2df4fa0530b6c94859b3021\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"252\"><span>Source: CNBC [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When I look at AMC’s chart, it reminds me of GME’s in February of 2021. The upward move has been quick and stark (~350% in ~23 days) similar to GME’s move in February (~1,525% in ~21 days). Both led to a large dispersion between the 7-day and 50-day moving averages in the short term and, thus, offered elevated potential for volatility both in terms of the upside and downside. As you can see from GME’s chart, it eventually tested the 50-day moving average around ~$45-50 after touching ~$350 the week prior.</p><p><blockquote>当我看AMC的图表时，它让我想起了2021年2月的GME。上涨迅速而明显（约23天内上涨约350%），类似于GME 2月份的上涨（约21天内上涨约1,525%）。两者都导致短期内7日移动平均线和50日移动平均线之间存在较大差异，因此在上行和下行方面都提供了较高的波动潜力。从GME的图表中可以看出，在前一周触及约350美元后，它最终测试了约45-50美元附近的50日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Similarly to GME, AMC has also now consolidated around its 7-day average after this run-up and allowed it to catch up to the price action. If AMC is unable to break through $62.55 and present new momentum, it is at risk of double topping, breaking through its 7-day average on the downside and retesting the 50-day around $20.<i>This scenario offers ~60% downside.</i>Although I don’t usual look at time periods in an effort to evaluate potential future price action, I think it is important to note the similarity in terms of the time period of both moves and stay wary about what followed on the back end of GME’s move.</p><p><blockquote>与GME类似，AMC在此次上涨后也在7日均线附近盘整，并使其能够赶上价格走势。如果AMC无法突破62.55美元并呈现新的动能，则有双重见顶的风险，向下突破7日均线，并重新测试20美元附近的50日均线。<i>这种情况会带来约60%的负面影响。</i>尽管我通常不会通过观察时间段来评估未来潜在的价格走势，但我认为重要的是要注意两种走势在时间段方面的相似性，并对GME走势后端的情况保持警惕。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Google Search Interest: The Momentum Story</b></p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索兴趣：动量故事</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dda9563f56dc1df868212408e969418\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"181\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends (GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As these moves are very much based upon momentum, Google search interest may be of value to consider. As you can see from the chart, GME’s search interest rose and fell quickly in late Jan. early Feb., pretty much in line with its equities performance. Its peak in interest pretty much aligned exactly with its peak in price, and its fall in interest aligned exactly with its fall in price. Similarly, its rebound in interest followed its rebound in price after testing the 50-day moving average around ~$45.</p><p><blockquote>由于这些举措在很大程度上基于势头，谷歌搜索兴趣可能值得考虑。从图表中可以看出，GME的搜索兴趣在1月底2月初迅速上升和下降，与其股票表现非常一致。它的利息峰值几乎与价格峰值完全一致，利息下降与价格下降完全一致。同样，在测试45美元左右的50日移动平均线后，其利息反弹跟随价格反弹。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fba476b389598252d5156f43d0962f3\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"190\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When you look at AMC’s Google Search Interest, you can also see its dramatic spike in a short period of time and then a subsequent stark decline. As search interest and volume were leading indicators for GME's move downward back in February, this chart might indicate a potential sell-off if it is not able to rebound.</p><p><blockquote>当您查看AMC的谷歌搜索兴趣时，您还可以看到它在短时间内急剧飙升，然后随后急剧下降。由于搜索兴趣和交易量是GME 2月份下跌的领先指标，因此该图表可能表明如果无法反弹，可能会出现潜在的抛售。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cross-Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交叉分析</b></blockquote></p><p> When you chart stock price, search interest, and volume over each other, the relationship between them all becomes clearer, despite the imperfections in measuring a large number like volume to interest.</p><p><blockquote>当你将股票价格、搜索兴趣和交易量相互绘制图表时，它们之间的关系都会变得更加清晰，尽管在测量大量数字（如交易量与兴趣）时存在缺陷。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/71c144385e0530f21df9f305b4eef2f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"392\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When considering GME, the chart demonstrates that the variables have a correlation, especially in the stark and volatile moves upward and downward. While they may stray during times of relative muted volatility, they retain a relationship when things are moving in a volatile nature. Search interest and volume seemingly led or fell directly in line with the stock price following the move upward.</p><p><blockquote>当考虑GME时，图表显示变量具有相关性，尤其是在剧烈波动的上下波动中。虽然他们可能会在波动相对较小的时候偏离，但当事情以波动的方式发展时，他们会保持一种关系。在股价上涨后，搜索兴趣和交易量似乎直接引领或下跌。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c1aab35454d89a6f58f78341bf918b\" tg-width=\"592\" tg-height=\"375\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> AMC’s chart actually demonstrates the relationship and correlation between these variables more clearly. Consider how search interest and volume actually preceded price in GME’s move down and how AMC’s search interest recently broke through its price in a similar manner.</p><p><blockquote>AMC的图表实际上更清楚地展示了这些变量之间的关系和相关性。考虑一下GME的搜索兴趣和交易量实际上是如何先于价格下跌的，以及AMC的搜索兴趣最近是如何以类似的方式突破其价格的。</blockquote></p><p> While this method of analysis is not perfect, it is important to remember what the catalysts for your positions are and constantly analyze the duration of their impact and lifespan in the marketplace. As with all short-term volatile moves, fundamentals rarely provide too much of an indication or near term price action. Often, technicals, volume, and momentum provide the most accurate forecasts of future price action and, thus, are the most useful to analyze.</p><p><blockquote>虽然这种分析方法并不完美，但重要的是要记住你的头寸的催化剂是什么，并不断分析它们在市场中的影响持续时间和寿命。与所有短期波动一样，基本面很少提供太多指示或近期价格走势。通常，技术面、成交量和动量提供了对未来价格走势最准确的预测，因此对分析最有用。</blockquote></p><p> Many have offered catalysts for what has driven this move, ranging from the re-opening narrative, a gamma or short squeeze, or the influx of new capital from shares issuances. The bottom line is all these catalysts depend upon momentum for their effective lifespan. Even if they are catalysts that will take place over time, dramatic price appreciation like this shortens the lifespan of the catalysts' daily momentum until they retest the longer term averages and establishes stability with heightened volume.</p><p><blockquote>许多人为推动这一举措提供了催化剂，包括重新开放的叙述、伽马或轧空，或者股票发行带来的新资本涌入。底线是所有这些催化剂的有效寿命都依赖于动量。即使它们是随着时间的推移而发生的催化剂，像这样的价格大幅上涨也会缩短催化剂每日动量的寿命，直到它们重新测试长期平均值并通过增加交易量建立稳定性。</blockquote></p><p> I think it would be prudent to take profit here or at least take more than 50% off the table for the time being, and for those interested, a position in anticipation of a stark downside seems sensible.</p><p><blockquote>我认为谨慎的做法是在这里获利了结，或者至少暂时获利了结超过50%，对于那些感兴趣的人来说，在预期大幅下跌的情况下建仓似乎是明智的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Risks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>风险</b></blockquote></p><p> The risks to the bearish thesis on AMC involve renewed momentum and continued strength above the 7-day moving average. As I elaborated on earlier, that seems to be the most critical indicator of short-term price movement in these scenarios and consistently has been an indicator of a dramatic move to come both on the upside and downside. If AMC holds above this average and tightens the gap between the 7-day and the 20 and 50-day moving averages, it could potentially hold this heightened volume and price level and consolidate before making a move to new highs. I fundamentally believe that, while there are catalysts here at play, when a move is this dramatic in this short of a time frame momentum and technicals take over in determining future price action. And, thus, if the technicals break down, there should be stark downside. However, if the technicals continue to stay bullish, there may be more upside ahead. AMC looks to similar, however, to GME’s February move, and the bearish double top pattern seems to be forming.</p><p><blockquote>AMC看跌论点的风险包括新的动能和7日移动平均线上方的持续强势。正如我之前所阐述的，这似乎是这些情况下短期价格变动的最关键指标，并且一直是上行和下行剧烈波动的指标。如果AMC保持在该平均线之上并缩小7日与20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，它可能会保持这一较高的成交量和价格水平，并在触及新高之前进行盘整。我从根本上相信，虽然这里有催化剂在起作用，但当在这么短的时间内出现如此戏剧性的走势时，动量和技术因素就会接管决定未来的价格走势。因此，如果技术面崩溃，应该会有明显的下行空间。然而，如果技术面继续看涨，未来可能会有更多上涨空间。然而，AMC看起来与GME 2月份的走势类似，看跌双顶形态似乎正在形成。</blockquote></p><p> Conclusion</p><p><blockquote>结论</blockquote></p><p></p><p> After writing a bullish article on AMC in January, we are now bearish on the equity, recognizing the deterioration of key momentum indicators and the technical similarity to the GME’s rise and fall back in February. In events like this, the catalysts get choppy, and it’s important to evaluate the lifespan of the main points to in your investment thesis. When things rise dramatically, there is often a time off profit taken in which the market re-prices just how valuable catalysts are. If it’s just momentum as a catalyst, the re-pricing is often stark and volatile. If it is a more long-term catalyst, the profit taking can be more muted. While there may be many catalysts driving AMC’s rise, there is without doubt one that takes precedent over them all, and that is the momentum story. Given our examination of GME, it seems the 7-day moving average is the price level to look at before dramatic downside, given the gap between the 20 and 50 day moving average. As Google search trends, volume, and price (double top pattern) seem to indicate things are breaking down and are similar at least to GME in February. One should consider taking profits here, and if inclined to take the other side, consider initiating a position accordingly now. While option premiums are high, I think there is still an ability to initiate a small position or a hedge with some short-term options (2 weeks-4 weeks). If price action were to head to the downside, the move would be drastic as the next level of support is $40 lower than the current price. While I think shorting could make sense here, and the cost to borrow doesn’t seem that high as the percentage of shares short is not GME’s level, there is inherently more risk there.</p><p><blockquote>在1月份写了一篇关于AMC的看涨文章后，我们现在看跌该股，认识到关键动量指标的恶化以及与GME 2月份上涨和回落的技术相似性。在这样的事件中，催化剂会变得不稳定，评估投资论文中要点的寿命非常重要。当股价大幅上涨时，通常会有一段获利了结的时间，市场会重新定价催化剂的价值。如果只是动力作为催化剂，那么重新定价往往是鲜明且不稳定的。如果是更长期的催化剂，获利了结可以更加温和。虽然推动AMC崛起的催化剂可能有很多，但毫无疑问，有一个催化剂比所有催化剂都更重要，那就是动量故事。根据我们对GME的研究，考虑到20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，7日移动平均线似乎是大幅下跌之前值得关注的价格水平。随着谷歌搜索趋势、交易量和价格（双顶模式）似乎表明情况正在崩溃，至少与2月份的GME相似。人们应该考虑在这里获利了结，如果倾向于站在另一边，现在就考虑相应地建仓。虽然期权费很高，但我认为仍然有能力用一些短期期权（2周-4周）发起小仓位或对冲。如果价格走势向下，走势将会剧烈，因为下一个支撑位比当前价格低40美元。虽然我认为做空在这里可能是有意义的，而且借贷成本似乎没有那么高，因为做空股票的百分比不是GME的水平，但那里固有的风险更大。</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>AMC: Take Profits<blockquote>AMC：获利了结</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMC: Take Profits<blockquote>AMC：获利了结</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-17 09:03</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>After emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.</li>  <li>Important short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.</li>  <li>Given the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fd621cec481d173c0f0d3b9be49ed335\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1241\"><span>BCFC/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>在成为第二波“模因”或动量股的领头羊后，AMC的举动与游戏驿站一月份的举动类似，表明可能会出现大幅下跌。</li><li>技术面、动量和搜索兴趣等重要短期指标开始形成类似于1月下旬GME的看跌模式。</li><li>鉴于7日和50日移动平均线之间的巨大差距，风险/回报似乎建议获利了结，启动对冲或空头/看跌头寸。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>BCFC/iStock社论来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Introduction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>介绍</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the past two weeks or so, AMC(NYSE:AMC)has undergone a historic rise in its stock price. Due in part to elevated levels of short interest, the use of options, and actions taken by AMC, the equities price has risen ~485% in the last month. For the year, AMC has risen by ~763.5% to a price of ~$55 a share and a market cap of $28.4B, despite a fundamentally destructive year to the company and its long-term business prospects. After rising earlier this year amongst the short and gamma squeeze of GameStop(NYSE:GMEand other “reddit” fueled equities, AMC has gained momentum again and has separated itself from the group with its performance. This piece will compare GME’s leadership in the February fiasco with AMC’s current leadership and will evaluate the catalysts driving the moves and their lifespans. Given the nature of this equities price action, it is important to consistently reconsider your investment thesis and re-evaluate what is driving price action. In my opinion, technical analysis takes over in these scenarios, and I will point to many factors that indicate this might be the time to take profit or initiate a position in anticipation of a sell-off.</p><p><blockquote>在过去两周左右的时间里，AMC（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）的股价经历了历史性的上涨。部分由于空头兴趣水平上升、期权的使用以及AMC采取的行动，股价在上个月上涨了约485%。今年，AMC上涨了约763.5%，至每股约55美元，市值为$28.4 B，尽管这一年对公司及其长期业务前景来说是根本性的破坏性。在今年早些时候游戏驿站（纽约证券交易所代码：GME和其他“reddit”推动的股票的空头和伽马挤压中上涨后，AMC再次获得了动力，并以其表现从该集团中脱颖而出。这篇文章将比较GME在2月份惨败中的领导地位与AMC目前的领导地位，并将评估推动这些举措的催化剂及其寿命。鉴于这种股票价格走势的性质，不断重新考虑你的投资论点并重新评估是什么推动了价格走势是很重要的。在我看来，在这些情况下，技术分析占据了主导地位，我将指出许多因素表明现在可能是获利了结或在预期抛售的情况下建仓的时候了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Technical Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>技术分析</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d813be28f7a34550ff50814b55a68e45\" tg-width=\"608\" tg-height=\"308\"><span>Source: CNBC(GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Consider the run-up in GME earlier this year when it had leadership amongst the pack of momentum or “meme” stocks. The top red band on the chart indicates the 7-day moving average, while the blue indicates the 50-day moving average and the green the 200-day moving average. As you can see from the chart, breakthroughs of the 7-day moving average are consistently followed by large moves in both directions. It seems, with these drastically volatile moves, the 7-day moving average is the most useful indicator for price action. As you can see in the chart, in February, March, and June, when GME’s price broke through the 7-day moving average, stark downside followed.</p><p><blockquote>想想今年早些时候GME的上涨，当时它在一群动量或“模因”股票中处于领先地位。图表上顶部的红色带表示7日移动平均线，蓝色表示50日移动平均线，绿色表示200日移动平均线。从图表中可以看出，突破7日移动平均线之后总是会出现两个方向的大幅波动。在这些剧烈波动的情况下，7日移动平均线似乎是价格走势最有用的指标。正如您在图表中看到的，在2月、3月和6月，当GME价格突破7日移动平均线时，随之而来的是大幅下跌。</blockquote></p><p> Interestingly enough, the 50-day moving average (blue line) has seemed to provide some level of consistent support in this upward trend, providing a level of support for a couple bounces along the move. And as this upward trend has continued, the gap between the 50-day and the 7-day has contracted, thus providing less volatility and greater predictability in terms of levels of resistance and support.</p><p><blockquote>有趣的是，50日移动平均线（蓝线）似乎在这一上升趋势中提供了一定程度的一致支撑，为走势中的几次反弹提供了一定程度的支撑。随着这种上升趋势的持续，50天和7天之间的差距已经缩小，从而在阻力和支撑位方面提供了更小的波动性和更大的可预测性。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/30a18cedd2df4fa0530b6c94859b3021\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"252\"><span>Source: CNBC [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When I look at AMC’s chart, it reminds me of GME’s in February of 2021. The upward move has been quick and stark (~350% in ~23 days) similar to GME’s move in February (~1,525% in ~21 days). Both led to a large dispersion between the 7-day and 50-day moving averages in the short term and, thus, offered elevated potential for volatility both in terms of the upside and downside. As you can see from GME’s chart, it eventually tested the 50-day moving average around ~$45-50 after touching ~$350 the week prior.</p><p><blockquote>当我看AMC的图表时，它让我想起了2021年2月的GME。上涨迅速而明显（约23天内上涨约350%），类似于GME 2月份的上涨（约21天内上涨约1,525%）。两者都导致短期内7日移动平均线和50日移动平均线之间存在较大差异，因此在上行和下行方面都提供了较高的波动潜力。从GME的图表中可以看出，在前一周触及约350美元后，它最终测试了约45-50美元附近的50日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Similarly to GME, AMC has also now consolidated around its 7-day average after this run-up and allowed it to catch up to the price action. If AMC is unable to break through $62.55 and present new momentum, it is at risk of double topping, breaking through its 7-day average on the downside and retesting the 50-day around $20.<i>This scenario offers ~60% downside.</i>Although I don’t usual look at time periods in an effort to evaluate potential future price action, I think it is important to note the similarity in terms of the time period of both moves and stay wary about what followed on the back end of GME’s move.</p><p><blockquote>与GME类似，AMC在此次上涨后也在7日均线附近盘整，并使其能够赶上价格走势。如果AMC无法突破62.55美元并呈现新的动能，则有双重见顶的风险，向下突破7日均线，并重新测试20美元附近的50日均线。<i>这种情况会带来约60%的负面影响。</i>尽管我通常不会通过观察时间段来评估未来潜在的价格走势，但我认为重要的是要注意两种走势在时间段方面的相似性，并对GME走势后端的情况保持警惕。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Google Search Interest: The Momentum Story</b></p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索兴趣：动量故事</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dda9563f56dc1df868212408e969418\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"181\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends (GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As these moves are very much based upon momentum, Google search interest may be of value to consider. As you can see from the chart, GME’s search interest rose and fell quickly in late Jan. early Feb., pretty much in line with its equities performance. Its peak in interest pretty much aligned exactly with its peak in price, and its fall in interest aligned exactly with its fall in price. Similarly, its rebound in interest followed its rebound in price after testing the 50-day moving average around ~$45.</p><p><blockquote>由于这些举措在很大程度上基于势头，谷歌搜索兴趣可能值得考虑。从图表中可以看出，GME的搜索兴趣在1月底2月初迅速上升和下降，与其股票表现非常一致。它的利息峰值几乎与价格峰值完全一致，利息下降与价格下降完全一致。同样，在测试45美元左右的50日移动平均线后，其利息反弹跟随价格反弹。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fba476b389598252d5156f43d0962f3\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"190\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When you look at AMC’s Google Search Interest, you can also see its dramatic spike in a short period of time and then a subsequent stark decline. As search interest and volume were leading indicators for GME's move downward back in February, this chart might indicate a potential sell-off if it is not able to rebound.</p><p><blockquote>当您查看AMC的谷歌搜索兴趣时，您还可以看到它在短时间内急剧飙升，然后随后急剧下降。由于搜索兴趣和交易量是GME 2月份下跌的领先指标，因此该图表可能表明如果无法反弹，可能会出现潜在的抛售。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cross-Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交叉分析</b></blockquote></p><p> When you chart stock price, search interest, and volume over each other, the relationship between them all becomes clearer, despite the imperfections in measuring a large number like volume to interest.</p><p><blockquote>当你将股票价格、搜索兴趣和交易量相互绘制图表时，它们之间的关系都会变得更加清晰，尽管在测量大量数字（如交易量与兴趣）时存在缺陷。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/71c144385e0530f21df9f305b4eef2f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"392\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When considering GME, the chart demonstrates that the variables have a correlation, especially in the stark and volatile moves upward and downward. While they may stray during times of relative muted volatility, they retain a relationship when things are moving in a volatile nature. Search interest and volume seemingly led or fell directly in line with the stock price following the move upward.</p><p><blockquote>当考虑GME时，图表显示变量具有相关性，尤其是在剧烈波动的上下波动中。虽然他们可能会在波动相对较小的时候偏离，但当事情以波动的方式发展时，他们会保持一种关系。在股价上涨后，搜索兴趣和交易量似乎直接引领或下跌。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c1aab35454d89a6f58f78341bf918b\" tg-width=\"592\" tg-height=\"375\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> AMC’s chart actually demonstrates the relationship and correlation between these variables more clearly. Consider how search interest and volume actually preceded price in GME’s move down and how AMC’s search interest recently broke through its price in a similar manner.</p><p><blockquote>AMC的图表实际上更清楚地展示了这些变量之间的关系和相关性。考虑一下GME的搜索兴趣和交易量实际上是如何先于价格下跌的，以及AMC的搜索兴趣最近是如何以类似的方式突破其价格的。</blockquote></p><p> While this method of analysis is not perfect, it is important to remember what the catalysts for your positions are and constantly analyze the duration of their impact and lifespan in the marketplace. As with all short-term volatile moves, fundamentals rarely provide too much of an indication or near term price action. Often, technicals, volume, and momentum provide the most accurate forecasts of future price action and, thus, are the most useful to analyze.</p><p><blockquote>虽然这种分析方法并不完美，但重要的是要记住你的头寸的催化剂是什么，并不断分析它们在市场中的影响持续时间和寿命。与所有短期波动一样，基本面很少提供太多指示或近期价格走势。通常，技术面、成交量和动量提供了对未来价格走势最准确的预测，因此对分析最有用。</blockquote></p><p> Many have offered catalysts for what has driven this move, ranging from the re-opening narrative, a gamma or short squeeze, or the influx of new capital from shares issuances. The bottom line is all these catalysts depend upon momentum for their effective lifespan. Even if they are catalysts that will take place over time, dramatic price appreciation like this shortens the lifespan of the catalysts' daily momentum until they retest the longer term averages and establishes stability with heightened volume.</p><p><blockquote>许多人为推动这一举措提供了催化剂，包括重新开放的叙述、伽马或轧空，或者股票发行带来的新资本涌入。底线是所有这些催化剂的有效寿命都依赖于动量。即使它们是随着时间的推移而发生的催化剂，像这样的价格大幅上涨也会缩短催化剂每日动量的寿命，直到它们重新测试长期平均值并通过增加交易量建立稳定性。</blockquote></p><p> I think it would be prudent to take profit here or at least take more than 50% off the table for the time being, and for those interested, a position in anticipation of a stark downside seems sensible.</p><p><blockquote>我认为谨慎的做法是在这里获利了结，或者至少暂时获利了结超过50%，对于那些感兴趣的人来说，在预期大幅下跌的情况下建仓似乎是明智的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Risks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>风险</b></blockquote></p><p> The risks to the bearish thesis on AMC involve renewed momentum and continued strength above the 7-day moving average. As I elaborated on earlier, that seems to be the most critical indicator of short-term price movement in these scenarios and consistently has been an indicator of a dramatic move to come both on the upside and downside. If AMC holds above this average and tightens the gap between the 7-day and the 20 and 50-day moving averages, it could potentially hold this heightened volume and price level and consolidate before making a move to new highs. I fundamentally believe that, while there are catalysts here at play, when a move is this dramatic in this short of a time frame momentum and technicals take over in determining future price action. And, thus, if the technicals break down, there should be stark downside. However, if the technicals continue to stay bullish, there may be more upside ahead. AMC looks to similar, however, to GME’s February move, and the bearish double top pattern seems to be forming.</p><p><blockquote>AMC看跌论点的风险包括新的动能和7日移动平均线上方的持续强势。正如我之前所阐述的，这似乎是这些情况下短期价格变动的最关键指标，并且一直是上行和下行剧烈波动的指标。如果AMC保持在该平均线之上并缩小7日与20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，它可能会保持这一较高的成交量和价格水平，并在触及新高之前进行盘整。我从根本上相信，虽然这里有催化剂在起作用，但当在这么短的时间内出现如此戏剧性的走势时，动量和技术因素就会接管决定未来的价格走势。因此，如果技术面崩溃，应该会有明显的下行空间。然而，如果技术面继续看涨，未来可能会有更多上涨空间。然而，AMC看起来与GME 2月份的走势类似，看跌双顶形态似乎正在形成。</blockquote></p><p> Conclusion</p><p><blockquote>结论</blockquote></p><p></p><p> After writing a bullish article on AMC in January, we are now bearish on the equity, recognizing the deterioration of key momentum indicators and the technical similarity to the GME’s rise and fall back in February. In events like this, the catalysts get choppy, and it’s important to evaluate the lifespan of the main points to in your investment thesis. When things rise dramatically, there is often a time off profit taken in which the market re-prices just how valuable catalysts are. If it’s just momentum as a catalyst, the re-pricing is often stark and volatile. If it is a more long-term catalyst, the profit taking can be more muted. While there may be many catalysts driving AMC’s rise, there is without doubt one that takes precedent over them all, and that is the momentum story. Given our examination of GME, it seems the 7-day moving average is the price level to look at before dramatic downside, given the gap between the 20 and 50 day moving average. As Google search trends, volume, and price (double top pattern) seem to indicate things are breaking down and are similar at least to GME in February. One should consider taking profits here, and if inclined to take the other side, consider initiating a position accordingly now. While option premiums are high, I think there is still an ability to initiate a small position or a hedge with some short-term options (2 weeks-4 weeks). If price action were to head to the downside, the move would be drastic as the next level of support is $40 lower than the current price. While I think shorting could make sense here, and the cost to borrow doesn’t seem that high as the percentage of shares short is not GME’s level, there is inherently more risk there.</p><p><blockquote>在1月份写了一篇关于AMC的看涨文章后，我们现在看跌该股，认识到关键动量指标的恶化以及与GME 2月份上涨和回落的技术相似性。在这样的事件中，催化剂会变得不稳定，评估投资论文中要点的寿命非常重要。当股价大幅上涨时，通常会有一段获利了结的时间，市场会重新定价催化剂的价值。如果只是动力作为催化剂，那么重新定价往往是鲜明且不稳定的。如果是更长期的催化剂，获利了结可以更加温和。虽然推动AMC崛起的催化剂可能有很多，但毫无疑问，有一个催化剂比所有催化剂都更重要，那就是动量故事。根据我们对GME的研究，考虑到20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，7日移动平均线似乎是大幅下跌之前值得关注的价格水平。随着谷歌搜索趋势、交易量和价格（双顶模式）似乎表明情况正在崩溃，至少与2月份的GME相似。人们应该考虑在这里获利了结，如果倾向于站在另一边，现在就考虑相应地建仓。虽然期权费很高，但我认为仍然有能力用一些短期期权（2周-4周）发起小仓位或对冲。如果价格走势向下，走势将会剧烈，因为下一个支撑位比当前价格低40美元。虽然我认为做空在这里可能是有意义的，而且借贷成本似乎没有那么高，因为做空股票的百分比不是GME的水平，但那里固有的风险更大。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435124-amc-stock-take-profits\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435124-amc-stock-take-profits","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1157739738","content_text":"Summary\n\nAfter emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.\nImportant short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.\nGiven the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.\n\nBCFC/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nIntroduction\nOver the past two weeks or so, AMC(NYSE:AMC)has undergone a historic rise in its stock price. Due in part to elevated levels of short interest, the use of options, and actions taken by AMC, the equities price has risen ~485% in the last month. For the year, AMC has risen by ~763.5% to a price of ~$55 a share and a market cap of $28.4B, despite a fundamentally destructive year to the company and its long-term business prospects. After rising earlier this year amongst the short and gamma squeeze of GameStop(NYSE:GMEand other “reddit” fueled equities, AMC has gained momentum again and has separated itself from the group with its performance. This piece will compare GME’s leadership in the February fiasco with AMC’s current leadership and will evaluate the catalysts driving the moves and their lifespans. Given the nature of this equities price action, it is important to consistently reconsider your investment thesis and re-evaluate what is driving price action. In my opinion, technical analysis takes over in these scenarios, and I will point to many factors that indicate this might be the time to take profit or initiate a position in anticipation of a sell-off.\nTechnical Analysis\nSource: CNBC(GameStop)\nConsider the run-up in GME earlier this year when it had leadership amongst the pack of momentum or “meme” stocks. The top red band on the chart indicates the 7-day moving average, while the blue indicates the 50-day moving average and the green the 200-day moving average. As you can see from the chart, breakthroughs of the 7-day moving average are consistently followed by large moves in both directions. It seems, with these drastically volatile moves, the 7-day moving average is the most useful indicator for price action. As you can see in the chart, in February, March, and June, when GME’s price broke through the 7-day moving average, stark downside followed.\nInterestingly enough, the 50-day moving average (blue line) has seemed to provide some level of consistent support in this upward trend, providing a level of support for a couple bounces along the move. And as this upward trend has continued, the gap between the 50-day and the 7-day has contracted, thus providing less volatility and greater predictability in terms of levels of resistance and support.\nSource: CNBC [AMC]\nWhen I look at AMC’s chart, it reminds me of GME’s in February of 2021. The upward move has been quick and stark (~350% in ~23 days) similar to GME’s move in February (~1,525% in ~21 days). Both led to a large dispersion between the 7-day and 50-day moving averages in the short term and, thus, offered elevated potential for volatility both in terms of the upside and downside. As you can see from GME’s chart, it eventually tested the 50-day moving average around ~$45-50 after touching ~$350 the week prior.\nSimilarly to GME, AMC has also now consolidated around its 7-day average after this run-up and allowed it to catch up to the price action. If AMC is unable to break through $62.55 and present new momentum, it is at risk of double topping, breaking through its 7-day average on the downside and retesting the 50-day around $20.This scenario offers ~60% downside.Although I don’t usual look at time periods in an effort to evaluate potential future price action, I think it is important to note the similarity in terms of the time period of both moves and stay wary about what followed on the back end of GME’s move.\nGoogle Search Interest: The Momentum Story\nSource: Google Search Trends (GameStop)\nAs these moves are very much based upon momentum, Google search interest may be of value to consider. As you can see from the chart, GME’s search interest rose and fell quickly in late Jan. early Feb., pretty much in line with its equities performance. Its peak in interest pretty much aligned exactly with its peak in price, and its fall in interest aligned exactly with its fall in price. Similarly, its rebound in interest followed its rebound in price after testing the 50-day moving average around ~$45.\nSource: Google Search Trends [AMC]\nWhen you look at AMC’s Google Search Interest, you can also see its dramatic spike in a short period of time and then a subsequent stark decline. As search interest and volume were leading indicators for GME's move downward back in February, this chart might indicate a potential sell-off if it is not able to rebound.\nCross-Analysis\nWhen you chart stock price, search interest, and volume over each other, the relationship between them all becomes clearer, despite the imperfections in measuring a large number like volume to interest.\nSource: ValueMan\nWhen considering GME, the chart demonstrates that the variables have a correlation, especially in the stark and volatile moves upward and downward. While they may stray during times of relative muted volatility, they retain a relationship when things are moving in a volatile nature. Search interest and volume seemingly led or fell directly in line with the stock price following the move upward.\nSource: ValueMan\nAMC’s chart actually demonstrates the relationship and correlation between these variables more clearly. Consider how search interest and volume actually preceded price in GME’s move down and how AMC’s search interest recently broke through its price in a similar manner.\nWhile this method of analysis is not perfect, it is important to remember what the catalysts for your positions are and constantly analyze the duration of their impact and lifespan in the marketplace. As with all short-term volatile moves, fundamentals rarely provide too much of an indication or near term price action. Often, technicals, volume, and momentum provide the most accurate forecasts of future price action and, thus, are the most useful to analyze.\nMany have offered catalysts for what has driven this move, ranging from the re-opening narrative, a gamma or short squeeze, or the influx of new capital from shares issuances. The bottom line is all these catalysts depend upon momentum for their effective lifespan. Even if they are catalysts that will take place over time, dramatic price appreciation like this shortens the lifespan of the catalysts' daily momentum until they retest the longer term averages and establishes stability with heightened volume.\nI think it would be prudent to take profit here or at least take more than 50% off the table for the time being, and for those interested, a position in anticipation of a stark downside seems sensible.\nRisks\nThe risks to the bearish thesis on AMC involve renewed momentum and continued strength above the 7-day moving average. As I elaborated on earlier, that seems to be the most critical indicator of short-term price movement in these scenarios and consistently has been an indicator of a dramatic move to come both on the upside and downside. If AMC holds above this average and tightens the gap between the 7-day and the 20 and 50-day moving averages, it could potentially hold this heightened volume and price level and consolidate before making a move to new highs. I fundamentally believe that, while there are catalysts here at play, when a move is this dramatic in this short of a time frame momentum and technicals take over in determining future price action. And, thus, if the technicals break down, there should be stark downside. However, if the technicals continue to stay bullish, there may be more upside ahead. AMC looks to similar, however, to GME’s February move, and the bearish double top pattern seems to be forming.\nConclusion\nAfter writing a bullish article on AMC in January, we are now bearish on the equity, recognizing the deterioration of key momentum indicators and the technical similarity to the GME’s rise and fall back in February. In events like this, the catalysts get choppy, and it’s important to evaluate the lifespan of the main points to in your investment thesis. When things rise dramatically, there is often a time off profit taken in which the market re-prices just how valuable catalysts are. If it’s just momentum as a catalyst, the re-pricing is often stark and volatile. If it is a more long-term catalyst, the profit taking can be more muted. While there may be many catalysts driving AMC’s rise, there is without doubt one that takes precedent over them all, and that is the momentum story. Given our examination of GME, it seems the 7-day moving average is the price level to look at before dramatic downside, given the gap between the 20 and 50 day moving average. As Google search trends, volume, and price (double top pattern) seem to indicate things are breaking down and are similar at least to GME in February. One should consider taking profits here, and if inclined to take the other side, consider initiating a position accordingly now. While option premiums are high, I think there is still an ability to initiate a small position or a hedge with some short-term options (2 weeks-4 weeks). If price action were to head to the downside, the move would be drastic as the next level of support is $40 lower than the current price. While I think shorting could make sense here, and the cost to borrow doesn’t seem that high as the percentage of shares short is not GME’s level, there is inherently more risk there.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1205,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169359568,"gmtCreate":1623818193154,"gmtModify":1634027609005,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/169359568","repostId":"1199891920","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":572,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":160985119,"gmtCreate":1623769410531,"gmtModify":1634028556581,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok can","listText":"Ok can","text":"Ok can","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/160985119","repostId":"1191245053","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1191245053","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623762167,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1191245053?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-15 21:02","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Quad-Witch Quandary: How Will Friday's $2 Trillion Gamma Expiration Impact Markets<blockquote>四女巫困境：周五2万亿美元伽马到期将如何影响市场</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1191245053","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers .So picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fis","content":"<p>Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers (see \"4 Reasons Why The Market Doldrums End With Next Friday's Op-Ex\").</p><p><blockquote>上周，在讨论将VIX推至新冠大流行爆发以来的最低水平的市场夏季低迷时，我们表示，这段异常的市场平静期可能会持续到本周五的“四女巫”，届时大量的gamma和delta到期并去风险，在此过程中消除了股票的自然下行缓冲之一（请参阅“市场低迷随着下周五的Op-Ex而结束的4个原因”）。</blockquote></p><p> So picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fishman, previews June’s upcoming expiration which he dubs as \"large - comparable to a typical quarterly.\" Specifically,<b>there are $1.8 trillion of SPX options expiring on Friday, in addition to $240 billion of SPY options and $200 billion of options on SPX and SPX E-mini futures.</b></p><p><blockquote>因此，高盛内部衍生品专家洛基·菲什曼(Rocky Fishman)在谈到周五“可能影响市场的运营支出”的话题时，预览了即将到来的6月份到期，他称之为“规模很大——与典型的季度相当”。具体而言，<b>周五有1.8万亿美元的SPX期权到期，此外还有2400亿美元的SPDR标普500指数ETF期权以及2000亿美元的SPX和SPX E-mini期货期权。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d1ece116794c7f6523250fd682450e3\" tg-width=\"959\" tg-height=\"765\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Yet while these totals are massive,<b>when adjusted for the index’s size the amount of expiring options within 10% of current spot is smaller than just about any quarterly over the past decade.</b></p><p><blockquote>然而，尽管这些总数很大，<b>根据指数规模进行调整后，当前现货10%以内的到期期权数量比过去十年中的任何一个季度都要少。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/534b677774a92a59d4fe08f09359932b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"298\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> It's worth noting that according to Goldman estimates that combos account<b>for 15-20% of SPX options,</b>so an adjusted open interest total would add up to $1.5tln, still much larger than total expiring single stock open interest ($775bln). Furthermore, with stocks at all time highs, it is to be expected that most of the June open interest is below the current SPX spot price. As shown in the chart below, the dual peaks are at 3,900 and 4,150. This means that after Friday, there may be a certain \"anti\"-gravity around those spots until gamma is refilled.</p><p><blockquote>值得注意的是，根据高盛的估计，combos账户<b>对于15-20%的SPX期权，</b>因此，调整后的未平仓合约总额将达到1.5万亿美元，仍远高于即将到期的单一股票未平仓合约总额（7750亿美元）。此外，由于股市处于历史高位，预计6月份大部分未平仓合约均低于当前SPX现货价格。如下图所示，双峰在3900和4150。这意味着周五之后，在伽马被重新填充之前，这些点周围可能会有一定的“反”重力。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adfcada2b0ef3f2ebbd684649a613043\" tg-width=\"936\" tg-height=\"541\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The Goldman strategist then explains what he believes is below the abnormally low level of realized market vol, noting that - as we discussed last week - it is consistent with long gamma positioning. Consider that SPX<b>realized volatility over the past 13 trading days has been just 5.1% - the lowest 13-day realized vol since 2019.</b></p><p><blockquote>这位高盛策略师随后解释了他认为低于已实现市场波动率的异常低水平的情况，并指出——正如我们上周讨论的——这与多头伽马头寸一致。考虑一下SPX<b>过去13个交易日的已实现波动率仅为5.1%，为2019年以来最低的13天已实现波动率。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/afffda1e07736784ad695d95a9936421\" tg-width=\"952\" tg-height=\"558\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> This contrasts with extreme volatility in pockets of the single stock market; AMC, which had the highest contract volume among single stocks last week (but far less notional volume at$7bln/day than AMZN’s leading $120bln/day), has had close to 400% realized vol over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>这与单一股票市场部分地区的极端波动形成鲜明对比；AMC上周是个股中合约量最高的（但名义交易量为70亿美元/天，远低于AMZN领先的1200亿美元/天），同期已实现成交量接近400%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df2b7aeaadb37160a7eaf0ac08ba31de\" tg-width=\"1236\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Then, as Nomura's Charlie McElligott first noted last week, Goldman's derivatives team agrees that<b>the extremely low SPX realized volatility is consistent with the possibility that 18-Jun has left “the street” long index gamma, in which case Fishman echoeswhat we said last week, namely that \"realized volatility could pick up once positions are cleaner. \"</b>Meanwhile, the rising beta of VIX futures to the SPX indicates that investors expect short gamma dynamics to pick up should markets sell off. Translation:<u><b>the market will become much more volatile in a selloff.</b></u></p><p><blockquote>然后，正如野村证券的Charlie McElligott上周首次指出的那样，高盛的衍生品团队同意<b>极低的SPX已实现波动性与6月18日离开“华尔街”多头指数gamma的可能性是一致的，在这种情况下，Fishman呼应了我们上周所说的，即“一旦头寸变得更加干净，已实现波动性可能会回升。”</b>与此同时，VIX期货相对于SPX的贝塔值上升表明，投资者预计，如果市场抛售，空头伽马动态将会回升。翻译：<u><b>在抛售中，市场将变得更加波动。</b></u></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76b01b8a05b70ec4f343626b1fad491b\" tg-width=\"931\" tg-height=\"560\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and in keeping with the latest memo stock squeeze, Goldman also notes that while single stock option volumes continue to be high, it is well short of Q1 peaks. The large percentage of all single stock option activity driven by retail, and the predictive value of retail activity, have both heightened the attention on the single stock option market in recent weeks. Recent growth in single stock option activity has been concentrated in low-share-price stocks, leaving a shar prise in contract-volume over the past two weeks that has not been matched by notional volume. When adjusting notional volume for the size of the equity market, Goldman finds that single stock volume has actually been on the low of its 2021 range over the past two weeks which means that the latest ramps had little to no gamma squeeze components to them.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，与最新的备忘录股票挤压保持一致，高盛还指出，虽然单一股票期权交易量仍然很高，但远低于第一季度的峰值。最近几周，由散户驱动的所有单一股票期权活动的很大比例以及散户活动的预测价值都提高了对单一股票期权市场的关注。近期单一股票期权活动的增长主要集中在低股价股票上，导致过去两周合约交易量大幅上涨，但名义交易量并未与之匹配。在根据股市规模调整名义成交量时，高盛发现过去两周单只股票成交量实际上一直处于2021年区间的低点，这意味着最新的上涨几乎没有伽马挤压成分。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9c6c3df49e3e5d1e4a7a0d9c24696e6a\" tg-width=\"1212\" tg-height=\"608\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> One final point which we discussed recently and which is in keeping with the growing retail participation in trading, is Goldman's observation that the trend toward shorter-dated SPX options (weeklies) and away from quarterlies, continues. That also is one of the reasons why Friday’s SPX expiration is smaller than many recent quarterlies, and why as it as approached expiration, its trading volume has been falling.</p><p><blockquote>我们最近讨论的最后一点是高盛的观察，即短期SPX期权（每周）和远离季度的趋势仍在继续，这与散户参与交易的不断增加相一致。这也是周五SPX到期时间小于最近许多季度的原因之一，也是为什么随着到期时间的临近，其交易量一直在下降的原因之一。</blockquote></p><p> As Goldman explains, investors have been increasingly adopting the full calendar of SPX expirations, including expirations every Monday and Wednesday, as they tailor their views around events. In fact,<b>the percentage of SPX option volume happening in 3rd Friday expirations is at an all-time low,</b>and is now smaller than the percentage happening in Monday and Wednesday expirations. One explanation for heightened ultra-short-dated volumes is the strong single stock volumes: and here an interest suggesting from Goldman - \"to the extent market makers are unable to cover the short single stock gamma generated by retail investors’ call buying, they may be actively trading long positions in strips of ultra-short-dated SPX index options to offset this gamma.\"</p><p><blockquote>正如高盛所解释的那样，投资者越来越多地采用SPX到期的完整日历，包括每周一和周三的到期，因为他们围绕事件调整了自己的观点。事实上，<b>第三个周五到期的SPX期权交易量百分比处于历史最低点，</b>现在低于周一和周三到期的百分比。超短期交易量增加的一个解释是强劲的单一股票交易量：高盛提出了一个兴趣——“在某种程度上，做市商无法弥补散户投资者看涨期权买入产生的单一股票空头伽马，他们可能会积极交易超短期SPX指数期权的多头头寸，以抵消这种伽马。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd0e886a62a61c70b0f299bd6c032a24\" tg-width=\"954\" tg-height=\"1128\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Why is this important? because if this trend is large enough, it directly contributes to low implied and realized correlation.<b>Ironically, by ramping single name, \"most-shorted names\", retail investors are ushering a period of unorthodox calm across the rest of the market!</b></p><p><blockquote>为什么这很重要？因为如果这种趋势足够大，它会直接导致低隐含和实现的相关性。<b>具有讽刺意味的是，通过增加单一名称“最受做空的名称”，散户投资者正在市场的其他部分迎来一段非正统的平静时期！</b></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>Quad-Witch Quandary: How Will Friday's $2 Trillion Gamma Expiration Impact Markets<blockquote>四女巫困境：周五2万亿美元伽马到期将如何影响市场</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\">\nQuad-Witch Quandary: How Will Friday's $2 Trillion Gamma Expiration Impact Markets<blockquote>四女巫困境：周五2万亿美元伽马到期将如何影响市场</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-15 21:02</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers (see \"4 Reasons Why The Market Doldrums End With Next Friday's Op-Ex\").</p><p><blockquote>上周，在讨论将VIX推至新冠大流行爆发以来的最低水平的市场夏季低迷时，我们表示，这段异常的市场平静期可能会持续到本周五的“四女巫”，届时大量的gamma和delta到期并去风险，在此过程中消除了股票的自然下行缓冲之一（请参阅“市场低迷随着下周五的Op-Ex而结束的4个原因”）。</blockquote></p><p> So picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fishman, previews June’s upcoming expiration which he dubs as \"large - comparable to a typical quarterly.\" Specifically,<b>there are $1.8 trillion of SPX options expiring on Friday, in addition to $240 billion of SPY options and $200 billion of options on SPX and SPX E-mini futures.</b></p><p><blockquote>因此，高盛内部衍生品专家洛基·菲什曼(Rocky Fishman)在谈到周五“可能影响市场的运营支出”的话题时，预览了即将到来的6月份到期，他称之为“规模很大——与典型的季度相当”。具体而言，<b>周五有1.8万亿美元的SPX期权到期，此外还有2400亿美元的SPDR标普500指数ETF期权以及2000亿美元的SPX和SPX E-mini期货期权。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d1ece116794c7f6523250fd682450e3\" tg-width=\"959\" tg-height=\"765\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Yet while these totals are massive,<b>when adjusted for the index’s size the amount of expiring options within 10% of current spot is smaller than just about any quarterly over the past decade.</b></p><p><blockquote>然而，尽管这些总数很大，<b>根据指数规模进行调整后，当前现货10%以内的到期期权数量比过去十年中的任何一个季度都要少。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/534b677774a92a59d4fe08f09359932b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"298\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> It's worth noting that according to Goldman estimates that combos account<b>for 15-20% of SPX options,</b>so an adjusted open interest total would add up to $1.5tln, still much larger than total expiring single stock open interest ($775bln). Furthermore, with stocks at all time highs, it is to be expected that most of the June open interest is below the current SPX spot price. As shown in the chart below, the dual peaks are at 3,900 and 4,150. This means that after Friday, there may be a certain \"anti\"-gravity around those spots until gamma is refilled.</p><p><blockquote>值得注意的是，根据高盛的估计，combos账户<b>对于15-20%的SPX期权，</b>因此，调整后的未平仓合约总额将达到1.5万亿美元，仍远高于即将到期的单一股票未平仓合约总额（7750亿美元）。此外，由于股市处于历史高位，预计6月份大部分未平仓合约均低于当前SPX现货价格。如下图所示，双峰在3900和4150。这意味着周五之后，在伽马被重新填充之前，这些点周围可能会有一定的“反”重力。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adfcada2b0ef3f2ebbd684649a613043\" tg-width=\"936\" tg-height=\"541\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The Goldman strategist then explains what he believes is below the abnormally low level of realized market vol, noting that - as we discussed last week - it is consistent with long gamma positioning. Consider that SPX<b>realized volatility over the past 13 trading days has been just 5.1% - the lowest 13-day realized vol since 2019.</b></p><p><blockquote>这位高盛策略师随后解释了他认为低于已实现市场波动率的异常低水平的情况，并指出——正如我们上周讨论的——这与多头伽马头寸一致。考虑一下SPX<b>过去13个交易日的已实现波动率仅为5.1%，为2019年以来最低的13天已实现波动率。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/afffda1e07736784ad695d95a9936421\" tg-width=\"952\" tg-height=\"558\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> This contrasts with extreme volatility in pockets of the single stock market; AMC, which had the highest contract volume among single stocks last week (but far less notional volume at$7bln/day than AMZN’s leading $120bln/day), has had close to 400% realized vol over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>这与单一股票市场部分地区的极端波动形成鲜明对比；AMC上周是个股中合约量最高的（但名义交易量为70亿美元/天，远低于AMZN领先的1200亿美元/天），同期已实现成交量接近400%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df2b7aeaadb37160a7eaf0ac08ba31de\" tg-width=\"1236\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Then, as Nomura's Charlie McElligott first noted last week, Goldman's derivatives team agrees that<b>the extremely low SPX realized volatility is consistent with the possibility that 18-Jun has left “the street” long index gamma, in which case Fishman echoeswhat we said last week, namely that \"realized volatility could pick up once positions are cleaner. \"</b>Meanwhile, the rising beta of VIX futures to the SPX indicates that investors expect short gamma dynamics to pick up should markets sell off. Translation:<u><b>the market will become much more volatile in a selloff.</b></u></p><p><blockquote>然后，正如野村证券的Charlie McElligott上周首次指出的那样，高盛的衍生品团队同意<b>极低的SPX已实现波动性与6月18日离开“华尔街”多头指数gamma的可能性是一致的，在这种情况下，Fishman呼应了我们上周所说的，即“一旦头寸变得更加干净，已实现波动性可能会回升。”</b>与此同时，VIX期货相对于SPX的贝塔值上升表明，投资者预计，如果市场抛售，空头伽马动态将会回升。翻译：<u><b>在抛售中，市场将变得更加波动。</b></u></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76b01b8a05b70ec4f343626b1fad491b\" tg-width=\"931\" tg-height=\"560\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and in keeping with the latest memo stock squeeze, Goldman also notes that while single stock option volumes continue to be high, it is well short of Q1 peaks. The large percentage of all single stock option activity driven by retail, and the predictive value of retail activity, have both heightened the attention on the single stock option market in recent weeks. Recent growth in single stock option activity has been concentrated in low-share-price stocks, leaving a shar prise in contract-volume over the past two weeks that has not been matched by notional volume. When adjusting notional volume for the size of the equity market, Goldman finds that single stock volume has actually been on the low of its 2021 range over the past two weeks which means that the latest ramps had little to no gamma squeeze components to them.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，与最新的备忘录股票挤压保持一致，高盛还指出，虽然单一股票期权交易量仍然很高，但远低于第一季度的峰值。最近几周，由散户驱动的所有单一股票期权活动的很大比例以及散户活动的预测价值都提高了对单一股票期权市场的关注。近期单一股票期权活动的增长主要集中在低股价股票上，导致过去两周合约交易量大幅上涨，但名义交易量并未与之匹配。在根据股市规模调整名义成交量时，高盛发现过去两周单只股票成交量实际上一直处于2021年区间的低点，这意味着最新的上涨几乎没有伽马挤压成分。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9c6c3df49e3e5d1e4a7a0d9c24696e6a\" tg-width=\"1212\" tg-height=\"608\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> One final point which we discussed recently and which is in keeping with the growing retail participation in trading, is Goldman's observation that the trend toward shorter-dated SPX options (weeklies) and away from quarterlies, continues. That also is one of the reasons why Friday’s SPX expiration is smaller than many recent quarterlies, and why as it as approached expiration, its trading volume has been falling.</p><p><blockquote>我们最近讨论的最后一点是高盛的观察，即短期SPX期权（每周）和远离季度的趋势仍在继续，这与散户参与交易的不断增加相一致。这也是周五SPX到期时间小于最近许多季度的原因之一，也是为什么随着到期时间的临近，其交易量一直在下降的原因之一。</blockquote></p><p> As Goldman explains, investors have been increasingly adopting the full calendar of SPX expirations, including expirations every Monday and Wednesday, as they tailor their views around events. In fact,<b>the percentage of SPX option volume happening in 3rd Friday expirations is at an all-time low,</b>and is now smaller than the percentage happening in Monday and Wednesday expirations. One explanation for heightened ultra-short-dated volumes is the strong single stock volumes: and here an interest suggesting from Goldman - \"to the extent market makers are unable to cover the short single stock gamma generated by retail investors’ call buying, they may be actively trading long positions in strips of ultra-short-dated SPX index options to offset this gamma.\"</p><p><blockquote>正如高盛所解释的那样，投资者越来越多地采用SPX到期的完整日历，包括每周一和周三的到期，因为他们围绕事件调整了自己的观点。事实上，<b>第三个周五到期的SPX期权交易量百分比处于历史最低点，</b>现在低于周一和周三到期的百分比。超短期交易量增加的一个解释是强劲的单一股票交易量：高盛提出了一个兴趣——“在某种程度上，做市商无法弥补散户投资者看涨期权买入产生的单一股票空头伽马，他们可能会积极交易超短期SPX指数期权的多头头寸，以抵消这种伽马。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd0e886a62a61c70b0f299bd6c032a24\" tg-width=\"954\" tg-height=\"1128\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Why is this important? because if this trend is large enough, it directly contributes to low implied and realized correlation.<b>Ironically, by ramping single name, \"most-shorted names\", retail investors are ushering a period of unorthodox calm across the rest of the market!</b></p><p><blockquote>为什么这很重要？因为如果这种趋势足够大，它会直接导致低隐含和实现的相关性。<b>具有讽刺意味的是，通过增加单一名称“最受做空的名称”，散户投资者正在市场的其他部分迎来一段非正统的平静时期！</b></blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/quad-witch-quandary-how-will-fridays-2-trillion-gamma-expiration-impact-markets\">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":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/quad-witch-quandary-how-will-fridays-2-trillion-gamma-expiration-impact-markets","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1191245053","content_text":"Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers (see \"4 Reasons Why The Market Doldrums End With Next Friday's Op-Ex\").\nSo picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fishman, previews June’s upcoming expiration which he dubs as \"large - comparable to a typical quarterly.\" Specifically,there are $1.8 trillion of SPX options expiring on Friday, in addition to $240 billion of SPY options and $200 billion of options on SPX and SPX E-mini futures.\n\nYet while these totals are massive,when adjusted for the index’s size the amount of expiring options within 10% of current spot is smaller than just about any quarterly over the past decade.\n\nIt's worth noting that according to Goldman estimates that combos accountfor 15-20% of SPX options,so an adjusted open interest total would add up to $1.5tln, still much larger than total expiring single stock open interest ($775bln). Furthermore, with stocks at all time highs, it is to be expected that most of the June open interest is below the current SPX spot price. As shown in the chart below, the dual peaks are at 3,900 and 4,150. This means that after Friday, there may be a certain \"anti\"-gravity around those spots until gamma is refilled.\n\nThe Goldman strategist then explains what he believes is below the abnormally low level of realized market vol, noting that - as we discussed last week - it is consistent with long gamma positioning. Consider that SPXrealized volatility over the past 13 trading days has been just 5.1% - the lowest 13-day realized vol since 2019.\n\nThis contrasts with extreme volatility in pockets of the single stock market; AMC, which had the highest contract volume among single stocks last week (but far less notional volume at$7bln/day than AMZN’s leading $120bln/day), has had close to 400% realized vol over the same period.\n\nThen, as Nomura's Charlie McElligott first noted last week, Goldman's derivatives team agrees thatthe extremely low SPX realized volatility is consistent with the possibility that 18-Jun has left “the street” long index gamma, in which case Fishman echoeswhat we said last week, namely that \"realized volatility could pick up once positions are cleaner. \"Meanwhile, the rising beta of VIX futures to the SPX indicates that investors expect short gamma dynamics to pick up should markets sell off. Translation:the market will become much more volatile in a selloff.\n\nMeanwhile, and in keeping with the latest memo stock squeeze, Goldman also notes that while single stock option volumes continue to be high, it is well short of Q1 peaks. The large percentage of all single stock option activity driven by retail, and the predictive value of retail activity, have both heightened the attention on the single stock option market in recent weeks. Recent growth in single stock option activity has been concentrated in low-share-price stocks, leaving a shar prise in contract-volume over the past two weeks that has not been matched by notional volume. When adjusting notional volume for the size of the equity market, Goldman finds that single stock volume has actually been on the low of its 2021 range over the past two weeks which means that the latest ramps had little to no gamma squeeze components to them.\n\nOne final point which we discussed recently and which is in keeping with the growing retail participation in trading, is Goldman's observation that the trend toward shorter-dated SPX options (weeklies) and away from quarterlies, continues. That also is one of the reasons why Friday’s SPX expiration is smaller than many recent quarterlies, and why as it as approached expiration, its trading volume has been falling.\nAs Goldman explains, investors have been increasingly adopting the full calendar of SPX expirations, including expirations every Monday and Wednesday, as they tailor their views around events. In fact,the percentage of SPX option volume happening in 3rd Friday expirations is at an all-time low,and is now smaller than the percentage happening in Monday and Wednesday expirations. One explanation for heightened ultra-short-dated volumes is the strong single stock volumes: and here an interest suggesting from Goldman - \"to the extent market makers are unable to cover the short single stock gamma generated by retail investors’ call buying, they may be actively trading long positions in strips of ultra-short-dated SPX index options to offset this gamma.\"\n\nWhy is this important? because if this trend is large enough, it directly contributes to low implied and realized correlation.Ironically, by ramping single name, \"most-shorted names\", retail investors are ushering a period of unorthodox calm across the rest of the market!","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1401,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186399230,"gmtCreate":1623472113820,"gmtModify":1634032672194,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cool","listText":"Cool","text":"Cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186399230","repostId":"1159804717","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":407,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186973730,"gmtCreate":1623471242120,"gmtModify":1634032688077,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nooooooo","listText":"Nooooooo","text":"Nooooooo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186973730","repostId":"1196090491","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":289,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186973814,"gmtCreate":1623471221138,"gmtModify":1634032688659,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Whut","listText":"Whut","text":"Whut","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186973814","repostId":"1174648150","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1174648150","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":1623421129,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1174648150?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-11 22:18","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chinese education stocks fell again<blockquote>中国教育股再次下跌</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1174648150","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(June 11) Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell abo","content":"<p>(June 11)&nbsp;Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell about 2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月11日）高途跌超7%，好未来教育集团跌约4%，新东方教育跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/19995de30a445296dd85511c627cc738\" tg-width=\"304\" tg-height=\"242\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Chinese education stocks fell again<blockquote>中国教育股再次下跌</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\">\nChinese education stocks fell again<blockquote>中国教育股再次下跌</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\">2021-06-11 22:18</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(June 11)&nbsp;Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell about 2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月11日）高途跌超7%，好未来教育集团跌约4%，新东方教育跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/19995de30a445296dd85511c627cc738\" tg-width=\"304\" tg-height=\"242\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1174648150","content_text":"(June 11) Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell about 2%.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":441,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186979983,"gmtCreate":1623471178142,"gmtModify":1634032690188,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Very nice article&nbsp;","listText":"Very nice article&nbsp;","text":"Very nice article","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186979983","repostId":"2142202973","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":418,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186957087,"gmtCreate":1623470745249,"gmtModify":1634032700562,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Kk","listText":"Kk","text":"Kk","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186957087","repostId":"1104635261","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1104635261","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470020,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1104635261?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:53","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1104635261","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.\n\nA multipronged bet onAMC Enter","content":"<p>  <b>Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.</b>  A multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.</p><p><blockquote><b>Mudrick Capital的亏损显示了投资模因股票的风险。</b>本月，对AMC Entertainment HoldingsINC.AMC 15.39%的多管齐下的押注在Mudrick Capital Management LP上适得其反，Mudrick Capital Management LP是最新一家成为大量日内交易者受害者的对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>知情人士称，穆德里克的旗舰基金在短短几天内损失了约10%，因为AMC股价的上涨意外引发了该基金作为复杂交易策略一部分持有的衍生品价值的变化。</blockquote></p><p> The setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.</p><p><blockquote>几个月前，一群在社交媒体上组织的交易员帮助GameStopCorp.GME5.88%和其他股票的价格在1月份飙升，远远超出了许多投资者对基本面的看法。</blockquote></p><p> The development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>这一事态发展促使许多对冲基金削减了对模因股票的投资。Mudrick Capital的损失凸显了保留对此类公司的大量投资的风险有多大，甚至会对一位与个人投资者的看涨情绪基本同步的对冲基金经理产生适得其反的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Jason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.</p><p><blockquote>该公司创始人杰森·穆德里克(Jason Mudrick)几个月来一直在交易AMC股票、期权和债券，个人投资者对这家连锁影院的热情高涨。但他也出售了看涨期权期权，这是一种衍生品合约，旨在对冲该基金在股价下跌时对AMC的敞口。知情人士称，这些衍生品合约赋予买家未来以大约40美元的价格从Mudrick购买AMC股票的权利，但当Reddit推动的购买热潮最近将AMC股票推至新纪录时，这些衍生品合约就变成了负债。</blockquote></p><p> As part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.</p><p><blockquote>作为更广泛的AMC战略的一部分，Mudrick Capital的高管正在与AMC就购买该公司的额外股票进行谈判。6月1日，AMC披露，Mudrick Capital已同意以每股27.12美元的价格直接从该公司购买2.305亿美元的新股，高于当时的交易价格。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克立即出售了该股票并获利，彭博新闻报道了这一快速抛售，并在社交媒体上引发了强烈反对。</blockquote></p><p> “Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.</p><p><blockquote>6月1日，Reddit华尔街博彩论坛上的一篇帖子写道：“穆德里克没有在背后捅AMC一刀……他们是搬起石头砸自己的脚。”当时的其他帖子称穆德里克为“失败者”、“人渣”和“一大堆没有未来的挥舞着的S-T”。论坛成员互相催促买入并持有。</blockquote></p><p> Inside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.</p><p><blockquote>随着AMC反弹势头增强，穆德里克内部的高管们越来越感到担忧。该公司的风险委员会于6月1日晚在该股收于32美元后召开会议，并决定在第二天退出所有债务和衍生品头寸。</blockquote></p><p> It was a day too late.</p><p><blockquote>晚了一天。</blockquote></p><p> AMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.</p><p><blockquote>6月2日，AMC股价在几个小时内突破40美元，触及72.62美元的盘中高点。在穆德里克资本促成的疯狂交易中，看涨期权期权价格飙升，到本周末，获胜的交易变成了失败，使该基金损失了数亿美元。Mudrick Capital出售的债务回报率约为5%，但考虑到期权交易后，该基金在AMC上的净亏损约为5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.</p><p><blockquote>其中一位知情人士表示，穆德里克的基金今年仍上涨了约12%。与此同时，年初购买AMC股票并持有的投资者已上涨约2000%。</blockquote></p><p> The impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>社交媒体推动的日内交易者的影响已成为今年市场的决定性发展，导致顶级对冲基金损失数十亿美元，引发国会听证会并受到美国证券交易委员会的审查。更多的对冲基金现在跟踪个人投资者在社交媒体上的情绪，更加关注市值较小的公司，这些公司的股价可能更容易受到个人投资者热情的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生专门从事不良债务投资，经常以高利率向陷入困境的公司提供贷款，或者在破产法庭上将其现有债务换成股权。Mudrick管理着全公司约35亿美元的投资，并通过此类交易所持有电子烟制造商NJOY Holdings Inc.和卫星通信公司GlobalStarInc.的大量非流动性股份。汇丰另类投资集团的数据显示，2018年至2020年，该旗舰基金的年回报率约为17%。</blockquote></p><p> But distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.</p><p><blockquote>但由于美联储的宽松资金甚至为陷入困境的公司提供了进入债务市场的机会，因此陷入困境的投资机会变得越来越难找到。穆德里克先生还探索了其他策略，成立了几家特殊目的收购公司，就AMC而言，最终通过大宗交易购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Mr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克最初将他的典型策略应用于AMC，以低至20美分的价格购买债券，在12月向该公司借出1亿美元，并将部分债券换成新股。在Covid-19大流行封锁期间，已经面临压力的影院上座率几乎完全消失，AMC股票交易价格低至2美元。他推断，随着越来越多的美国人接种疫苗，消费者今年将恢复对大屏幕娱乐的兴趣。</blockquote></p><p> Day traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.</p><p><blockquote>1月下旬，日内交易者首次在AMC进行了交易，在社交媒体上高呼#SaveAMC，并短暂将该股推升至20美元左右。AMC不断上涨的股票价值推高了债务价格——Mudrick Capital持有的一只债券在一周内翻了一番——很快就回报了Mudrick先生的看涨情绪。AMC利用其飙升的股价在1月底筹集了近10亿美元的新融资，使其能够避免此前预期的破产申请。</blockquote></p><p> Around that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.</p><p><blockquote>大约在那个时候，穆德里克先生出售了AMC股票的看涨期权期权，如果连锁影院确实面临问题，可以立即产生收入来抵消潜在的损失。衍生品让买家可以选择以40美元左右的价格从穆德里克资本手中购买AMC股票——当股票交易价格低于10美元时，这似乎是不太可能的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生与AMC首席执行官亚当·阿伦(Adam Aron)就提供额外资金保持联系，导致他最近购买了股票。但一位知情人士表示，作为一项保险政策，他保留了衍生品合约。</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>AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-12 11:53</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  <b>Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.</b>  A multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.</p><p><blockquote><b>Mudrick Capital的亏损显示了投资模因股票的风险。</b>本月，对AMC Entertainment HoldingsINC.AMC 15.39%的多管齐下的押注在Mudrick Capital Management LP上适得其反，Mudrick Capital Management LP是最新一家成为大量日内交易者受害者的对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>知情人士称，穆德里克的旗舰基金在短短几天内损失了约10%，因为AMC股价的上涨意外引发了该基金作为复杂交易策略一部分持有的衍生品价值的变化。</blockquote></p><p> The setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.</p><p><blockquote>几个月前，一群在社交媒体上组织的交易员帮助GameStopCorp.GME5.88%和其他股票的价格在1月份飙升，远远超出了许多投资者对基本面的看法。</blockquote></p><p> The development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>这一事态发展促使许多对冲基金削减了对模因股票的投资。Mudrick Capital的损失凸显了保留对此类公司的大量投资的风险有多大，甚至会对一位与个人投资者的看涨情绪基本同步的对冲基金经理产生适得其反的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Jason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.</p><p><blockquote>该公司创始人杰森·穆德里克(Jason Mudrick)几个月来一直在交易AMC股票、期权和债券，个人投资者对这家连锁影院的热情高涨。但他也出售了看涨期权期权，这是一种衍生品合约，旨在对冲该基金在股价下跌时对AMC的敞口。知情人士称，这些衍生品合约赋予买家未来以大约40美元的价格从Mudrick购买AMC股票的权利，但当Reddit推动的购买热潮最近将AMC股票推至新纪录时，这些衍生品合约就变成了负债。</blockquote></p><p> As part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.</p><p><blockquote>作为更广泛的AMC战略的一部分，Mudrick Capital的高管正在与AMC就购买该公司的额外股票进行谈判。6月1日，AMC披露，Mudrick Capital已同意以每股27.12美元的价格直接从该公司购买2.305亿美元的新股，高于当时的交易价格。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克立即出售了该股票并获利，彭博新闻报道了这一快速抛售，并在社交媒体上引发了强烈反对。</blockquote></p><p> “Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.</p><p><blockquote>6月1日，Reddit华尔街博彩论坛上的一篇帖子写道：“穆德里克没有在背后捅AMC一刀……他们是搬起石头砸自己的脚。”当时的其他帖子称穆德里克为“失败者”、“人渣”和“一大堆没有未来的挥舞着的S-T”。论坛成员互相催促买入并持有。</blockquote></p><p> Inside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.</p><p><blockquote>随着AMC反弹势头增强，穆德里克内部的高管们越来越感到担忧。该公司的风险委员会于6月1日晚在该股收于32美元后召开会议，并决定在第二天退出所有债务和衍生品头寸。</blockquote></p><p> It was a day too late.</p><p><blockquote>晚了一天。</blockquote></p><p> AMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.</p><p><blockquote>6月2日，AMC股价在几个小时内突破40美元，触及72.62美元的盘中高点。在穆德里克资本促成的疯狂交易中，看涨期权期权价格飙升，到本周末，获胜的交易变成了失败，使该基金损失了数亿美元。Mudrick Capital出售的债务回报率约为5%，但考虑到期权交易后，该基金在AMC上的净亏损约为5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.</p><p><blockquote>其中一位知情人士表示，穆德里克的基金今年仍上涨了约12%。与此同时，年初购买AMC股票并持有的投资者已上涨约2000%。</blockquote></p><p> The impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>社交媒体推动的日内交易者的影响已成为今年市场的决定性发展，导致顶级对冲基金损失数十亿美元，引发国会听证会并受到美国证券交易委员会的审查。更多的对冲基金现在跟踪个人投资者在社交媒体上的情绪，更加关注市值较小的公司，这些公司的股价可能更容易受到个人投资者热情的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生专门从事不良债务投资，经常以高利率向陷入困境的公司提供贷款，或者在破产法庭上将其现有债务换成股权。Mudrick管理着全公司约35亿美元的投资，并通过此类交易所持有电子烟制造商NJOY Holdings Inc.和卫星通信公司GlobalStarInc.的大量非流动性股份。汇丰另类投资集团的数据显示，2018年至2020年，该旗舰基金的年回报率约为17%。</blockquote></p><p> But distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.</p><p><blockquote>但由于美联储的宽松资金甚至为陷入困境的公司提供了进入债务市场的机会，因此陷入困境的投资机会变得越来越难找到。穆德里克先生还探索了其他策略，成立了几家特殊目的收购公司，就AMC而言，最终通过大宗交易购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Mr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克最初将他的典型策略应用于AMC，以低至20美分的价格购买债券，在12月向该公司借出1亿美元，并将部分债券换成新股。在Covid-19大流行封锁期间，已经面临压力的影院上座率几乎完全消失，AMC股票交易价格低至2美元。他推断，随着越来越多的美国人接种疫苗，消费者今年将恢复对大屏幕娱乐的兴趣。</blockquote></p><p> Day traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.</p><p><blockquote>1月下旬，日内交易者首次在AMC进行了交易，在社交媒体上高呼#SaveAMC，并短暂将该股推升至20美元左右。AMC不断上涨的股票价值推高了债务价格——Mudrick Capital持有的一只债券在一周内翻了一番——很快就回报了Mudrick先生的看涨情绪。AMC利用其飙升的股价在1月底筹集了近10亿美元的新融资，使其能够避免此前预期的破产申请。</blockquote></p><p> Around that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.</p><p><blockquote>大约在那个时候，穆德里克先生出售了AMC股票的看涨期权期权，如果连锁影院确实面临问题，可以立即产生收入来抵消潜在的损失。衍生品让买家可以选择以40美元左右的价格从穆德里克资本手中购买AMC股票——当股票交易价格低于10美元时，这似乎是不太可能的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生与AMC首席执行官亚当·阿伦(Adam Aron)就提供额外资金保持联系，导致他最近购买了股票。但一位知情人士表示，作为一项保险政策，他保留了衍生品合约。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/amc-bet-by-hedge-fund-unravels-thanks-to-meme-stock-traders-11623431320?mod=markets_lead_pos2\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/amc-bet-by-hedge-fund-unravels-thanks-to-meme-stock-traders-11623431320?mod=markets_lead_pos2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1104635261","content_text":"Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.\n\nA multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.\nMudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.\nThe setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.\nThe development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.\nJason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.\nAs part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.\nMudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.\n“Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.\nInside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.\nIt was a day too late.\nAMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.\nMr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.\nThe impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.\nMr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.\nBut distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.\nMr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.\nDay traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.\nAround that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.\nMr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":233,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186955298,"gmtCreate":1623470706514,"gmtModify":1634032702085,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581771143434296","idStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186955298","repostId":"1147474880","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147474880","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470168,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1147474880?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147474880","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless ris","content":"<p>  Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.  I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</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>Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</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\">\nInvestor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-12 11:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.  I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147474880","content_text":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.\nIf you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.\nWhenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.\nYou’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.\nOf course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%areinvestors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.\nAn investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.\nThe word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.\nNevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”\nHe wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)\n“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”\nGraham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.\nIn that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”\nHowever, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”\nMost investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.\nIf you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.\nTake speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.\nI think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.\n“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”\nI hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.\nCalling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.\nIna recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”\nIn her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.\nThe currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)\nPAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.\nMs. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”\nIn Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":431,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":807020184,"gmtCreate":1627989995148,"gmtModify":1633754613904,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/807020184","repostId":"1169635195","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1169635195","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":1627988246,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1169635195?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-03 18:57","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Alibaba EPS beats by RMB2.27, misses on revenue<blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW每股收益超过预期人民币2.27元、营收不及预期</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1169635195","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":" $Alibaba$ posted financial result in premarket, which showed that:. Alibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.Alibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.Revenue was RMB205,740 million , an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million .Annual active consumersof the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached app","content":"<p>(August 3)&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a> posted&nbsp;financial&nbsp;result&nbsp;in&nbsp;premarket,&nbsp;which&nbsp;showed&nbsp;that:</p><p><blockquote>（8月3日）<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">阿里巴巴-SW</a>盘前公布的财务业绩显示：</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度营收为人民币2057.4亿元，去年同期为人民币1537.5亿元；FactSet共识为人民币2091.1亿元。</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度调整后。每股收益为人民币16.60元，去年同期为人民币14.82元；FactSet共识人民币14.33元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS</b></p><p><blockquote><b>业务亮点</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>In the quarter ended June 30, 2021:</b></p><p><blockquote><b>截至2021年6月30日的季度：</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Revenue</b>&nbsp;was RMB205,740 million (US$31,865 million), an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million (US$29,010 million).</li>  <li><b>Annual active consumers</b>of the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached approximately 1.18 billion for the twelve months ended June 30, 2021, an increase of 45 million from the twelve months ended March 31, 2021. This includes 912 million consumers in China1and 265 million consumers overseas served by Lazada, AliExpress, Trendyol and Daraz.</li>  <li><b>Income from operations</b>&nbsp;was RMB30,847 million (US$4,778 million), a decrease of 11% year-over-year.<b>Adjusted EBITDA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 5% year-over-year to RMB48,628 million (US$7,532 million).<b>Adjusted EBITA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 8% year-over-year to RMB41,731 million (US$6,463 million). The year-over-year decreases were primarily due to our investments in strategic areas to capture incremental opportunities, such as Community Marketplaces, Taobao Deals, Local Consumer Services and Lazada, as well as our increased spending on growth initiatives within China retail marketplaces, such as Idle Fish and Taobao Live, and our support to merchants.</li>  <li><b>Net income attributable to ordinary shareholders</b>&nbsp;was RMB45,141 million (US$6,991 million),and<b>net income</b>was RMB42,835 million (US$6,634 million).<b>Non-GAAP net income</b>&nbsp;was RMB43,441 million (US$6,728 million), an increase of 10% year-over-year, mainly due to an increase in share of profit of equity method investees.</li>  <li><b>Diluted earnings per ADS</b>&nbsp;was RMB16.38 (US$2.54) and<b>diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.05 (US$0.32 or HK$2.46).<b>Non-GAAP diluted earnings per ADS</b>was RMB16.60 (US$2.57), an increase of 12% year-over-year and<b>non-GAAP diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.08 (US$0.32 or HK$2.50), an increase of 12% year-over-year.</li>  <li><b>Net cashprovided by operating activities</b>&nbsp;was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million).<b>Non-GAAP free cash flow</b>was RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), a decrease compared to RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020, mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million fine levied earlier this year by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation pursuant to China’s Anti-monopoly Law (the “Anti-monopoly Fine”) and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas.</li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11aa08a1ccb4f80e6867c7e7631297c8\" tg-width=\"719\" tg-height=\"863\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>收入</b>为人民币2,057.40百万元（318.65亿美元），同比增长34%。如果不包括合并高鑫，我们的收入将同比增长22%至人民币1,873.06亿元（290.1亿美元）。</li><li><b>年度活跃消费者</b>截至2021年6月30日止十二个月，全球阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的总用户数达到约11.8亿，较截至2021年3月31日止十二个月增加4500万。这包括Lazada、全球速卖通、Trendyol和Daraz服务的中国9.12亿消费者1和海外2.65亿消费者。</li><li><b>营业收入</b>为人民币308.47亿元（47.78亿美元），同比下降11%。<b>调整后EBITDA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降5%至人民币486.28亿元（75.32亿美元）。<b>调整后EBITA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降8%至人民币417.31亿元（64.63亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于我们在战略领域的投资以捕捉增量机会，例如社区市场、淘宝交易、本地消费者服务和Lazada，以及我们在中国零售市场增长计划上的支出增加，例如闲鱼和淘宝直播，以及我们对商家的支持。</li><li><b>归属于普通股股东的净利润</b>为人民币451.41亿元（69.91亿美元），及<b>净收入</b>为人民币428.35亿元（66.34亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则净利润</b>为人民币434.41亿元（67.28亿美元），同比增长10%，主要是由于权益法被投资方利润份额增加。</li><li><b>每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.38元（2.54美元）<b>每股摊薄盈利</b>为人民币2.05元（0.32美元或2.46港元）。<b>非公认会计准则每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.60元（2.57美元），同比增长12%<b>非公认会计准则稀释每股收益</b>为人民币2.08元（0.32美元或2.50港元），同比增长12%。</li><li><b>经营活动提供的现金净额</b>为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则自由现金流</b>为人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币365.70亿元有所下降，主要是由于部分结清了今年早些时候中国国家市场监督管理总局根据中国反垄断法征收的人民币182.28亿元罚款（“反垄断法罚款”）中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元）以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。</li></ul></blockquote></p><p> <b>China Retail Marketplaces</b></p><p><blockquote><b>中国零售市场</b></blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, Alibaba's China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，阿里巴巴-SW中国零售市场的移动月活跃用户数为9.39亿，季度净增1400万。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cloud Computing</b></p><p><blockquote><b>云计算</b></blockquote></p><p> In the June 2021 quarter, our cloud computing revenue grew 29% year-over-year to RMB16,051 million (US$2,486 million), primarily driven by robust growth in revenue from customers in the Internet, financial services and retail industries.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月季度，我们的云计算收入同比增长29%至人民币160.51亿元（24.86亿美元），主要得益于互联网、金融服务和零售行业客户收入的强劲增长。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cash Flow from Operating Activities and Free Cash Flow</b></p><p><blockquote><b>经营活动产生的现金流量和自由现金流量</b></blockquote></p><p> In the quarter ended June 30, 2021, net cash provided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million), a decrease compared to RMB50,099 million in the same quarter of 2020. Free cash flow, a non-GAAP measurement of liquidity, decreased to RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), from RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020. The year-over-year decreases were mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million Anti-monopoly Fine and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas. A reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow is included at the end of this results announcement.</p><p><blockquote>截至2021年6月30日的季度，经营活动提供的净现金为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币500.99亿元有所下降。自由现金流（衡量流动性的非公认会计准则衡量标准）从2020年同季度的人民币365.7亿元下降至人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于部分和解了人民币182.28亿元的反垄断罚款中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元），以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。经营活动提供的净现金与自由现金流的调节表包含在本业绩公告的末尾。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Increasing Share Repurchases</b></p><p><blockquote><b>增加股票回购</b></blockquote></p><p> Since April 1, 2021 and through the publication of this results announcement, we repurchased approximately 18.1 million of our ADSs (the equivalent of approximately 144.5 million of our ordinary shares) for approximately US$3,680 million under our share repurchase program. In addition, on August 2, 2021, our board of directors authorized the Company to upsize our Company's share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion. This share repurchase program will be effective through the end of 2022.</p><p><blockquote>自2021年4月1日起及透过刊发本业绩公告，我们根据股份回购计划以约36.8亿美元回购约18.1百万股美国存讬股（相当于约144.5百万股普通股）。此外，2021年8月2日，我们的董事会授权公司将我们公司的股票回购计划规模从100亿美元扩大到150亿美元。该股票回购计划将于2022年底生效。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/58bf53593de78f5f6e4fa1096d7aae94\" tg-width=\"757\" tg-height=\"793\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, our China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million. We continue to increase penetration in less-developed areas, reflecting our success in broadening product offerings to meet diverse consumer demand.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，我们的中国零售市场拥有9.39亿移动月活跃用户数，季度净增1400万。我们继续提高在欠发达地区的渗透率，反映我们在扩大产品供应以满足多样化消费者需求方面取得的成功。</blockquote></p><p> “Alibaba started the new fiscal year by delivering a healthy quarter. For the June quarter, global annual active consumers across the Alibaba Ecosystem reached 1.18 billion, an increase of 45 million from the March quarter, which includes 912 million consumers in China. Over more than twenty years of growth, we have developed a company that spans across both consumer and industrial Internet, with multiple engines driving our long-term growth,” said Daniel Zhang, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Alibaba Group. “We believe in the growth of the Chinese economy and long-term value creation of Alibaba, and we will continue to strengthen our technology advantage in improving the consumer experience and helping our enterprise customers to accomplish successful digital transformations.”</p><p><blockquote>张勇集团董事长兼首席执行官阿里巴巴-SW表示：“阿里巴巴-SW以健康的季度开局新财年。在6月季度，阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的全球年度活跃消费者达到11.8亿，比3月季度增加了4500万，其中包括9.12亿中国消费者。经过二十多年的增长，我们已经发展出一家横跨消费互联网和工业互联网的公司，多个引擎推动我们的长期增长。”“我们相信中国经济的增长和阿里巴巴-SW的长期价值创造，我们将继续加强我们在改善消费者体验和帮助企业客户成功完成数字化转型方面的技术优势。”</blockquote></p><p> “We delivered strong revenue growth of 34% year-over-year. As we said in last quarter's results announcement, we are investing our excess profits and additional capital to support our merchants and invest in strategic areas to better serve customers and penetrate into new addressable markets,” said Maggie Wu, Chief Financial Officer of Alibaba Group. “We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>“我们实现了34%的强劲收入增长。正如我们在上季度业绩公告中所说，我们正在投资超额利润和额外资本来支持我们的商家，并投资于战略领域，以更好地服务客户并渗透到新的潜在市场，”阿里巴巴-SW集团首席财务官Maggie Wu表示。“我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已经回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</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>Alibaba EPS beats by RMB2.27, misses on revenue<blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW每股收益超过预期人民币2.27元、营收不及预期</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\">\nAlibaba EPS beats by RMB2.27, misses on revenue<blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW每股收益超过预期人民币2.27元、营收不及预期</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\">2021-08-03 18:57</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(August 3)&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">Alibaba</a> posted&nbsp;financial&nbsp;result&nbsp;in&nbsp;premarket,&nbsp;which&nbsp;showed&nbsp;that:</p><p><blockquote>（8月3日）<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BABA\">阿里巴巴-SW</a>盘前公布的财务业绩显示：</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度营收为人民币2057.4亿元，去年同期为人民币1537.5亿元；FactSet共识为人民币2091.1亿元。</blockquote></p><p> Alibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.</p><p><blockquote>阿里巴巴-SW第一季度调整后。每股收益为人民币16.60元，去年同期为人民币14.82元；FactSet共识人民币14.33元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS</b></p><p><blockquote><b>业务亮点</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>In the quarter ended June 30, 2021:</b></p><p><blockquote><b>截至2021年6月30日的季度：</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Revenue</b>&nbsp;was RMB205,740 million (US$31,865 million), an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million (US$29,010 million).</li>  <li><b>Annual active consumers</b>of the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached approximately 1.18 billion for the twelve months ended June 30, 2021, an increase of 45 million from the twelve months ended March 31, 2021. This includes 912 million consumers in China1and 265 million consumers overseas served by Lazada, AliExpress, Trendyol and Daraz.</li>  <li><b>Income from operations</b>&nbsp;was RMB30,847 million (US$4,778 million), a decrease of 11% year-over-year.<b>Adjusted EBITDA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 5% year-over-year to RMB48,628 million (US$7,532 million).<b>Adjusted EBITA</b>, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 8% year-over-year to RMB41,731 million (US$6,463 million). The year-over-year decreases were primarily due to our investments in strategic areas to capture incremental opportunities, such as Community Marketplaces, Taobao Deals, Local Consumer Services and Lazada, as well as our increased spending on growth initiatives within China retail marketplaces, such as Idle Fish and Taobao Live, and our support to merchants.</li>  <li><b>Net income attributable to ordinary shareholders</b>&nbsp;was RMB45,141 million (US$6,991 million),and<b>net income</b>was RMB42,835 million (US$6,634 million).<b>Non-GAAP net income</b>&nbsp;was RMB43,441 million (US$6,728 million), an increase of 10% year-over-year, mainly due to an increase in share of profit of equity method investees.</li>  <li><b>Diluted earnings per ADS</b>&nbsp;was RMB16.38 (US$2.54) and<b>diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.05 (US$0.32 or HK$2.46).<b>Non-GAAP diluted earnings per ADS</b>was RMB16.60 (US$2.57), an increase of 12% year-over-year and<b>non-GAAP diluted earnings per share</b>was RMB2.08 (US$0.32 or HK$2.50), an increase of 12% year-over-year.</li>  <li><b>Net cashprovided by operating activities</b>&nbsp;was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million).<b>Non-GAAP free cash flow</b>was RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), a decrease compared to RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020, mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million fine levied earlier this year by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation pursuant to China’s Anti-monopoly Law (the “Anti-monopoly Fine”) and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas.</li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11aa08a1ccb4f80e6867c7e7631297c8\" tg-width=\"719\" tg-height=\"863\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>收入</b>为人民币2,057.40百万元（318.65亿美元），同比增长34%。如果不包括合并高鑫，我们的收入将同比增长22%至人民币1,873.06亿元（290.1亿美元）。</li><li><b>年度活跃消费者</b>截至2021年6月30日止十二个月，全球阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的总用户数达到约11.8亿，较截至2021年3月31日止十二个月增加4500万。这包括Lazada、全球速卖通、Trendyol和Daraz服务的中国9.12亿消费者1和海外2.65亿消费者。</li><li><b>营业收入</b>为人民币308.47亿元（47.78亿美元），同比下降11%。<b>调整后EBITDA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降5%至人民币486.28亿元（75.32亿美元）。<b>调整后EBITA</b>根据非公认会计准则衡量，同比下降8%至人民币417.31亿元（64.63亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于我们在战略领域的投资以捕捉增量机会，例如社区市场、淘宝交易、本地消费者服务和Lazada，以及我们在中国零售市场增长计划上的支出增加，例如闲鱼和淘宝直播，以及我们对商家的支持。</li><li><b>归属于普通股股东的净利润</b>为人民币451.41亿元（69.91亿美元），及<b>净收入</b>为人民币428.35亿元（66.34亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则净利润</b>为人民币434.41亿元（67.28亿美元），同比增长10%，主要是由于权益法被投资方利润份额增加。</li><li><b>每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.38元（2.54美元）<b>每股摊薄盈利</b>为人民币2.05元（0.32美元或2.46港元）。<b>非公认会计准则每股美国存托凭证摊薄收益</b>为人民币16.60元（2.57美元），同比增长12%<b>非公认会计准则稀释每股收益</b>为人民币2.08元（0.32美元或2.50港元），同比增长12%。</li><li><b>经营活动提供的现金净额</b>为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元）。<b>非公认会计准则自由现金流</b>为人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币365.70亿元有所下降，主要是由于部分结清了今年早些时候中国国家市场监督管理总局根据中国反垄断法征收的人民币182.28亿元罚款（“反垄断法罚款”）中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元）以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。</li></ul></blockquote></p><p> <b>China Retail Marketplaces</b></p><p><blockquote><b>中国零售市场</b></blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, Alibaba's China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，阿里巴巴-SW中国零售市场的移动月活跃用户数为9.39亿，季度净增1400万。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cloud Computing</b></p><p><blockquote><b>云计算</b></blockquote></p><p> In the June 2021 quarter, our cloud computing revenue grew 29% year-over-year to RMB16,051 million (US$2,486 million), primarily driven by robust growth in revenue from customers in the Internet, financial services and retail industries.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月季度，我们的云计算收入同比增长29%至人民币160.51亿元（24.86亿美元），主要得益于互联网、金融服务和零售行业客户收入的强劲增长。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cash Flow from Operating Activities and Free Cash Flow</b></p><p><blockquote><b>经营活动产生的现金流量和自由现金流量</b></blockquote></p><p> In the quarter ended June 30, 2021, net cash provided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million), a decrease compared to RMB50,099 million in the same quarter of 2020. Free cash flow, a non-GAAP measurement of liquidity, decreased to RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), from RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020. The year-over-year decreases were mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million Anti-monopoly Fine and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas. A reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow is included at the end of this results announcement.</p><p><blockquote>截至2021年6月30日的季度，经营活动提供的净现金为人民币336.03亿元（52.04亿美元），较2020年同季度的人民币500.99亿元有所下降。自由现金流（衡量流动性的非公认会计准则衡量标准）从2020年同季度的人民币365.7亿元下降至人民币206.83亿元（32.03亿美元）。同比下降主要是由于部分和解了人民币182.28亿元的反垄断罚款中的人民币91.14亿元（14.12亿美元），以及我们在关键战略领域的投资导致利润减少。经营活动提供的净现金与自由现金流的调节表包含在本业绩公告的末尾。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Increasing Share Repurchases</b></p><p><blockquote><b>增加股票回购</b></blockquote></p><p> Since April 1, 2021 and through the publication of this results announcement, we repurchased approximately 18.1 million of our ADSs (the equivalent of approximately 144.5 million of our ordinary shares) for approximately US$3,680 million under our share repurchase program. In addition, on August 2, 2021, our board of directors authorized the Company to upsize our Company's share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion. This share repurchase program will be effective through the end of 2022.</p><p><blockquote>自2021年4月1日起及透过刊发本业绩公告，我们根据股份回购计划以约36.8亿美元回购约18.1百万股美国存讬股（相当于约144.5百万股普通股）。此外，2021年8月2日，我们的董事会授权公司将我们公司的股票回购计划规模从100亿美元扩大到150亿美元。该股票回购计划将于2022年底生效。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/58bf53593de78f5f6e4fa1096d7aae94\" tg-width=\"757\" tg-height=\"793\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</blockquote></p><p> In June 2021, our China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million. We continue to increase penetration in less-developed areas, reflecting our success in broadening product offerings to meet diverse consumer demand.</p><p><blockquote>2021年6月，我们的中国零售市场拥有9.39亿移动月活跃用户数，季度净增1400万。我们继续提高在欠发达地区的渗透率，反映我们在扩大产品供应以满足多样化消费者需求方面取得的成功。</blockquote></p><p> “Alibaba started the new fiscal year by delivering a healthy quarter. For the June quarter, global annual active consumers across the Alibaba Ecosystem reached 1.18 billion, an increase of 45 million from the March quarter, which includes 912 million consumers in China. Over more than twenty years of growth, we have developed a company that spans across both consumer and industrial Internet, with multiple engines driving our long-term growth,” said Daniel Zhang, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Alibaba Group. “We believe in the growth of the Chinese economy and long-term value creation of Alibaba, and we will continue to strengthen our technology advantage in improving the consumer experience and helping our enterprise customers to accomplish successful digital transformations.”</p><p><blockquote>张勇集团董事长兼首席执行官阿里巴巴-SW表示：“阿里巴巴-SW以健康的季度开局新财年。在6月季度，阿里巴巴-SW生态系统的全球年度活跃消费者达到11.8亿，比3月季度增加了4500万，其中包括9.12亿中国消费者。经过二十多年的增长，我们已经发展出一家横跨消费互联网和工业互联网的公司，多个引擎推动我们的长期增长。”“我们相信中国经济的增长和阿里巴巴-SW的长期价值创造，我们将继续加强我们在改善消费者体验和帮助企业客户成功完成数字化转型方面的技术优势。”</blockquote></p><p> “We delivered strong revenue growth of 34% year-over-year. As we said in last quarter's results announcement, we are investing our excess profits and additional capital to support our merchants and invest in strategic areas to better serve customers and penetrate into new addressable markets,” said Maggie Wu, Chief Financial Officer of Alibaba Group. “We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”</p><p><blockquote>“我们实现了34%的强劲收入增长。正如我们在上季度业绩公告中所说，我们正在投资超额利润和额外资本来支持我们的商家，并投资于战略领域，以更好地服务客户并渗透到新的潜在市场，”阿里巴巴-SW集团首席财务官Maggie Wu表示。“我们正在将股票回购计划从100亿美元增加到150亿美元，这是公司历史上最大的股票回购计划，因为我们对我们的长期增长前景充满信心。我们的净现金状况仍然强劲，自2021年4月1日以来，我们已经回购了约37亿美元的ADS。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"09988":"阿里巴巴-W","BABA":"阿里巴巴"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1169635195","content_text":"(August 3) Alibaba posted financial result in premarket, which showed that:\nAlibaba Q1 revenue RMB205.74 bln vs. RMB153.75 bln a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB209.11 bln.\nAlibaba Q1 adj. EPS RMB16.60 vs. RMB14.82 a year ago; FactSet consensus RMB14.33.\nBUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS\nIn the quarter ended June 30, 2021:\n\nRevenue was RMB205,740 million (US$31,865 million), an increase of 34% year-over-year. Excluding the consolidation of Sun Art, our revenue would have grown 22% year-over-year to RMB187,306 million (US$29,010 million).\nAnnual active consumersof the Alibaba Ecosystem across the world reached approximately 1.18 billion for the twelve months ended June 30, 2021, an increase of 45 million from the twelve months ended March 31, 2021. This includes 912 million consumers in China1and 265 million consumers overseas served by Lazada, AliExpress, Trendyol and Daraz.\nIncome from operations was RMB30,847 million (US$4,778 million), a decrease of 11% year-over-year.Adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 5% year-over-year to RMB48,628 million (US$7,532 million).Adjusted EBITA, a non-GAAP measurement, decreased 8% year-over-year to RMB41,731 million (US$6,463 million). The year-over-year decreases were primarily due to our investments in strategic areas to capture incremental opportunities, such as Community Marketplaces, Taobao Deals, Local Consumer Services and Lazada, as well as our increased spending on growth initiatives within China retail marketplaces, such as Idle Fish and Taobao Live, and our support to merchants.\nNet income attributable to ordinary shareholders was RMB45,141 million (US$6,991 million),andnet incomewas RMB42,835 million (US$6,634 million).Non-GAAP net income was RMB43,441 million (US$6,728 million), an increase of 10% year-over-year, mainly due to an increase in share of profit of equity method investees.\nDiluted earnings per ADS was RMB16.38 (US$2.54) anddiluted earnings per sharewas RMB2.05 (US$0.32 or HK$2.46).Non-GAAP diluted earnings per ADSwas RMB16.60 (US$2.57), an increase of 12% year-over-year andnon-GAAP diluted earnings per sharewas RMB2.08 (US$0.32 or HK$2.50), an increase of 12% year-over-year.\nNet cashprovided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million).Non-GAAP free cash flowwas RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), a decrease compared to RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020, mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million fine levied earlier this year by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation pursuant to China’s Anti-monopoly Law (the “Anti-monopoly Fine”) and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas.\n\n\nChina Retail Marketplaces\nIn June 2021, Alibaba's China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million.\nCloud Computing\nIn the June 2021 quarter, our cloud computing revenue grew 29% year-over-year to RMB16,051 million (US$2,486 million), primarily driven by robust growth in revenue from customers in the Internet, financial services and retail industries.\nCash Flow from Operating Activities and Free Cash Flow\nIn the quarter ended June 30, 2021, net cash provided by operating activities was RMB33,603 million (US$5,204 million), a decrease compared to RMB50,099 million in the same quarter of 2020. Free cash flow, a non-GAAP measurement of liquidity, decreased to RMB20,683 million (US$3,203 million), from RMB36,570 million in the same quarter of 2020. The year-over-year decreases were mainly due to the partial settlement in the amount of RMB9,114 million (US$1,412 million) of the RMB18,228 million Anti-monopoly Fine and a decrease in profit as a result of our investments in key strategic areas. A reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow is included at the end of this results announcement.\nIncreasing Share Repurchases\nSince April 1, 2021 and through the publication of this results announcement, we repurchased approximately 18.1 million of our ADSs (the equivalent of approximately 144.5 million of our ordinary shares) for approximately US$3,680 million under our share repurchase program. In addition, on August 2, 2021, our board of directors authorized the Company to upsize our Company's share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion. This share repurchase program will be effective through the end of 2022.\n\nWe are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”\nIn June 2021, our China retail marketplaces had 939 million mobile MAUs, representing a quarterly net increase of 14 million. We continue to increase penetration in less-developed areas, reflecting our success in broadening product offerings to meet diverse consumer demand.\n“Alibaba started the new fiscal year by delivering a healthy quarter. For the June quarter, global annual active consumers across the Alibaba Ecosystem reached 1.18 billion, an increase of 45 million from the March quarter, which includes 912 million consumers in China. Over more than twenty years of growth, we have developed a company that spans across both consumer and industrial Internet, with multiple engines driving our long-term growth,” said Daniel Zhang, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Alibaba Group. “We believe in the growth of the Chinese economy and long-term value creation of Alibaba, and we will continue to strengthen our technology advantage in improving the consumer experience and helping our enterprise customers to accomplish successful digital transformations.”\n“We delivered strong revenue growth of 34% year-over-year. As we said in last quarter's results announcement, we are investing our excess profits and additional capital to support our merchants and invest in strategic areas to better serve customers and penetrate into new addressable markets,” said Maggie Wu, Chief Financial Officer of Alibaba Group. “We are increasing our share repurchase program from US$10 billion to US$15 billion, the largest share repurchase program in the Company’s history, because we are confident of our long-term growth prospects. Our net cash position remains strong and we have repurchased approximately US$3.7 billion of our ADSs since April 1, 2021.”","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BABA":0.9,"09988":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1502,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150154643,"gmtCreate":1624890737382,"gmtModify":1633947402868,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Stonks&nbsp;","listText":"Stonks&nbsp;","text":"Stonks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/150154643","repostId":"2146835880","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2321,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":162735054,"gmtCreate":1624075278578,"gmtModify":1634011015558,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"K","listText":"K","text":"K","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/162735054","repostId":"1199331995","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1907,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":162732178,"gmtCreate":1624075264994,"gmtModify":1634011016025,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"K","listText":"K","text":"K","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/162732178","repostId":"1199331995","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1701,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169359568,"gmtCreate":1623818193154,"gmtModify":1634027609005,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/169359568","repostId":"1199891920","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":572,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":807067764,"gmtCreate":1627989956358,"gmtModify":1633754614248,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yoooooo","listText":"Yoooooo","text":"Yoooooo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/807067764","repostId":"2156140231","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2577,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":163779289,"gmtCreate":1623894839841,"gmtModify":1634026242823,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"K","listText":"K","text":"K","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/163779289","repostId":"1157739738","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1157739738","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623891796,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1157739738?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-17 09:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Take Profits<blockquote>AMC：获利了结</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1157739738","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"After emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.Important short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.Given the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.When I look at AMC’s cha","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>After emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.</li>  <li>Important short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.</li>  <li>Given the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fd621cec481d173c0f0d3b9be49ed335\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1241\"><span>BCFC/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>在成为第二波“模因”或动量股的领头羊后，AMC的举动与游戏驿站一月份的举动类似，表明可能会出现大幅下跌。</li><li>技术面、动量和搜索兴趣等重要短期指标开始形成类似于1月下旬GME的看跌模式。</li><li>鉴于7日和50日移动平均线之间的巨大差距，风险/回报似乎建议获利了结，启动对冲或空头/看跌头寸。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>BCFC/iStock社论来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Introduction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>介绍</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the past two weeks or so, AMC(NYSE:AMC)has undergone a historic rise in its stock price. Due in part to elevated levels of short interest, the use of options, and actions taken by AMC, the equities price has risen ~485% in the last month. For the year, AMC has risen by ~763.5% to a price of ~$55 a share and a market cap of $28.4B, despite a fundamentally destructive year to the company and its long-term business prospects. After rising earlier this year amongst the short and gamma squeeze of GameStop(NYSE:GMEand other “reddit” fueled equities, AMC has gained momentum again and has separated itself from the group with its performance. This piece will compare GME’s leadership in the February fiasco with AMC’s current leadership and will evaluate the catalysts driving the moves and their lifespans. Given the nature of this equities price action, it is important to consistently reconsider your investment thesis and re-evaluate what is driving price action. In my opinion, technical analysis takes over in these scenarios, and I will point to many factors that indicate this might be the time to take profit or initiate a position in anticipation of a sell-off.</p><p><blockquote>在过去两周左右的时间里，AMC（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）的股价经历了历史性的上涨。部分由于空头兴趣水平上升、期权的使用以及AMC采取的行动，股价在上个月上涨了约485%。今年，AMC上涨了约763.5%，至每股约55美元，市值为$28.4 B，尽管这一年对公司及其长期业务前景来说是根本性的破坏性。在今年早些时候游戏驿站（纽约证券交易所代码：GME和其他“reddit”推动的股票的空头和伽马挤压中上涨后，AMC再次获得了动力，并以其表现从该集团中脱颖而出。这篇文章将比较GME在2月份惨败中的领导地位与AMC目前的领导地位，并将评估推动这些举措的催化剂及其寿命。鉴于这种股票价格走势的性质，不断重新考虑你的投资论点并重新评估是什么推动了价格走势是很重要的。在我看来，在这些情况下，技术分析占据了主导地位，我将指出许多因素表明现在可能是获利了结或在预期抛售的情况下建仓的时候了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Technical Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>技术分析</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d813be28f7a34550ff50814b55a68e45\" tg-width=\"608\" tg-height=\"308\"><span>Source: CNBC(GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Consider the run-up in GME earlier this year when it had leadership amongst the pack of momentum or “meme” stocks. The top red band on the chart indicates the 7-day moving average, while the blue indicates the 50-day moving average and the green the 200-day moving average. As you can see from the chart, breakthroughs of the 7-day moving average are consistently followed by large moves in both directions. It seems, with these drastically volatile moves, the 7-day moving average is the most useful indicator for price action. As you can see in the chart, in February, March, and June, when GME’s price broke through the 7-day moving average, stark downside followed.</p><p><blockquote>想想今年早些时候GME的上涨，当时它在一群动量或“模因”股票中处于领先地位。图表上顶部的红色带表示7日移动平均线，蓝色表示50日移动平均线，绿色表示200日移动平均线。从图表中可以看出，突破7日移动平均线之后总是会出现两个方向的大幅波动。在这些剧烈波动的情况下，7日移动平均线似乎是价格走势最有用的指标。正如您在图表中看到的，在2月、3月和6月，当GME价格突破7日移动平均线时，随之而来的是大幅下跌。</blockquote></p><p> Interestingly enough, the 50-day moving average (blue line) has seemed to provide some level of consistent support in this upward trend, providing a level of support for a couple bounces along the move. And as this upward trend has continued, the gap between the 50-day and the 7-day has contracted, thus providing less volatility and greater predictability in terms of levels of resistance and support.</p><p><blockquote>有趣的是，50日移动平均线（蓝线）似乎在这一上升趋势中提供了一定程度的一致支撑，为走势中的几次反弹提供了一定程度的支撑。随着这种上升趋势的持续，50天和7天之间的差距已经缩小，从而在阻力和支撑位方面提供了更小的波动性和更大的可预测性。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/30a18cedd2df4fa0530b6c94859b3021\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"252\"><span>Source: CNBC [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When I look at AMC’s chart, it reminds me of GME’s in February of 2021. The upward move has been quick and stark (~350% in ~23 days) similar to GME’s move in February (~1,525% in ~21 days). Both led to a large dispersion between the 7-day and 50-day moving averages in the short term and, thus, offered elevated potential for volatility both in terms of the upside and downside. As you can see from GME’s chart, it eventually tested the 50-day moving average around ~$45-50 after touching ~$350 the week prior.</p><p><blockquote>当我看AMC的图表时，它让我想起了2021年2月的GME。上涨迅速而明显（约23天内上涨约350%），类似于GME 2月份的上涨（约21天内上涨约1,525%）。两者都导致短期内7日移动平均线和50日移动平均线之间存在较大差异，因此在上行和下行方面都提供了较高的波动潜力。从GME的图表中可以看出，在前一周触及约350美元后，它最终测试了约45-50美元附近的50日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Similarly to GME, AMC has also now consolidated around its 7-day average after this run-up and allowed it to catch up to the price action. If AMC is unable to break through $62.55 and present new momentum, it is at risk of double topping, breaking through its 7-day average on the downside and retesting the 50-day around $20.<i>This scenario offers ~60% downside.</i>Although I don’t usual look at time periods in an effort to evaluate potential future price action, I think it is important to note the similarity in terms of the time period of both moves and stay wary about what followed on the back end of GME’s move.</p><p><blockquote>与GME类似，AMC在此次上涨后也在7日均线附近盘整，并使其能够赶上价格走势。如果AMC无法突破62.55美元并呈现新的动能，则有双重见顶的风险，向下突破7日均线，并重新测试20美元附近的50日均线。<i>这种情况会带来约60%的负面影响。</i>尽管我通常不会通过观察时间段来评估未来潜在的价格走势，但我认为重要的是要注意两种走势在时间段方面的相似性，并对GME走势后端的情况保持警惕。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Google Search Interest: The Momentum Story</b></p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索兴趣：动量故事</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dda9563f56dc1df868212408e969418\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"181\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends (GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As these moves are very much based upon momentum, Google search interest may be of value to consider. As you can see from the chart, GME’s search interest rose and fell quickly in late Jan. early Feb., pretty much in line with its equities performance. Its peak in interest pretty much aligned exactly with its peak in price, and its fall in interest aligned exactly with its fall in price. Similarly, its rebound in interest followed its rebound in price after testing the 50-day moving average around ~$45.</p><p><blockquote>由于这些举措在很大程度上基于势头，谷歌搜索兴趣可能值得考虑。从图表中可以看出，GME的搜索兴趣在1月底2月初迅速上升和下降，与其股票表现非常一致。它的利息峰值几乎与价格峰值完全一致，利息下降与价格下降完全一致。同样，在测试45美元左右的50日移动平均线后，其利息反弹跟随价格反弹。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fba476b389598252d5156f43d0962f3\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"190\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When you look at AMC’s Google Search Interest, you can also see its dramatic spike in a short period of time and then a subsequent stark decline. As search interest and volume were leading indicators for GME's move downward back in February, this chart might indicate a potential sell-off if it is not able to rebound.</p><p><blockquote>当您查看AMC的谷歌搜索兴趣时，您还可以看到它在短时间内急剧飙升，然后随后急剧下降。由于搜索兴趣和交易量是GME 2月份下跌的领先指标，因此该图表可能表明如果无法反弹，可能会出现潜在的抛售。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cross-Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交叉分析</b></blockquote></p><p> When you chart stock price, search interest, and volume over each other, the relationship between them all becomes clearer, despite the imperfections in measuring a large number like volume to interest.</p><p><blockquote>当你将股票价格、搜索兴趣和交易量相互绘制图表时，它们之间的关系都会变得更加清晰，尽管在测量大量数字（如交易量与兴趣）时存在缺陷。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/71c144385e0530f21df9f305b4eef2f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"392\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When considering GME, the chart demonstrates that the variables have a correlation, especially in the stark and volatile moves upward and downward. While they may stray during times of relative muted volatility, they retain a relationship when things are moving in a volatile nature. Search interest and volume seemingly led or fell directly in line with the stock price following the move upward.</p><p><blockquote>当考虑GME时，图表显示变量具有相关性，尤其是在剧烈波动的上下波动中。虽然他们可能会在波动相对较小的时候偏离，但当事情以波动的方式发展时，他们会保持一种关系。在股价上涨后，搜索兴趣和交易量似乎直接引领或下跌。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c1aab35454d89a6f58f78341bf918b\" tg-width=\"592\" tg-height=\"375\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> AMC’s chart actually demonstrates the relationship and correlation between these variables more clearly. Consider how search interest and volume actually preceded price in GME’s move down and how AMC’s search interest recently broke through its price in a similar manner.</p><p><blockquote>AMC的图表实际上更清楚地展示了这些变量之间的关系和相关性。考虑一下GME的搜索兴趣和交易量实际上是如何先于价格下跌的，以及AMC的搜索兴趣最近是如何以类似的方式突破其价格的。</blockquote></p><p> While this method of analysis is not perfect, it is important to remember what the catalysts for your positions are and constantly analyze the duration of their impact and lifespan in the marketplace. As with all short-term volatile moves, fundamentals rarely provide too much of an indication or near term price action. Often, technicals, volume, and momentum provide the most accurate forecasts of future price action and, thus, are the most useful to analyze.</p><p><blockquote>虽然这种分析方法并不完美，但重要的是要记住你的头寸的催化剂是什么，并不断分析它们在市场中的影响持续时间和寿命。与所有短期波动一样，基本面很少提供太多指示或近期价格走势。通常，技术面、成交量和动量提供了对未来价格走势最准确的预测，因此对分析最有用。</blockquote></p><p> Many have offered catalysts for what has driven this move, ranging from the re-opening narrative, a gamma or short squeeze, or the influx of new capital from shares issuances. The bottom line is all these catalysts depend upon momentum for their effective lifespan. Even if they are catalysts that will take place over time, dramatic price appreciation like this shortens the lifespan of the catalysts' daily momentum until they retest the longer term averages and establishes stability with heightened volume.</p><p><blockquote>许多人为推动这一举措提供了催化剂，包括重新开放的叙述、伽马或轧空，或者股票发行带来的新资本涌入。底线是所有这些催化剂的有效寿命都依赖于动量。即使它们是随着时间的推移而发生的催化剂，像这样的价格大幅上涨也会缩短催化剂每日动量的寿命，直到它们重新测试长期平均值并通过增加交易量建立稳定性。</blockquote></p><p> I think it would be prudent to take profit here or at least take more than 50% off the table for the time being, and for those interested, a position in anticipation of a stark downside seems sensible.</p><p><blockquote>我认为谨慎的做法是在这里获利了结，或者至少暂时获利了结超过50%，对于那些感兴趣的人来说，在预期大幅下跌的情况下建仓似乎是明智的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Risks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>风险</b></blockquote></p><p> The risks to the bearish thesis on AMC involve renewed momentum and continued strength above the 7-day moving average. As I elaborated on earlier, that seems to be the most critical indicator of short-term price movement in these scenarios and consistently has been an indicator of a dramatic move to come both on the upside and downside. If AMC holds above this average and tightens the gap between the 7-day and the 20 and 50-day moving averages, it could potentially hold this heightened volume and price level and consolidate before making a move to new highs. I fundamentally believe that, while there are catalysts here at play, when a move is this dramatic in this short of a time frame momentum and technicals take over in determining future price action. And, thus, if the technicals break down, there should be stark downside. However, if the technicals continue to stay bullish, there may be more upside ahead. AMC looks to similar, however, to GME’s February move, and the bearish double top pattern seems to be forming.</p><p><blockquote>AMC看跌论点的风险包括新的动能和7日移动平均线上方的持续强势。正如我之前所阐述的，这似乎是这些情况下短期价格变动的最关键指标，并且一直是上行和下行剧烈波动的指标。如果AMC保持在该平均线之上并缩小7日与20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，它可能会保持这一较高的成交量和价格水平，并在触及新高之前进行盘整。我从根本上相信，虽然这里有催化剂在起作用，但当在这么短的时间内出现如此戏剧性的走势时，动量和技术因素就会接管决定未来的价格走势。因此，如果技术面崩溃，应该会有明显的下行空间。然而，如果技术面继续看涨，未来可能会有更多上涨空间。然而，AMC看起来与GME 2月份的走势类似，看跌双顶形态似乎正在形成。</blockquote></p><p> Conclusion</p><p><blockquote>结论</blockquote></p><p></p><p> After writing a bullish article on AMC in January, we are now bearish on the equity, recognizing the deterioration of key momentum indicators and the technical similarity to the GME’s rise and fall back in February. In events like this, the catalysts get choppy, and it’s important to evaluate the lifespan of the main points to in your investment thesis. When things rise dramatically, there is often a time off profit taken in which the market re-prices just how valuable catalysts are. If it’s just momentum as a catalyst, the re-pricing is often stark and volatile. If it is a more long-term catalyst, the profit taking can be more muted. While there may be many catalysts driving AMC’s rise, there is without doubt one that takes precedent over them all, and that is the momentum story. Given our examination of GME, it seems the 7-day moving average is the price level to look at before dramatic downside, given the gap between the 20 and 50 day moving average. As Google search trends, volume, and price (double top pattern) seem to indicate things are breaking down and are similar at least to GME in February. One should consider taking profits here, and if inclined to take the other side, consider initiating a position accordingly now. While option premiums are high, I think there is still an ability to initiate a small position or a hedge with some short-term options (2 weeks-4 weeks). If price action were to head to the downside, the move would be drastic as the next level of support is $40 lower than the current price. While I think shorting could make sense here, and the cost to borrow doesn’t seem that high as the percentage of shares short is not GME’s level, there is inherently more risk there.</p><p><blockquote>在1月份写了一篇关于AMC的看涨文章后，我们现在看跌该股，认识到关键动量指标的恶化以及与GME 2月份上涨和回落的技术相似性。在这样的事件中，催化剂会变得不稳定，评估投资论文中要点的寿命非常重要。当股价大幅上涨时，通常会有一段获利了结的时间，市场会重新定价催化剂的价值。如果只是动力作为催化剂，那么重新定价往往是鲜明且不稳定的。如果是更长期的催化剂，获利了结可以更加温和。虽然推动AMC崛起的催化剂可能有很多，但毫无疑问，有一个催化剂比所有催化剂都更重要，那就是动量故事。根据我们对GME的研究，考虑到20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，7日移动平均线似乎是大幅下跌之前值得关注的价格水平。随着谷歌搜索趋势、交易量和价格（双顶模式）似乎表明情况正在崩溃，至少与2月份的GME相似。人们应该考虑在这里获利了结，如果倾向于站在另一边，现在就考虑相应地建仓。虽然期权费很高，但我认为仍然有能力用一些短期期权（2周-4周）发起小仓位或对冲。如果价格走势向下，走势将会剧烈，因为下一个支撑位比当前价格低40美元。虽然我认为做空在这里可能是有意义的，而且借贷成本似乎没有那么高，因为做空股票的百分比不是GME的水平，但那里固有的风险更大。</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>AMC: Take Profits<blockquote>AMC：获利了结</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMC: Take Profits<blockquote>AMC：获利了结</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-17 09:03</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>After emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.</li>  <li>Important short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.</li>  <li>Given the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fd621cec481d173c0f0d3b9be49ed335\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1241\"><span>BCFC/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>在成为第二波“模因”或动量股的领头羊后，AMC的举动与游戏驿站一月份的举动类似，表明可能会出现大幅下跌。</li><li>技术面、动量和搜索兴趣等重要短期指标开始形成类似于1月下旬GME的看跌模式。</li><li>鉴于7日和50日移动平均线之间的巨大差距，风险/回报似乎建议获利了结，启动对冲或空头/看跌头寸。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>BCFC/iStock社论来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Introduction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>介绍</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the past two weeks or so, AMC(NYSE:AMC)has undergone a historic rise in its stock price. Due in part to elevated levels of short interest, the use of options, and actions taken by AMC, the equities price has risen ~485% in the last month. For the year, AMC has risen by ~763.5% to a price of ~$55 a share and a market cap of $28.4B, despite a fundamentally destructive year to the company and its long-term business prospects. After rising earlier this year amongst the short and gamma squeeze of GameStop(NYSE:GMEand other “reddit” fueled equities, AMC has gained momentum again and has separated itself from the group with its performance. This piece will compare GME’s leadership in the February fiasco with AMC’s current leadership and will evaluate the catalysts driving the moves and their lifespans. Given the nature of this equities price action, it is important to consistently reconsider your investment thesis and re-evaluate what is driving price action. In my opinion, technical analysis takes over in these scenarios, and I will point to many factors that indicate this might be the time to take profit or initiate a position in anticipation of a sell-off.</p><p><blockquote>在过去两周左右的时间里，AMC（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）的股价经历了历史性的上涨。部分由于空头兴趣水平上升、期权的使用以及AMC采取的行动，股价在上个月上涨了约485%。今年，AMC上涨了约763.5%，至每股约55美元，市值为$28.4 B，尽管这一年对公司及其长期业务前景来说是根本性的破坏性。在今年早些时候游戏驿站（纽约证券交易所代码：GME和其他“reddit”推动的股票的空头和伽马挤压中上涨后，AMC再次获得了动力，并以其表现从该集团中脱颖而出。这篇文章将比较GME在2月份惨败中的领导地位与AMC目前的领导地位，并将评估推动这些举措的催化剂及其寿命。鉴于这种股票价格走势的性质，不断重新考虑你的投资论点并重新评估是什么推动了价格走势是很重要的。在我看来，在这些情况下，技术分析占据了主导地位，我将指出许多因素表明现在可能是获利了结或在预期抛售的情况下建仓的时候了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Technical Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>技术分析</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d813be28f7a34550ff50814b55a68e45\" tg-width=\"608\" tg-height=\"308\"><span>Source: CNBC(GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Consider the run-up in GME earlier this year when it had leadership amongst the pack of momentum or “meme” stocks. The top red band on the chart indicates the 7-day moving average, while the blue indicates the 50-day moving average and the green the 200-day moving average. As you can see from the chart, breakthroughs of the 7-day moving average are consistently followed by large moves in both directions. It seems, with these drastically volatile moves, the 7-day moving average is the most useful indicator for price action. As you can see in the chart, in February, March, and June, when GME’s price broke through the 7-day moving average, stark downside followed.</p><p><blockquote>想想今年早些时候GME的上涨，当时它在一群动量或“模因”股票中处于领先地位。图表上顶部的红色带表示7日移动平均线，蓝色表示50日移动平均线，绿色表示200日移动平均线。从图表中可以看出，突破7日移动平均线之后总是会出现两个方向的大幅波动。在这些剧烈波动的情况下，7日移动平均线似乎是价格走势最有用的指标。正如您在图表中看到的，在2月、3月和6月，当GME价格突破7日移动平均线时，随之而来的是大幅下跌。</blockquote></p><p> Interestingly enough, the 50-day moving average (blue line) has seemed to provide some level of consistent support in this upward trend, providing a level of support for a couple bounces along the move. And as this upward trend has continued, the gap between the 50-day and the 7-day has contracted, thus providing less volatility and greater predictability in terms of levels of resistance and support.</p><p><blockquote>有趣的是，50日移动平均线（蓝线）似乎在这一上升趋势中提供了一定程度的一致支撑，为走势中的几次反弹提供了一定程度的支撑。随着这种上升趋势的持续，50天和7天之间的差距已经缩小，从而在阻力和支撑位方面提供了更小的波动性和更大的可预测性。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/30a18cedd2df4fa0530b6c94859b3021\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"252\"><span>Source: CNBC [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：CNBC[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When I look at AMC’s chart, it reminds me of GME’s in February of 2021. The upward move has been quick and stark (~350% in ~23 days) similar to GME’s move in February (~1,525% in ~21 days). Both led to a large dispersion between the 7-day and 50-day moving averages in the short term and, thus, offered elevated potential for volatility both in terms of the upside and downside. As you can see from GME’s chart, it eventually tested the 50-day moving average around ~$45-50 after touching ~$350 the week prior.</p><p><blockquote>当我看AMC的图表时，它让我想起了2021年2月的GME。上涨迅速而明显（约23天内上涨约350%），类似于GME 2月份的上涨（约21天内上涨约1,525%）。两者都导致短期内7日移动平均线和50日移动平均线之间存在较大差异，因此在上行和下行方面都提供了较高的波动潜力。从GME的图表中可以看出，在前一周触及约350美元后，它最终测试了约45-50美元附近的50日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Similarly to GME, AMC has also now consolidated around its 7-day average after this run-up and allowed it to catch up to the price action. If AMC is unable to break through $62.55 and present new momentum, it is at risk of double topping, breaking through its 7-day average on the downside and retesting the 50-day around $20.<i>This scenario offers ~60% downside.</i>Although I don’t usual look at time periods in an effort to evaluate potential future price action, I think it is important to note the similarity in terms of the time period of both moves and stay wary about what followed on the back end of GME’s move.</p><p><blockquote>与GME类似，AMC在此次上涨后也在7日均线附近盘整，并使其能够赶上价格走势。如果AMC无法突破62.55美元并呈现新的动能，则有双重见顶的风险，向下突破7日均线，并重新测试20美元附近的50日均线。<i>这种情况会带来约60%的负面影响。</i>尽管我通常不会通过观察时间段来评估未来潜在的价格走势，但我认为重要的是要注意两种走势在时间段方面的相似性，并对GME走势后端的情况保持警惕。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Google Search Interest: The Momentum Story</b></p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索兴趣：动量故事</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dda9563f56dc1df868212408e969418\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"181\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends (GameStop)</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势（游戏驿站）</span></p></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As these moves are very much based upon momentum, Google search interest may be of value to consider. As you can see from the chart, GME’s search interest rose and fell quickly in late Jan. early Feb., pretty much in line with its equities performance. Its peak in interest pretty much aligned exactly with its peak in price, and its fall in interest aligned exactly with its fall in price. Similarly, its rebound in interest followed its rebound in price after testing the 50-day moving average around ~$45.</p><p><blockquote>由于这些举措在很大程度上基于势头，谷歌搜索兴趣可能值得考虑。从图表中可以看出，GME的搜索兴趣在1月底2月初迅速上升和下降，与其股票表现非常一致。它的利息峰值几乎与价格峰值完全一致，利息下降与价格下降完全一致。同样，在测试45美元左右的50日移动平均线后，其利息反弹跟随价格反弹。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fba476b389598252d5156f43d0962f3\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"190\"><span>Source: Google Search Trends [AMC]</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：谷歌搜索趋势[AMC]</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When you look at AMC’s Google Search Interest, you can also see its dramatic spike in a short period of time and then a subsequent stark decline. As search interest and volume were leading indicators for GME's move downward back in February, this chart might indicate a potential sell-off if it is not able to rebound.</p><p><blockquote>当您查看AMC的谷歌搜索兴趣时，您还可以看到它在短时间内急剧飙升，然后随后急剧下降。由于搜索兴趣和交易量是GME 2月份下跌的领先指标，因此该图表可能表明如果无法反弹，可能会出现潜在的抛售。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Cross-Analysis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交叉分析</b></blockquote></p><p> When you chart stock price, search interest, and volume over each other, the relationship between them all becomes clearer, despite the imperfections in measuring a large number like volume to interest.</p><p><blockquote>当你将股票价格、搜索兴趣和交易量相互绘制图表时，它们之间的关系都会变得更加清晰，尽管在测量大量数字（如交易量与兴趣）时存在缺陷。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/71c144385e0530f21df9f305b4eef2f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"392\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> When considering GME, the chart demonstrates that the variables have a correlation, especially in the stark and volatile moves upward and downward. While they may stray during times of relative muted volatility, they retain a relationship when things are moving in a volatile nature. Search interest and volume seemingly led or fell directly in line with the stock price following the move upward.</p><p><blockquote>当考虑GME时，图表显示变量具有相关性，尤其是在剧烈波动的上下波动中。虽然他们可能会在波动相对较小的时候偏离，但当事情以波动的方式发展时，他们会保持一种关系。在股价上涨后，搜索兴趣和交易量似乎直接引领或下跌。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c1aab35454d89a6f58f78341bf918b\" tg-width=\"592\" tg-height=\"375\"><span>Source: ValueMan</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：ValueMan</span></p></blockquote></p><p> AMC’s chart actually demonstrates the relationship and correlation between these variables more clearly. Consider how search interest and volume actually preceded price in GME’s move down and how AMC’s search interest recently broke through its price in a similar manner.</p><p><blockquote>AMC的图表实际上更清楚地展示了这些变量之间的关系和相关性。考虑一下GME的搜索兴趣和交易量实际上是如何先于价格下跌的，以及AMC的搜索兴趣最近是如何以类似的方式突破其价格的。</blockquote></p><p> While this method of analysis is not perfect, it is important to remember what the catalysts for your positions are and constantly analyze the duration of their impact and lifespan in the marketplace. As with all short-term volatile moves, fundamentals rarely provide too much of an indication or near term price action. Often, technicals, volume, and momentum provide the most accurate forecasts of future price action and, thus, are the most useful to analyze.</p><p><blockquote>虽然这种分析方法并不完美，但重要的是要记住你的头寸的催化剂是什么，并不断分析它们在市场中的影响持续时间和寿命。与所有短期波动一样，基本面很少提供太多指示或近期价格走势。通常，技术面、成交量和动量提供了对未来价格走势最准确的预测，因此对分析最有用。</blockquote></p><p> Many have offered catalysts for what has driven this move, ranging from the re-opening narrative, a gamma or short squeeze, or the influx of new capital from shares issuances. The bottom line is all these catalysts depend upon momentum for their effective lifespan. Even if they are catalysts that will take place over time, dramatic price appreciation like this shortens the lifespan of the catalysts' daily momentum until they retest the longer term averages and establishes stability with heightened volume.</p><p><blockquote>许多人为推动这一举措提供了催化剂，包括重新开放的叙述、伽马或轧空，或者股票发行带来的新资本涌入。底线是所有这些催化剂的有效寿命都依赖于动量。即使它们是随着时间的推移而发生的催化剂，像这样的价格大幅上涨也会缩短催化剂每日动量的寿命，直到它们重新测试长期平均值并通过增加交易量建立稳定性。</blockquote></p><p> I think it would be prudent to take profit here or at least take more than 50% off the table for the time being, and for those interested, a position in anticipation of a stark downside seems sensible.</p><p><blockquote>我认为谨慎的做法是在这里获利了结，或者至少暂时获利了结超过50%，对于那些感兴趣的人来说，在预期大幅下跌的情况下建仓似乎是明智的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Risks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>风险</b></blockquote></p><p> The risks to the bearish thesis on AMC involve renewed momentum and continued strength above the 7-day moving average. As I elaborated on earlier, that seems to be the most critical indicator of short-term price movement in these scenarios and consistently has been an indicator of a dramatic move to come both on the upside and downside. If AMC holds above this average and tightens the gap between the 7-day and the 20 and 50-day moving averages, it could potentially hold this heightened volume and price level and consolidate before making a move to new highs. I fundamentally believe that, while there are catalysts here at play, when a move is this dramatic in this short of a time frame momentum and technicals take over in determining future price action. And, thus, if the technicals break down, there should be stark downside. However, if the technicals continue to stay bullish, there may be more upside ahead. AMC looks to similar, however, to GME’s February move, and the bearish double top pattern seems to be forming.</p><p><blockquote>AMC看跌论点的风险包括新的动能和7日移动平均线上方的持续强势。正如我之前所阐述的，这似乎是这些情况下短期价格变动的最关键指标，并且一直是上行和下行剧烈波动的指标。如果AMC保持在该平均线之上并缩小7日与20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，它可能会保持这一较高的成交量和价格水平，并在触及新高之前进行盘整。我从根本上相信，虽然这里有催化剂在起作用，但当在这么短的时间内出现如此戏剧性的走势时，动量和技术因素就会接管决定未来的价格走势。因此，如果技术面崩溃，应该会有明显的下行空间。然而，如果技术面继续看涨，未来可能会有更多上涨空间。然而，AMC看起来与GME 2月份的走势类似，看跌双顶形态似乎正在形成。</blockquote></p><p> Conclusion</p><p><blockquote>结论</blockquote></p><p></p><p> After writing a bullish article on AMC in January, we are now bearish on the equity, recognizing the deterioration of key momentum indicators and the technical similarity to the GME’s rise and fall back in February. In events like this, the catalysts get choppy, and it’s important to evaluate the lifespan of the main points to in your investment thesis. When things rise dramatically, there is often a time off profit taken in which the market re-prices just how valuable catalysts are. If it’s just momentum as a catalyst, the re-pricing is often stark and volatile. If it is a more long-term catalyst, the profit taking can be more muted. While there may be many catalysts driving AMC’s rise, there is without doubt one that takes precedent over them all, and that is the momentum story. Given our examination of GME, it seems the 7-day moving average is the price level to look at before dramatic downside, given the gap between the 20 and 50 day moving average. As Google search trends, volume, and price (double top pattern) seem to indicate things are breaking down and are similar at least to GME in February. One should consider taking profits here, and if inclined to take the other side, consider initiating a position accordingly now. While option premiums are high, I think there is still an ability to initiate a small position or a hedge with some short-term options (2 weeks-4 weeks). If price action were to head to the downside, the move would be drastic as the next level of support is $40 lower than the current price. While I think shorting could make sense here, and the cost to borrow doesn’t seem that high as the percentage of shares short is not GME’s level, there is inherently more risk there.</p><p><blockquote>在1月份写了一篇关于AMC的看涨文章后，我们现在看跌该股，认识到关键动量指标的恶化以及与GME 2月份上涨和回落的技术相似性。在这样的事件中，催化剂会变得不稳定，评估投资论文中要点的寿命非常重要。当股价大幅上涨时，通常会有一段获利了结的时间，市场会重新定价催化剂的价值。如果只是动力作为催化剂，那么重新定价往往是鲜明且不稳定的。如果是更长期的催化剂，获利了结可以更加温和。虽然推动AMC崛起的催化剂可能有很多，但毫无疑问，有一个催化剂比所有催化剂都更重要，那就是动量故事。根据我们对GME的研究，考虑到20日和50日移动平均线之间的差距，7日移动平均线似乎是大幅下跌之前值得关注的价格水平。随着谷歌搜索趋势、交易量和价格（双顶模式）似乎表明情况正在崩溃，至少与2月份的GME相似。人们应该考虑在这里获利了结，如果倾向于站在另一边，现在就考虑相应地建仓。虽然期权费很高，但我认为仍然有能力用一些短期期权（2周-4周）发起小仓位或对冲。如果价格走势向下，走势将会剧烈，因为下一个支撑位比当前价格低40美元。虽然我认为做空在这里可能是有意义的，而且借贷成本似乎没有那么高，因为做空股票的百分比不是GME的水平，但那里固有的风险更大。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435124-amc-stock-take-profits\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435124-amc-stock-take-profits","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1157739738","content_text":"Summary\n\nAfter emerging as the leader in the second wave of \"meme\" or momentum stocks, AMC's move resembles that of GameStop in January, indicating the potential for stark downside.\nImportant short-term indicators such as technicals, momentum, and search interest are beginning to form a bearish pattern similar to GME in late January.\nGiven the large gap between the 7 and 50-day moving average, the risk/reward seems to suggest taking profits, initiating a hedge or short/put position.\n\nBCFC/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nIntroduction\nOver the past two weeks or so, AMC(NYSE:AMC)has undergone a historic rise in its stock price. Due in part to elevated levels of short interest, the use of options, and actions taken by AMC, the equities price has risen ~485% in the last month. For the year, AMC has risen by ~763.5% to a price of ~$55 a share and a market cap of $28.4B, despite a fundamentally destructive year to the company and its long-term business prospects. After rising earlier this year amongst the short and gamma squeeze of GameStop(NYSE:GMEand other “reddit” fueled equities, AMC has gained momentum again and has separated itself from the group with its performance. This piece will compare GME’s leadership in the February fiasco with AMC’s current leadership and will evaluate the catalysts driving the moves and their lifespans. Given the nature of this equities price action, it is important to consistently reconsider your investment thesis and re-evaluate what is driving price action. In my opinion, technical analysis takes over in these scenarios, and I will point to many factors that indicate this might be the time to take profit or initiate a position in anticipation of a sell-off.\nTechnical Analysis\nSource: CNBC(GameStop)\nConsider the run-up in GME earlier this year when it had leadership amongst the pack of momentum or “meme” stocks. The top red band on the chart indicates the 7-day moving average, while the blue indicates the 50-day moving average and the green the 200-day moving average. As you can see from the chart, breakthroughs of the 7-day moving average are consistently followed by large moves in both directions. It seems, with these drastically volatile moves, the 7-day moving average is the most useful indicator for price action. As you can see in the chart, in February, March, and June, when GME’s price broke through the 7-day moving average, stark downside followed.\nInterestingly enough, the 50-day moving average (blue line) has seemed to provide some level of consistent support in this upward trend, providing a level of support for a couple bounces along the move. And as this upward trend has continued, the gap between the 50-day and the 7-day has contracted, thus providing less volatility and greater predictability in terms of levels of resistance and support.\nSource: CNBC [AMC]\nWhen I look at AMC’s chart, it reminds me of GME’s in February of 2021. The upward move has been quick and stark (~350% in ~23 days) similar to GME’s move in February (~1,525% in ~21 days). Both led to a large dispersion between the 7-day and 50-day moving averages in the short term and, thus, offered elevated potential for volatility both in terms of the upside and downside. As you can see from GME’s chart, it eventually tested the 50-day moving average around ~$45-50 after touching ~$350 the week prior.\nSimilarly to GME, AMC has also now consolidated around its 7-day average after this run-up and allowed it to catch up to the price action. If AMC is unable to break through $62.55 and present new momentum, it is at risk of double topping, breaking through its 7-day average on the downside and retesting the 50-day around $20.This scenario offers ~60% downside.Although I don’t usual look at time periods in an effort to evaluate potential future price action, I think it is important to note the similarity in terms of the time period of both moves and stay wary about what followed on the back end of GME’s move.\nGoogle Search Interest: The Momentum Story\nSource: Google Search Trends (GameStop)\nAs these moves are very much based upon momentum, Google search interest may be of value to consider. As you can see from the chart, GME’s search interest rose and fell quickly in late Jan. early Feb., pretty much in line with its equities performance. Its peak in interest pretty much aligned exactly with its peak in price, and its fall in interest aligned exactly with its fall in price. Similarly, its rebound in interest followed its rebound in price after testing the 50-day moving average around ~$45.\nSource: Google Search Trends [AMC]\nWhen you look at AMC’s Google Search Interest, you can also see its dramatic spike in a short period of time and then a subsequent stark decline. As search interest and volume were leading indicators for GME's move downward back in February, this chart might indicate a potential sell-off if it is not able to rebound.\nCross-Analysis\nWhen you chart stock price, search interest, and volume over each other, the relationship between them all becomes clearer, despite the imperfections in measuring a large number like volume to interest.\nSource: ValueMan\nWhen considering GME, the chart demonstrates that the variables have a correlation, especially in the stark and volatile moves upward and downward. While they may stray during times of relative muted volatility, they retain a relationship when things are moving in a volatile nature. Search interest and volume seemingly led or fell directly in line with the stock price following the move upward.\nSource: ValueMan\nAMC’s chart actually demonstrates the relationship and correlation between these variables more clearly. Consider how search interest and volume actually preceded price in GME’s move down and how AMC’s search interest recently broke through its price in a similar manner.\nWhile this method of analysis is not perfect, it is important to remember what the catalysts for your positions are and constantly analyze the duration of their impact and lifespan in the marketplace. As with all short-term volatile moves, fundamentals rarely provide too much of an indication or near term price action. Often, technicals, volume, and momentum provide the most accurate forecasts of future price action and, thus, are the most useful to analyze.\nMany have offered catalysts for what has driven this move, ranging from the re-opening narrative, a gamma or short squeeze, or the influx of new capital from shares issuances. The bottom line is all these catalysts depend upon momentum for their effective lifespan. Even if they are catalysts that will take place over time, dramatic price appreciation like this shortens the lifespan of the catalysts' daily momentum until they retest the longer term averages and establishes stability with heightened volume.\nI think it would be prudent to take profit here or at least take more than 50% off the table for the time being, and for those interested, a position in anticipation of a stark downside seems sensible.\nRisks\nThe risks to the bearish thesis on AMC involve renewed momentum and continued strength above the 7-day moving average. As I elaborated on earlier, that seems to be the most critical indicator of short-term price movement in these scenarios and consistently has been an indicator of a dramatic move to come both on the upside and downside. If AMC holds above this average and tightens the gap between the 7-day and the 20 and 50-day moving averages, it could potentially hold this heightened volume and price level and consolidate before making a move to new highs. I fundamentally believe that, while there are catalysts here at play, when a move is this dramatic in this short of a time frame momentum and technicals take over in determining future price action. And, thus, if the technicals break down, there should be stark downside. However, if the technicals continue to stay bullish, there may be more upside ahead. AMC looks to similar, however, to GME’s February move, and the bearish double top pattern seems to be forming.\nConclusion\nAfter writing a bullish article on AMC in January, we are now bearish on the equity, recognizing the deterioration of key momentum indicators and the technical similarity to the GME’s rise and fall back in February. In events like this, the catalysts get choppy, and it’s important to evaluate the lifespan of the main points to in your investment thesis. When things rise dramatically, there is often a time off profit taken in which the market re-prices just how valuable catalysts are. If it’s just momentum as a catalyst, the re-pricing is often stark and volatile. If it is a more long-term catalyst, the profit taking can be more muted. While there may be many catalysts driving AMC’s rise, there is without doubt one that takes precedent over them all, and that is the momentum story. Given our examination of GME, it seems the 7-day moving average is the price level to look at before dramatic downside, given the gap between the 20 and 50 day moving average. As Google search trends, volume, and price (double top pattern) seem to indicate things are breaking down and are similar at least to GME in February. One should consider taking profits here, and if inclined to take the other side, consider initiating a position accordingly now. While option premiums are high, I think there is still an ability to initiate a small position or a hedge with some short-term options (2 weeks-4 weeks). If price action were to head to the downside, the move would be drastic as the next level of support is $40 lower than the current price. While I think shorting could make sense here, and the cost to borrow doesn’t seem that high as the percentage of shares short is not GME’s level, there is inherently more risk there.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1205,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186973814,"gmtCreate":1623471221138,"gmtModify":1634032688659,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Whut","listText":"Whut","text":"Whut","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186973814","repostId":"1174648150","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1174648150","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":1623421129,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1174648150?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-11 22:18","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chinese education stocks fell again<blockquote>中国教育股再次下跌</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1174648150","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(June 11) Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell abo","content":"<p>(June 11)&nbsp;Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell about 2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月11日）高途跌超7%，好未来教育集团跌约4%，新东方教育跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/19995de30a445296dd85511c627cc738\" tg-width=\"304\" tg-height=\"242\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Chinese education stocks fell again<blockquote>中国教育股再次下跌</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\">\nChinese education stocks fell again<blockquote>中国教育股再次下跌</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\">2021-06-11 22:18</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(June 11)&nbsp;Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell about 2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月11日）高途跌超7%，好未来教育集团跌约4%，新东方教育跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/19995de30a445296dd85511c627cc738\" tg-width=\"304\" tg-height=\"242\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1174648150","content_text":"(June 11) Gaotu fell over 7%, TAL Education Group was down about 4%, New Oriental Education fell about 2%.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":441,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122726179,"gmtCreate":1624634073791,"gmtModify":1633950241052,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Kool","listText":"Kool","text":"Kool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122726179","repostId":"1100357819","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1432,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129694884,"gmtCreate":1624370448248,"gmtModify":1634007139009,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Juju","listText":"Juju","text":"Juju","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129694884","repostId":"1158992528","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1396,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":160985119,"gmtCreate":1623769410531,"gmtModify":1634028556581,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok can","listText":"Ok can","text":"Ok can","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/160985119","repostId":"1191245053","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1191245053","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623762167,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1191245053?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-15 21:02","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Quad-Witch Quandary: How Will Friday's $2 Trillion Gamma Expiration Impact Markets<blockquote>四女巫困境：周五2万亿美元伽马到期将如何影响市场</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1191245053","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers .So picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fis","content":"<p>Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers (see \"4 Reasons Why The Market Doldrums End With Next Friday's Op-Ex\").</p><p><blockquote>上周，在讨论将VIX推至新冠大流行爆发以来的最低水平的市场夏季低迷时，我们表示，这段异常的市场平静期可能会持续到本周五的“四女巫”，届时大量的gamma和delta到期并去风险，在此过程中消除了股票的自然下行缓冲之一（请参阅“市场低迷随着下周五的Op-Ex而结束的4个原因”）。</blockquote></p><p> So picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fishman, previews June’s upcoming expiration which he dubs as \"large - comparable to a typical quarterly.\" Specifically,<b>there are $1.8 trillion of SPX options expiring on Friday, in addition to $240 billion of SPY options and $200 billion of options on SPX and SPX E-mini futures.</b></p><p><blockquote>因此，高盛内部衍生品专家洛基·菲什曼(Rocky Fishman)在谈到周五“可能影响市场的运营支出”的话题时，预览了即将到来的6月份到期，他称之为“规模很大——与典型的季度相当”。具体而言，<b>周五有1.8万亿美元的SPX期权到期，此外还有2400亿美元的SPDR标普500指数ETF期权以及2000亿美元的SPX和SPX E-mini期货期权。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d1ece116794c7f6523250fd682450e3\" tg-width=\"959\" tg-height=\"765\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Yet while these totals are massive,<b>when adjusted for the index’s size the amount of expiring options within 10% of current spot is smaller than just about any quarterly over the past decade.</b></p><p><blockquote>然而，尽管这些总数很大，<b>根据指数规模进行调整后，当前现货10%以内的到期期权数量比过去十年中的任何一个季度都要少。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/534b677774a92a59d4fe08f09359932b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"298\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> It's worth noting that according to Goldman estimates that combos account<b>for 15-20% of SPX options,</b>so an adjusted open interest total would add up to $1.5tln, still much larger than total expiring single stock open interest ($775bln). Furthermore, with stocks at all time highs, it is to be expected that most of the June open interest is below the current SPX spot price. As shown in the chart below, the dual peaks are at 3,900 and 4,150. This means that after Friday, there may be a certain \"anti\"-gravity around those spots until gamma is refilled.</p><p><blockquote>值得注意的是，根据高盛的估计，combos账户<b>对于15-20%的SPX期权，</b>因此，调整后的未平仓合约总额将达到1.5万亿美元，仍远高于即将到期的单一股票未平仓合约总额（7750亿美元）。此外，由于股市处于历史高位，预计6月份大部分未平仓合约均低于当前SPX现货价格。如下图所示，双峰在3900和4150。这意味着周五之后，在伽马被重新填充之前，这些点周围可能会有一定的“反”重力。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adfcada2b0ef3f2ebbd684649a613043\" tg-width=\"936\" tg-height=\"541\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The Goldman strategist then explains what he believes is below the abnormally low level of realized market vol, noting that - as we discussed last week - it is consistent with long gamma positioning. Consider that SPX<b>realized volatility over the past 13 trading days has been just 5.1% - the lowest 13-day realized vol since 2019.</b></p><p><blockquote>这位高盛策略师随后解释了他认为低于已实现市场波动率的异常低水平的情况，并指出——正如我们上周讨论的——这与多头伽马头寸一致。考虑一下SPX<b>过去13个交易日的已实现波动率仅为5.1%，为2019年以来最低的13天已实现波动率。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/afffda1e07736784ad695d95a9936421\" tg-width=\"952\" tg-height=\"558\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> This contrasts with extreme volatility in pockets of the single stock market; AMC, which had the highest contract volume among single stocks last week (but far less notional volume at$7bln/day than AMZN’s leading $120bln/day), has had close to 400% realized vol over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>这与单一股票市场部分地区的极端波动形成鲜明对比；AMC上周是个股中合约量最高的（但名义交易量为70亿美元/天，远低于AMZN领先的1200亿美元/天），同期已实现成交量接近400%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df2b7aeaadb37160a7eaf0ac08ba31de\" tg-width=\"1236\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Then, as Nomura's Charlie McElligott first noted last week, Goldman's derivatives team agrees that<b>the extremely low SPX realized volatility is consistent with the possibility that 18-Jun has left “the street” long index gamma, in which case Fishman echoeswhat we said last week, namely that \"realized volatility could pick up once positions are cleaner. \"</b>Meanwhile, the rising beta of VIX futures to the SPX indicates that investors expect short gamma dynamics to pick up should markets sell off. Translation:<u><b>the market will become much more volatile in a selloff.</b></u></p><p><blockquote>然后，正如野村证券的Charlie McElligott上周首次指出的那样，高盛的衍生品团队同意<b>极低的SPX已实现波动性与6月18日离开“华尔街”多头指数gamma的可能性是一致的，在这种情况下，Fishman呼应了我们上周所说的，即“一旦头寸变得更加干净，已实现波动性可能会回升。”</b>与此同时，VIX期货相对于SPX的贝塔值上升表明，投资者预计，如果市场抛售，空头伽马动态将会回升。翻译：<u><b>在抛售中，市场将变得更加波动。</b></u></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76b01b8a05b70ec4f343626b1fad491b\" tg-width=\"931\" tg-height=\"560\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and in keeping with the latest memo stock squeeze, Goldman also notes that while single stock option volumes continue to be high, it is well short of Q1 peaks. The large percentage of all single stock option activity driven by retail, and the predictive value of retail activity, have both heightened the attention on the single stock option market in recent weeks. Recent growth in single stock option activity has been concentrated in low-share-price stocks, leaving a shar prise in contract-volume over the past two weeks that has not been matched by notional volume. When adjusting notional volume for the size of the equity market, Goldman finds that single stock volume has actually been on the low of its 2021 range over the past two weeks which means that the latest ramps had little to no gamma squeeze components to them.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，与最新的备忘录股票挤压保持一致，高盛还指出，虽然单一股票期权交易量仍然很高，但远低于第一季度的峰值。最近几周，由散户驱动的所有单一股票期权活动的很大比例以及散户活动的预测价值都提高了对单一股票期权市场的关注。近期单一股票期权活动的增长主要集中在低股价股票上，导致过去两周合约交易量大幅上涨，但名义交易量并未与之匹配。在根据股市规模调整名义成交量时，高盛发现过去两周单只股票成交量实际上一直处于2021年区间的低点，这意味着最新的上涨几乎没有伽马挤压成分。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9c6c3df49e3e5d1e4a7a0d9c24696e6a\" tg-width=\"1212\" tg-height=\"608\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> One final point which we discussed recently and which is in keeping with the growing retail participation in trading, is Goldman's observation that the trend toward shorter-dated SPX options (weeklies) and away from quarterlies, continues. That also is one of the reasons why Friday’s SPX expiration is smaller than many recent quarterlies, and why as it as approached expiration, its trading volume has been falling.</p><p><blockquote>我们最近讨论的最后一点是高盛的观察，即短期SPX期权（每周）和远离季度的趋势仍在继续，这与散户参与交易的不断增加相一致。这也是周五SPX到期时间小于最近许多季度的原因之一，也是为什么随着到期时间的临近，其交易量一直在下降的原因之一。</blockquote></p><p> As Goldman explains, investors have been increasingly adopting the full calendar of SPX expirations, including expirations every Monday and Wednesday, as they tailor their views around events. In fact,<b>the percentage of SPX option volume happening in 3rd Friday expirations is at an all-time low,</b>and is now smaller than the percentage happening in Monday and Wednesday expirations. One explanation for heightened ultra-short-dated volumes is the strong single stock volumes: and here an interest suggesting from Goldman - \"to the extent market makers are unable to cover the short single stock gamma generated by retail investors’ call buying, they may be actively trading long positions in strips of ultra-short-dated SPX index options to offset this gamma.\"</p><p><blockquote>正如高盛所解释的那样，投资者越来越多地采用SPX到期的完整日历，包括每周一和周三的到期，因为他们围绕事件调整了自己的观点。事实上，<b>第三个周五到期的SPX期权交易量百分比处于历史最低点，</b>现在低于周一和周三到期的百分比。超短期交易量增加的一个解释是强劲的单一股票交易量：高盛提出了一个兴趣——“在某种程度上，做市商无法弥补散户投资者看涨期权买入产生的单一股票空头伽马，他们可能会积极交易超短期SPX指数期权的多头头寸，以抵消这种伽马。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd0e886a62a61c70b0f299bd6c032a24\" tg-width=\"954\" tg-height=\"1128\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Why is this important? because if this trend is large enough, it directly contributes to low implied and realized correlation.<b>Ironically, by ramping single name, \"most-shorted names\", retail investors are ushering a period of unorthodox calm across the rest of the market!</b></p><p><blockquote>为什么这很重要？因为如果这种趋势足够大，它会直接导致低隐含和实现的相关性。<b>具有讽刺意味的是，通过增加单一名称“最受做空的名称”，散户投资者正在市场的其他部分迎来一段非正统的平静时期！</b></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>Quad-Witch Quandary: How Will Friday's $2 Trillion Gamma Expiration Impact Markets<blockquote>四女巫困境：周五2万亿美元伽马到期将如何影响市场</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\">\nQuad-Witch Quandary: How Will Friday's $2 Trillion Gamma Expiration Impact Markets<blockquote>四女巫困境：周五2万亿美元伽马到期将如何影响市场</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-15 21:02</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers (see \"4 Reasons Why The Market Doldrums End With Next Friday's Op-Ex\").</p><p><blockquote>上周，在讨论将VIX推至新冠大流行爆发以来的最低水平的市场夏季低迷时，我们表示，这段异常的市场平静期可能会持续到本周五的“四女巫”，届时大量的gamma和delta到期并去风险，在此过程中消除了股票的自然下行缓冲之一（请参阅“市场低迷随着下周五的Op-Ex而结束的4个原因”）。</blockquote></p><p> So picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fishman, previews June’s upcoming expiration which he dubs as \"large - comparable to a typical quarterly.\" Specifically,<b>there are $1.8 trillion of SPX options expiring on Friday, in addition to $240 billion of SPY options and $200 billion of options on SPX and SPX E-mini futures.</b></p><p><blockquote>因此，高盛内部衍生品专家洛基·菲什曼(Rocky Fishman)在谈到周五“可能影响市场的运营支出”的话题时，预览了即将到来的6月份到期，他称之为“规模很大——与典型的季度相当”。具体而言，<b>周五有1.8万亿美元的SPX期权到期，此外还有2400亿美元的SPDR标普500指数ETF期权以及2000亿美元的SPX和SPX E-mini期货期权。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0d1ece116794c7f6523250fd682450e3\" tg-width=\"959\" tg-height=\"765\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Yet while these totals are massive,<b>when adjusted for the index’s size the amount of expiring options within 10% of current spot is smaller than just about any quarterly over the past decade.</b></p><p><blockquote>然而，尽管这些总数很大，<b>根据指数规模进行调整后，当前现货10%以内的到期期权数量比过去十年中的任何一个季度都要少。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/534b677774a92a59d4fe08f09359932b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"298\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> It's worth noting that according to Goldman estimates that combos account<b>for 15-20% of SPX options,</b>so an adjusted open interest total would add up to $1.5tln, still much larger than total expiring single stock open interest ($775bln). Furthermore, with stocks at all time highs, it is to be expected that most of the June open interest is below the current SPX spot price. As shown in the chart below, the dual peaks are at 3,900 and 4,150. This means that after Friday, there may be a certain \"anti\"-gravity around those spots until gamma is refilled.</p><p><blockquote>值得注意的是，根据高盛的估计，combos账户<b>对于15-20%的SPX期权，</b>因此，调整后的未平仓合约总额将达到1.5万亿美元，仍远高于即将到期的单一股票未平仓合约总额（7750亿美元）。此外，由于股市处于历史高位，预计6月份大部分未平仓合约均低于当前SPX现货价格。如下图所示，双峰在3900和4150。这意味着周五之后，在伽马被重新填充之前，这些点周围可能会有一定的“反”重力。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adfcada2b0ef3f2ebbd684649a613043\" tg-width=\"936\" tg-height=\"541\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The Goldman strategist then explains what he believes is below the abnormally low level of realized market vol, noting that - as we discussed last week - it is consistent with long gamma positioning. Consider that SPX<b>realized volatility over the past 13 trading days has been just 5.1% - the lowest 13-day realized vol since 2019.</b></p><p><blockquote>这位高盛策略师随后解释了他认为低于已实现市场波动率的异常低水平的情况，并指出——正如我们上周讨论的——这与多头伽马头寸一致。考虑一下SPX<b>过去13个交易日的已实现波动率仅为5.1%，为2019年以来最低的13天已实现波动率。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/afffda1e07736784ad695d95a9936421\" tg-width=\"952\" tg-height=\"558\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> This contrasts with extreme volatility in pockets of the single stock market; AMC, which had the highest contract volume among single stocks last week (but far less notional volume at$7bln/day than AMZN’s leading $120bln/day), has had close to 400% realized vol over the same period.</p><p><blockquote>这与单一股票市场部分地区的极端波动形成鲜明对比；AMC上周是个股中合约量最高的（但名义交易量为70亿美元/天，远低于AMZN领先的1200亿美元/天），同期已实现成交量接近400%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df2b7aeaadb37160a7eaf0ac08ba31de\" tg-width=\"1236\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Then, as Nomura's Charlie McElligott first noted last week, Goldman's derivatives team agrees that<b>the extremely low SPX realized volatility is consistent with the possibility that 18-Jun has left “the street” long index gamma, in which case Fishman echoeswhat we said last week, namely that \"realized volatility could pick up once positions are cleaner. \"</b>Meanwhile, the rising beta of VIX futures to the SPX indicates that investors expect short gamma dynamics to pick up should markets sell off. Translation:<u><b>the market will become much more volatile in a selloff.</b></u></p><p><blockquote>然后，正如野村证券的Charlie McElligott上周首次指出的那样，高盛的衍生品团队同意<b>极低的SPX已实现波动性与6月18日离开“华尔街”多头指数gamma的可能性是一致的，在这种情况下，Fishman呼应了我们上周所说的，即“一旦头寸变得更加干净，已实现波动性可能会回升。”</b>与此同时，VIX期货相对于SPX的贝塔值上升表明，投资者预计，如果市场抛售，空头伽马动态将会回升。翻译：<u><b>在抛售中，市场将变得更加波动。</b></u></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76b01b8a05b70ec4f343626b1fad491b\" tg-width=\"931\" tg-height=\"560\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and in keeping with the latest memo stock squeeze, Goldman also notes that while single stock option volumes continue to be high, it is well short of Q1 peaks. The large percentage of all single stock option activity driven by retail, and the predictive value of retail activity, have both heightened the attention on the single stock option market in recent weeks. Recent growth in single stock option activity has been concentrated in low-share-price stocks, leaving a shar prise in contract-volume over the past two weeks that has not been matched by notional volume. When adjusting notional volume for the size of the equity market, Goldman finds that single stock volume has actually been on the low of its 2021 range over the past two weeks which means that the latest ramps had little to no gamma squeeze components to them.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，与最新的备忘录股票挤压保持一致，高盛还指出，虽然单一股票期权交易量仍然很高，但远低于第一季度的峰值。最近几周，由散户驱动的所有单一股票期权活动的很大比例以及散户活动的预测价值都提高了对单一股票期权市场的关注。近期单一股票期权活动的增长主要集中在低股价股票上，导致过去两周合约交易量大幅上涨，但名义交易量并未与之匹配。在根据股市规模调整名义成交量时，高盛发现过去两周单只股票成交量实际上一直处于2021年区间的低点，这意味着最新的上涨几乎没有伽马挤压成分。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9c6c3df49e3e5d1e4a7a0d9c24696e6a\" tg-width=\"1212\" tg-height=\"608\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> One final point which we discussed recently and which is in keeping with the growing retail participation in trading, is Goldman's observation that the trend toward shorter-dated SPX options (weeklies) and away from quarterlies, continues. That also is one of the reasons why Friday’s SPX expiration is smaller than many recent quarterlies, and why as it as approached expiration, its trading volume has been falling.</p><p><blockquote>我们最近讨论的最后一点是高盛的观察，即短期SPX期权（每周）和远离季度的趋势仍在继续，这与散户参与交易的不断增加相一致。这也是周五SPX到期时间小于最近许多季度的原因之一，也是为什么随着到期时间的临近，其交易量一直在下降的原因之一。</blockquote></p><p> As Goldman explains, investors have been increasingly adopting the full calendar of SPX expirations, including expirations every Monday and Wednesday, as they tailor their views around events. In fact,<b>the percentage of SPX option volume happening in 3rd Friday expirations is at an all-time low,</b>and is now smaller than the percentage happening in Monday and Wednesday expirations. One explanation for heightened ultra-short-dated volumes is the strong single stock volumes: and here an interest suggesting from Goldman - \"to the extent market makers are unable to cover the short single stock gamma generated by retail investors’ call buying, they may be actively trading long positions in strips of ultra-short-dated SPX index options to offset this gamma.\"</p><p><blockquote>正如高盛所解释的那样，投资者越来越多地采用SPX到期的完整日历，包括每周一和周三的到期，因为他们围绕事件调整了自己的观点。事实上，<b>第三个周五到期的SPX期权交易量百分比处于历史最低点，</b>现在低于周一和周三到期的百分比。超短期交易量增加的一个解释是强劲的单一股票交易量：高盛提出了一个兴趣——“在某种程度上，做市商无法弥补散户投资者看涨期权买入产生的单一股票空头伽马，他们可能会积极交易超短期SPX指数期权的多头头寸，以抵消这种伽马。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd0e886a62a61c70b0f299bd6c032a24\" tg-width=\"954\" tg-height=\"1128\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Why is this important? because if this trend is large enough, it directly contributes to low implied and realized correlation.<b>Ironically, by ramping single name, \"most-shorted names\", retail investors are ushering a period of unorthodox calm across the rest of the market!</b></p><p><blockquote>为什么这很重要？因为如果这种趋势足够大，它会直接导致低隐含和实现的相关性。<b>具有讽刺意味的是，通过增加单一名称“最受做空的名称”，散户投资者正在市场的其他部分迎来一段非正统的平静时期！</b></blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/quad-witch-quandary-how-will-fridays-2-trillion-gamma-expiration-impact-markets\">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":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/quad-witch-quandary-how-will-fridays-2-trillion-gamma-expiration-impact-markets","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1191245053","content_text":"Last week, when discussing thebizarre summer doldrumsin the market which pushed the VIX to the lowest level since the onset of the covid pandemic, we said that this period of abnormal market quiet is likely to last until this Friday' quad-witch, when a massive amount of gamma and delta expire and are de-risked, in the process eliminating one of the natural downside stock buffers (see \"4 Reasons Why The Market Doldrums End With Next Friday's Op-Ex\").\nSo picking up on the topic of Friday' potentially market-moving opex, Goldman' in-house derivatives expert, Rocky Fishman, previews June’s upcoming expiration which he dubs as \"large - comparable to a typical quarterly.\" Specifically,there are $1.8 trillion of SPX options expiring on Friday, in addition to $240 billion of SPY options and $200 billion of options on SPX and SPX E-mini futures.\n\nYet while these totals are massive,when adjusted for the index’s size the amount of expiring options within 10% of current spot is smaller than just about any quarterly over the past decade.\n\nIt's worth noting that according to Goldman estimates that combos accountfor 15-20% of SPX options,so an adjusted open interest total would add up to $1.5tln, still much larger than total expiring single stock open interest ($775bln). Furthermore, with stocks at all time highs, it is to be expected that most of the June open interest is below the current SPX spot price. As shown in the chart below, the dual peaks are at 3,900 and 4,150. This means that after Friday, there may be a certain \"anti\"-gravity around those spots until gamma is refilled.\n\nThe Goldman strategist then explains what he believes is below the abnormally low level of realized market vol, noting that - as we discussed last week - it is consistent with long gamma positioning. Consider that SPXrealized volatility over the past 13 trading days has been just 5.1% - the lowest 13-day realized vol since 2019.\n\nThis contrasts with extreme volatility in pockets of the single stock market; AMC, which had the highest contract volume among single stocks last week (but far less notional volume at$7bln/day than AMZN’s leading $120bln/day), has had close to 400% realized vol over the same period.\n\nThen, as Nomura's Charlie McElligott first noted last week, Goldman's derivatives team agrees thatthe extremely low SPX realized volatility is consistent with the possibility that 18-Jun has left “the street” long index gamma, in which case Fishman echoeswhat we said last week, namely that \"realized volatility could pick up once positions are cleaner. \"Meanwhile, the rising beta of VIX futures to the SPX indicates that investors expect short gamma dynamics to pick up should markets sell off. Translation:the market will become much more volatile in a selloff.\n\nMeanwhile, and in keeping with the latest memo stock squeeze, Goldman also notes that while single stock option volumes continue to be high, it is well short of Q1 peaks. The large percentage of all single stock option activity driven by retail, and the predictive value of retail activity, have both heightened the attention on the single stock option market in recent weeks. Recent growth in single stock option activity has been concentrated in low-share-price stocks, leaving a shar prise in contract-volume over the past two weeks that has not been matched by notional volume. When adjusting notional volume for the size of the equity market, Goldman finds that single stock volume has actually been on the low of its 2021 range over the past two weeks which means that the latest ramps had little to no gamma squeeze components to them.\n\nOne final point which we discussed recently and which is in keeping with the growing retail participation in trading, is Goldman's observation that the trend toward shorter-dated SPX options (weeklies) and away from quarterlies, continues. That also is one of the reasons why Friday’s SPX expiration is smaller than many recent quarterlies, and why as it as approached expiration, its trading volume has been falling.\nAs Goldman explains, investors have been increasingly adopting the full calendar of SPX expirations, including expirations every Monday and Wednesday, as they tailor their views around events. In fact,the percentage of SPX option volume happening in 3rd Friday expirations is at an all-time low,and is now smaller than the percentage happening in Monday and Wednesday expirations. One explanation for heightened ultra-short-dated volumes is the strong single stock volumes: and here an interest suggesting from Goldman - \"to the extent market makers are unable to cover the short single stock gamma generated by retail investors’ call buying, they may be actively trading long positions in strips of ultra-short-dated SPX index options to offset this gamma.\"\n\nWhy is this important? because if this trend is large enough, it directly contributes to low implied and realized correlation.Ironically, by ramping single name, \"most-shorted names\", retail investors are ushering a period of unorthodox calm across the rest of the market!","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1401,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186979983,"gmtCreate":1623471178142,"gmtModify":1634032690188,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Very nice article&nbsp;","listText":"Very nice article&nbsp;","text":"Very nice article","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186979983","repostId":"2142202973","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":418,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167623082,"gmtCreate":1624266314946,"gmtModify":1634008685985,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ooek","listText":"Ooek","text":"Ooek","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167623082","repostId":"1146982088","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1146982088","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624259620,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1146982088?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 15:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis<blockquote>鲍威尔刚刚发射了2万亿美元的“热寻导弹”：Zoltan解释美联储如何开启下一次回购危机</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1146982088","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpect","content":"<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.</p><p><blockquote>上周，在市场对美联储意外鹰派转向的震惊反应中，我们注意到有两个切实但不太引人注目的变化：美联储调整了两个关键的“管理”利率，将IOER和RRP利率都提高了5个基点（正如美国银行、摩根大通、莱特森、德意志银行和富国银行正确预测的那样，而花旗、牛津经济研究院、杰富瑞、瑞士信贷、渣打银行、蒙特利尔银行错误地预测利率不会变化），以推动有效联邦基金利率走高，远离即将到来的0%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e3c93e7ae558cd9f2fdb7e4a2769f1\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"377\">What does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP&nbsp; facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.</p><p><blockquote>这是什么意思？正如Curvature Securities回购专家Scott Skyrm上周写道，“显然，美联储打算将隔夜利率提高到零以上，并耗尽RRP工具的现金。”不幸的是，最终结果将与美联储想要达到的目标完全相反。</blockquote></p><p> But what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.</p><p><blockquote>但这对于隔夜利率和建议零售价交易量到底意味着什么？正如Skyrm进一步指出的那样，IOER的上升应该会将每日联邦基金利率拉高5个基点，进而给回购GC带来上行压力。结合RRP增加5个基点，GC应该会大幅上涨5个基点，事实也确实如此。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8b99df7af1731b4bdcbcf072dcf39ce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\">The problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:</p><p><blockquote>正如Skyrm警告的那样，问题在于美联储的技术调整无助于缓解建议零售额：</blockquote></p><p>   When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.  Bottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"<i>the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"</i></p><p><blockquote>当市场回购利率为0%且RRP利率为零时，约5000亿美元进入RRP。好吧，如果市场回购利率和RRP利率都高出5个基点，就没有理由从RRP中提取现金。例如，如果GC利率升至0.05%，而RRP利率保持在零，投资者以更高利率投资的偏好将从RRP中移除现金。底线：由于市场利率和建议零售价均为0.05%，现金投资者确实没有经济动机将现金转移到回购市场。或者，正如我们总结的那样，“<i>美联储的利率变化可能对美联储的逆回购工具或创纪录的5000亿现金产生零影响。”</i></blockquote></p><p> In retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.</p><p><blockquote>回想起来，这是一种轻描淡写的说法，因为仅仅一天后，美联储逆回购工具的使用量就飙升了创纪录的50%，随着GSE的出现，飙升至惊人的7560亿美元（周五收盘价为7470亿美元）。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0fba18d7808300abc3bdf4ffaa3d5fb6\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\">Needless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"<b>the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:</b><b><u>the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market</u></b><b>).\"</b></p><p><blockquote>不用说，淹没美联储的建议零售价工具和冲销准备金几乎不是美联储的本意，正如瑞士信贷自己的回购专家（前纽约联储工作人员）Zoltan Pozsar在他的事后分析中所写的那样，“<b>重新定价的建议零售价融资将很快成为银行系统的一个问题：</b><b><u>银行体系正在从资产约束（存款大量涌入，但除了美联储之外无处可贷）转变为负债约束（存款不断流失，除了货币市场之外无处可替代）</u></b><b>).\"</b></blockquote></p><p> What he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did not<i>reward</i>allocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.</p><p><blockquote>他的意思是，以前0.00%的RRP利率没有<i>奖励</i>分配惰性的超额准备金，但只是提供了一个存放它们的地方，现在美联储提供的收益率与数万亿票据提供的利率相比大幅上升，我们即将看到隔夜货币市场发生翻天覆地的变化，数万亿资本从传统投资重新分配到美联储的建议零售价。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fed<i><b>also</b></i>made a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “<b>yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>换句话说，正如Pozsar所说，“RRP设施开始对储备进行消毒……还会有更多储备。”而就在德意志银行向Pozsar解释为什么美联储的信号是一个r*政策错误时，美联储<i><b>也</b></i>犯了一个政策错误——只是这次是技术利率——冲销准备金，因为“当严格来说没有必要提高RRP设施的利率时，提高RRP设施的利率是一回事，而将其提高到‘过高’是另一回事——正如一位货币基金经理所说，”<b>昨天，我们一年甚至拿不到一个基点；以五个基点从最值得信赖的交易对手那里获得无尽的票据是梦想成真。”</b></blockquote></p><p> He's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),<b>5bps is too generous</b>, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo rate<b>will upset the state of \"singularity\"</b>and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –<b>at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>他是对的：虽然许多人可能认为0个基点太低，但目前这很难说是灾难性的（瑞士信贷是预测不会有管理加息的机构之一），<b>5bps太慷慨了</b>Pozsar警告说，新的逆回购利率<b>将颠覆“奇点”状态</b>“就像热寻的导弹一样，货币市场投资者转移了数千亿美元，急转弯90度，在零边界寻找哪怕一个基点的收益率——<b>在5个基点的利率下，货币基金有动力出售所有国库券并将现金存放在RRP设施中。”</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Indeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,<b>and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.</b>They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.<b>So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.</b></p><p><blockquote>事实上，如下图所示，6个月的票据收益率不到5个基点，<b>货币基金拥有超过2万亿美元的票据。</b>他们有卖出的动机，而其他人有买入的动机：那些存款一直被银行“容忍”到目前为止赚取零利息的机构有动力获得票据曲线提供的0-5个基点的范围。将现金以一个基点存入票据比零存款要好。<b>因此，准备金冲销开始了，因此o/n RRP工具从一个为大型银行一直在推走的存款提供利率下限的基本上被动的工具，变成了一个“吸走”银行决定保留的存款的主动工具。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bf593f7b1d2d665f39384ed6a998d3bf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"403\">To help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves with<i><b>too few</b></i>intraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.</p><p><blockquote>为了帮助读者直观地了解正在发生的事情，瑞士信贷策略师建议进行以下“极端”的思想实验：目前银行的大部分“Covid-19”存款都进入了利率更好的票据市场。货币基金向目前将现金存放在银行的机构投资者出售票据，货币基金将票据交换为o/N RRP。（有点）简单地说，虽然美联储以前为银行提供了一个方便的存放准备金的地方，但现在它将积极耗尽准备金，以至于我们可能最终会陷入另一场2019年式的回购危机，因为大多数金融机构突然发现自己与<i><b>太少</b></i>日内储备，迫使它们使用美联储的其他融资工具（如外汇掉期额度）来保持持续的偿付能力。</blockquote></p><p> This process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.</p><p><blockquote>这个过程不是一蹴而就的。需要几周时间才能观察到美联储准备金冲销的影响。</blockquote></p><p> And here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,<b>some bond-heavy banks cannot.</b>As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who can<i><b>not</b></i>handle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么这个问题与2019年的回购危机类似：很快我们就会发现，虽然现金充裕的银行可以应对资金外流，<b>一些债券密集型银行则不能。</b>因此，Zoltan预测，接下来“我们将注意到一些银行（那些能够<i><b>不</b></i>处理资金外流）正在从FHLB借入预付款，现金充裕的银行停止在外汇掉期市场放贷，因为RRP工具从它们那里抽走了准备金，美联储不得不重新启动外汇掉期额度来抵消。”</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line:<i><b>whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>底线：<i><b>尽管之前我们看到Libor-OIS崩溃，但这一关键资金利差将不得不从这里扩大，除非美联储再次将o/n RRP利率降低到以前的水平。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Or, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,<b>in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"</b>While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,<b>the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.</b></p><p><blockquote>或者，正如Zoltan总结的那样，“要么是数量，要么是价格”——事实上，<b>2019年，美联储选择了价格而不是数量，这适得其反，并导致了回购危机，结束了美联储的加息周期，并开始了“非量化宽松”。</b>虽然美联储在2月份进行了自我救赎，但上周三，它在没有使其负债受到限制的情况下扩大了建议零售价的使用范围，因为它选择了数量而不是价格——这一点效果很好——<b>美联储将“无限”的数量变成了“免费的钱”，并开始冲销储备。</b></blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：“我们正在目睹最后手段交易商（DoLR）学习交易艺术，犯非受迫性错误——如果美联储通过定价过高的o/n RRP工具进行冲销，它必须准备好通过掉期增加流动性线……”</blockquote></p><p> Translation:&nbsp;<b>by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.</b></p><p><blockquote>翻译：<b>通过支付数万亿美元的准备金5个基点，美联储刚刚播下了下一场流动性危机的种子。</b></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>Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis<blockquote>鲍威尔刚刚发射了2万亿美元的“热寻导弹”：Zoltan解释美联储如何开启下一次回购危机</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\">\nPowell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis<blockquote>鲍威尔刚刚发射了2万亿美元的“热寻导弹”：Zoltan解释美联储如何开启下一次回购危机</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-21 15:13</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.</p><p><blockquote>上周，在市场对美联储意外鹰派转向的震惊反应中，我们注意到有两个切实但不太引人注目的变化：美联储调整了两个关键的“管理”利率，将IOER和RRP利率都提高了5个基点（正如美国银行、摩根大通、莱特森、德意志银行和富国银行正确预测的那样，而花旗、牛津经济研究院、杰富瑞、瑞士信贷、渣打银行、蒙特利尔银行错误地预测利率不会变化），以推动有效联邦基金利率走高，远离即将到来的0%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e3c93e7ae558cd9f2fdb7e4a2769f1\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"377\">What does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP&nbsp; facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.</p><p><blockquote>这是什么意思？正如Curvature Securities回购专家Scott Skyrm上周写道，“显然，美联储打算将隔夜利率提高到零以上，并耗尽RRP工具的现金。”不幸的是，最终结果将与美联储想要达到的目标完全相反。</blockquote></p><p> But what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.</p><p><blockquote>但这对于隔夜利率和建议零售价交易量到底意味着什么？正如Skyrm进一步指出的那样，IOER的上升应该会将每日联邦基金利率拉高5个基点，进而给回购GC带来上行压力。结合RRP增加5个基点，GC应该会大幅上涨5个基点，事实也确实如此。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8b99df7af1731b4bdcbcf072dcf39ce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\">The problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:</p><p><blockquote>正如Skyrm警告的那样，问题在于美联储的技术调整无助于缓解建议零售额：</blockquote></p><p>   When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.  Bottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"<i>the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"</i></p><p><blockquote>当市场回购利率为0%且RRP利率为零时，约5000亿美元进入RRP。好吧，如果市场回购利率和RRP利率都高出5个基点，就没有理由从RRP中提取现金。例如，如果GC利率升至0.05%，而RRP利率保持在零，投资者以更高利率投资的偏好将从RRP中移除现金。底线：由于市场利率和建议零售价均为0.05%，现金投资者确实没有经济动机将现金转移到回购市场。或者，正如我们总结的那样，“<i>美联储的利率变化可能对美联储的逆回购工具或创纪录的5000亿现金产生零影响。”</i></blockquote></p><p> In retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.</p><p><blockquote>回想起来，这是一种轻描淡写的说法，因为仅仅一天后，美联储逆回购工具的使用量就飙升了创纪录的50%，随着GSE的出现，飙升至惊人的7560亿美元（周五收盘价为7470亿美元）。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0fba18d7808300abc3bdf4ffaa3d5fb6\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\">Needless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"<b>the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:</b><b><u>the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market</u></b><b>).\"</b></p><p><blockquote>不用说，淹没美联储的建议零售价工具和冲销准备金几乎不是美联储的本意，正如瑞士信贷自己的回购专家（前纽约联储工作人员）Zoltan Pozsar在他的事后分析中所写的那样，“<b>重新定价的建议零售价融资将很快成为银行系统的一个问题：</b><b><u>银行体系正在从资产约束（存款大量涌入，但除了美联储之外无处可贷）转变为负债约束（存款不断流失，除了货币市场之外无处可替代）</u></b><b>).\"</b></blockquote></p><p> What he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did not<i>reward</i>allocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.</p><p><blockquote>他的意思是，以前0.00%的RRP利率没有<i>奖励</i>分配惰性的超额准备金，但只是提供了一个存放它们的地方，现在美联储提供的收益率与数万亿票据提供的利率相比大幅上升，我们即将看到隔夜货币市场发生翻天覆地的变化，数万亿资本从传统投资重新分配到美联储的建议零售价。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fed<i><b>also</b></i>made a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “<b>yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>换句话说，正如Pozsar所说，“RRP设施开始对储备进行消毒……还会有更多储备。”而就在德意志银行向Pozsar解释为什么美联储的信号是一个r*政策错误时，美联储<i><b>也</b></i>犯了一个政策错误——只是这次是技术利率——冲销准备金，因为“当严格来说没有必要提高RRP设施的利率时，提高RRP设施的利率是一回事，而将其提高到‘过高’是另一回事——正如一位货币基金经理所说，”<b>昨天，我们一年甚至拿不到一个基点；以五个基点从最值得信赖的交易对手那里获得无尽的票据是梦想成真。”</b></blockquote></p><p> He's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),<b>5bps is too generous</b>, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo rate<b>will upset the state of \"singularity\"</b>and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –<b>at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"</b></p><p><blockquote>他是对的：虽然许多人可能认为0个基点太低，但目前这很难说是灾难性的（瑞士信贷是预测不会有管理加息的机构之一），<b>5bps太慷慨了</b>Pozsar警告说，新的逆回购利率<b>将颠覆“奇点”状态</b>“就像热寻的导弹一样，货币市场投资者转移了数千亿美元，急转弯90度，在零边界寻找哪怕一个基点的收益率——<b>在5个基点的利率下，货币基金有动力出售所有国库券并将现金存放在RRP设施中。”</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Indeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,<b>and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.</b>They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.<b>So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.</b></p><p><blockquote>事实上，如下图所示，6个月的票据收益率不到5个基点，<b>货币基金拥有超过2万亿美元的票据。</b>他们有卖出的动机，而其他人有买入的动机：那些存款一直被银行“容忍”到目前为止赚取零利息的机构有动力获得票据曲线提供的0-5个基点的范围。将现金以一个基点存入票据比零存款要好。<b>因此，准备金冲销开始了，因此o/n RRP工具从一个为大型银行一直在推走的存款提供利率下限的基本上被动的工具，变成了一个“吸走”银行决定保留的存款的主动工具。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bf593f7b1d2d665f39384ed6a998d3bf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"403\">To help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves with<i><b>too few</b></i>intraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.</p><p><blockquote>为了帮助读者直观地了解正在发生的事情，瑞士信贷策略师建议进行以下“极端”的思想实验：目前银行的大部分“Covid-19”存款都进入了利率更好的票据市场。货币基金向目前将现金存放在银行的机构投资者出售票据，货币基金将票据交换为o/N RRP。（有点）简单地说，虽然美联储以前为银行提供了一个方便的存放准备金的地方，但现在它将积极耗尽准备金，以至于我们可能最终会陷入另一场2019年式的回购危机，因为大多数金融机构突然发现自己与<i><b>太少</b></i>日内储备，迫使它们使用美联储的其他融资工具（如外汇掉期额度）来保持持续的偿付能力。</blockquote></p><p> This process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.</p><p><blockquote>这个过程不是一蹴而就的。需要几周时间才能观察到美联储准备金冲销的影响。</blockquote></p><p> And here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,<b>some bond-heavy banks cannot.</b>As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who can<i><b>not</b></i>handle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么这个问题与2019年的回购危机类似：很快我们就会发现，虽然现金充裕的银行可以应对资金外流，<b>一些债券密集型银行则不能。</b>因此，Zoltan预测，接下来“我们将注意到一些银行（那些能够<i><b>不</b></i>处理资金外流）正在从FHLB借入预付款，现金充裕的银行停止在外汇掉期市场放贷，因为RRP工具从它们那里抽走了准备金，美联储不得不重新启动外汇掉期额度来抵消。”</blockquote></p><p> Bottom line:<i><b>whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.</b></i></p><p><blockquote>底线：<i><b>尽管之前我们看到Libor-OIS崩溃，但这一关键资金利差将不得不从这里扩大，除非美联储再次将o/n RRP利率降低到以前的水平。</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Or, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,<b>in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"</b>While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,<b>the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.</b></p><p><blockquote>或者，正如Zoltan总结的那样，“要么是数量，要么是价格”——事实上，<b>2019年，美联储选择了价格而不是数量，这适得其反，并导致了回购危机，结束了美联储的加息周期，并开始了“非量化宽松”。</b>虽然美联储在2月份进行了自我救赎，但上周三，它在没有使其负债受到限制的情况下扩大了建议零售价的使用范围，因为它选择了数量而不是价格——这一点效果很好——<b>美联储将“无限”的数量变成了“免费的钱”，并开始冲销储备。</b></blockquote></p><p> Bottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"</p><p><blockquote>底线：“我们正在目睹最后手段交易商（DoLR）学习交易艺术，犯非受迫性错误——如果美联储通过定价过高的o/n RRP工具进行冲销，它必须准备好通过掉期增加流动性线……”</blockquote></p><p> Translation:&nbsp;<b>by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.</b></p><p><blockquote>翻译：<b>通过支付数万亿美元的准备金5个基点，美联储刚刚播下了下一场流动性危机的种子。</b></blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1146982088","content_text":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.\nWhat does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP  facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.\nBut what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.\nThe problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:\n\n When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.\n\nBottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"\nIn retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.\nNeedless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market).\"\nWhat he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did notrewardallocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.\nIn other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fedalsomade a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"\nHe's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),5bps is too generous, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo ratewill upset the state of \"singularity\"and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"\nIndeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.\nTo help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves withtoo fewintraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.\nThis process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.\nAnd here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,some bond-heavy banks cannot.As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who cannothandle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"\nBottom line:whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.\nOr, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.\nBottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"\nTranslation: by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1492,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166938243,"gmtCreate":1623987469682,"gmtModify":1634024558580,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Heh","listText":"Heh","text":"Heh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166938243","repostId":"1112448941","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1112448941","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623984287,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1112448941?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Crypto Mining Could Give Huge Boost to Seagate and Western Digital Stock<blockquote>加密货币挖矿可能会极大提振希捷和西部数据的股票</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1112448941","media":"Barrons","summary":"Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies","content":"<p>Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies on large capacity drives to “farm” new coins.</p><p><blockquote>磁盘驱动器的需求继续被Chia的快速采用所扭曲，Chia是一种依赖大容量驱动器来“培育”新硬币的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> , Chia uses a different model than other cryptocurrencies to create new coins. Most cryptocurrencies rely on a “proof of work” model to verify transactions: Miners solve complex mathematical problems that require lots of computational power to earn coins, which explains why traditional mining is so energy-intensive.</p><p><blockquote>，Chia使用不同于其他加密货币的模式来创造新的硬币。大多数加密货币依赖于“工作量证明”模型来验证交易：矿工解决复杂的数学问题，需要大量的计算能力来赚取硬币，这解释了为什么传统挖矿如此耗能。</blockquote></p><p> Chia’s approach, by contrast, is tied to storage capacity committed to being used on the blockchain, rather than computational might. And that is warping demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，Chia的方法与致力于在区块链上使用的存储容量有关，而不是计算能力。这扭曲了对高容量驱动器的需求。</blockquote></p><p> In a research note on Thursday, Loop Capital analyst&nbsp;Ananda Baruah&nbsp;asserts that both&nbsp;SeagateTechnology Holdings (ticker: STX) and&nbsp;Western Digital(WDC)—which together control most of the world’s disk-drive production—could see a sustained boost to both pricing and profits from the Chia-driven acceleration in demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>Loop Capital分析师Ananda Baruah在周四的一份研究报告中断言，希捷科技控股公司（股票代码：STX）和西部数据（WDC）——这两家公司共同控制着全球大部分磁盘驱动器生产——的定价和利润可能会持续上涨来自Chia推动的高容量驱动器需求加速。</blockquote></p><p> If that demand is sustained, he asserts, Seagate’s annualized earnings could reach $12 a share, well above the Street’s consensus forecasts of profits of $5.52 a share for the June 2021 fiscal year, $7.48 for fiscal 2022, and $7.71 for fiscal 2023. For Western Digital, he writes, profits could reach the $10-$12-per-share range, which compares to Street estimates of $3.83 for the June 2021 fiscal year, $8.87 for fiscal 2022, and $10.54 for fiscal 2023.</p><p><blockquote>他断言，如果这种需求持续下去，希捷的年化收益可能达到每股12美元，远高于华尔街普遍预测的2021年6月财年每股利润5.52美元、2022财年每股利润7.48美元和2023财年每股利润7.71美元。他写道，对于西部数据来说，每股利润可能达到10-12美元，而华尔街预计2021年6月财年为3.83美元，2022财年为8.87美元，2023财年为10.54美元。</blockquote></p><p> While the impact on drive pricing from Chia farming has largely been at the retail level and through distributors, Baruah sees the trend overflowing to contract pricing if the Chia trend is sustained, with higher prices possible for drives sold to both cloud-computing companies and major data-storage systems companies like Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE),Dell Technologies‘ (DELL) EMC unit, and&nbsp;NetApp(NTAP).</p><p><blockquote>虽然Chia farming对驱动器定价的影响主要是在零售层面和通过分销商，但Baruah认为，如果Chia趋势持续下去，这种趋势将蔓延到合同定价，销售给云计算公司和主要数据的驱动器价格可能会更高-慧与(HPE)、戴尔科技(DELL)EMC部门和NetApp(NTAP)等存储系统公司。</blockquote></p><p> He contends that both Seagate and Western Digital have begun holding conversations on shifting average selling prices higher. And he adds that “if all of this holds, gross margin expansion could have a long way to go.”</p><p><blockquote>他认为，希捷和西部数据已经开始就提高平均售价进行对话。他补充道，“如果所有这些都成立，毛利率扩张可能还有很长的路要走。”</blockquote></p><p> With distributor inventories depleted, Baruah adds, the hard-drive suppliers are “in prime position” heading into the calendar second half to see elevated pricing. He notes that the last time there was an event-driven price reset in the drive market was 10 years ago, when severe flooding in Thailand knocked out a substantial portion of drive manufacturing capacity. This time, he says, there is less excess capacity in the system, with limited suppliers of both recording heads and magnetic media constraining the ability to satisfy demand.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah补充说，随着分销商库存的耗尽，硬盘供应商在进入下半年时“处于有利地位”，可以看到价格上涨。他指出，驱动器市场上上一次出现事件驱动的价格重置是在10年前，当时泰国的严重洪水摧毁了很大一部分驱动器制造能力。他说，这一次，系统中的过剩容量减少了，记录头和磁介质的供应商有限，限制了满足需求的能力。</blockquote></p><p> Baruah maintains his Buy ratings on both Seagate and Western Digital. He has price targets of $100 on Seagate and $90 on Western. Both stocks are lower in recent trading, with Seagate off 4.2%, at $88.82, and Western Digital down 3.4%, at $70.77. The&nbsp;S&amp;P 500&nbsp;index is down 0.04%.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah维持对希捷和西部数据的买入评级。他对希捷的目标价为100美元，对西部航空的目标价为90美元。两只股票在近期交易中均走低，希捷下跌4.2%，至88.82美元，西部数据下跌3.4%，至70.77美元。标准普尔500指数下跌0.04%。</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>Crypto Mining Could Give Huge Boost to Seagate and Western Digital Stock<blockquote>加密货币挖矿可能会极大提振希捷和西部数据的股票</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\">\nCrypto Mining Could Give Huge Boost to Seagate and Western Digital Stock<blockquote>加密货币挖矿可能会极大提振希捷和西部数据的股票</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 10:44</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies on large capacity drives to “farm” new coins.</p><p><blockquote>磁盘驱动器的需求继续被Chia的快速采用所扭曲，Chia是一种依赖大容量驱动器来“培育”新硬币的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> , Chia uses a different model than other cryptocurrencies to create new coins. Most cryptocurrencies rely on a “proof of work” model to verify transactions: Miners solve complex mathematical problems that require lots of computational power to earn coins, which explains why traditional mining is so energy-intensive.</p><p><blockquote>，Chia使用不同于其他加密货币的模式来创造新的硬币。大多数加密货币依赖于“工作量证明”模型来验证交易：矿工解决复杂的数学问题，需要大量的计算能力来赚取硬币，这解释了为什么传统挖矿如此耗能。</blockquote></p><p> Chia’s approach, by contrast, is tied to storage capacity committed to being used on the blockchain, rather than computational might. And that is warping demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，Chia的方法与致力于在区块链上使用的存储容量有关，而不是计算能力。这扭曲了对高容量驱动器的需求。</blockquote></p><p> In a research note on Thursday, Loop Capital analyst&nbsp;Ananda Baruah&nbsp;asserts that both&nbsp;SeagateTechnology Holdings (ticker: STX) and&nbsp;Western Digital(WDC)—which together control most of the world’s disk-drive production—could see a sustained boost to both pricing and profits from the Chia-driven acceleration in demand for high-capacity drives.</p><p><blockquote>Loop Capital分析师Ananda Baruah在周四的一份研究报告中断言，希捷科技控股公司（股票代码：STX）和西部数据（WDC）——这两家公司共同控制着全球大部分磁盘驱动器生产——的定价和利润可能会持续上涨来自Chia推动的高容量驱动器需求加速。</blockquote></p><p> If that demand is sustained, he asserts, Seagate’s annualized earnings could reach $12 a share, well above the Street’s consensus forecasts of profits of $5.52 a share for the June 2021 fiscal year, $7.48 for fiscal 2022, and $7.71 for fiscal 2023. For Western Digital, he writes, profits could reach the $10-$12-per-share range, which compares to Street estimates of $3.83 for the June 2021 fiscal year, $8.87 for fiscal 2022, and $10.54 for fiscal 2023.</p><p><blockquote>他断言，如果这种需求持续下去，希捷的年化收益可能达到每股12美元，远高于华尔街普遍预测的2021年6月财年每股利润5.52美元、2022财年每股利润7.48美元和2023财年每股利润7.71美元。他写道，对于西部数据来说，每股利润可能达到10-12美元，而华尔街预计2021年6月财年为3.83美元，2022财年为8.87美元，2023财年为10.54美元。</blockquote></p><p> While the impact on drive pricing from Chia farming has largely been at the retail level and through distributors, Baruah sees the trend overflowing to contract pricing if the Chia trend is sustained, with higher prices possible for drives sold to both cloud-computing companies and major data-storage systems companies like Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE),Dell Technologies‘ (DELL) EMC unit, and&nbsp;NetApp(NTAP).</p><p><blockquote>虽然Chia farming对驱动器定价的影响主要是在零售层面和通过分销商，但Baruah认为，如果Chia趋势持续下去，这种趋势将蔓延到合同定价，销售给云计算公司和主要数据的驱动器价格可能会更高-慧与(HPE)、戴尔科技(DELL)EMC部门和NetApp(NTAP)等存储系统公司。</blockquote></p><p> He contends that both Seagate and Western Digital have begun holding conversations on shifting average selling prices higher. And he adds that “if all of this holds, gross margin expansion could have a long way to go.”</p><p><blockquote>他认为，希捷和西部数据已经开始就提高平均售价进行对话。他补充道，“如果所有这些都成立，毛利率扩张可能还有很长的路要走。”</blockquote></p><p> With distributor inventories depleted, Baruah adds, the hard-drive suppliers are “in prime position” heading into the calendar second half to see elevated pricing. He notes that the last time there was an event-driven price reset in the drive market was 10 years ago, when severe flooding in Thailand knocked out a substantial portion of drive manufacturing capacity. This time, he says, there is less excess capacity in the system, with limited suppliers of both recording heads and magnetic media constraining the ability to satisfy demand.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah补充说，随着分销商库存的耗尽，硬盘供应商在进入下半年时“处于有利地位”，可以看到价格上涨。他指出，驱动器市场上上一次出现事件驱动的价格重置是在10年前，当时泰国的严重洪水摧毁了很大一部分驱动器制造能力。他说，这一次，系统中的过剩容量减少了，记录头和磁介质的供应商有限，限制了满足需求的能力。</blockquote></p><p> Baruah maintains his Buy ratings on both Seagate and Western Digital. He has price targets of $100 on Seagate and $90 on Western. Both stocks are lower in recent trading, with Seagate off 4.2%, at $88.82, and Western Digital down 3.4%, at $70.77. The&nbsp;S&amp;P 500&nbsp;index is down 0.04%.</p><p><blockquote>Baruah维持对希捷和西部数据的买入评级。他对希捷的目标价为100美元，对西部航空的目标价为90美元。两只股票在近期交易中均走低，希捷下跌4.2%，至88.82美元，西部数据下跌3.4%，至70.77美元。标准普尔500指数下跌0.04%。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/crypto-mining-could-give-huge-boost-to-seagate-and-western-digital-stock-51623944488?mod=hp_DAY_7\">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":{"STX":"希捷科技","WDC":"西部数据"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/crypto-mining-could-give-huge-boost-to-seagate-and-western-digital-stock-51623944488?mod=hp_DAY_7","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1112448941","content_text":"Disk-drive demand continues to be warped by the rapid adoption of Chia, a cryptocurrency that relies on large capacity drives to “farm” new coins.\n, Chia uses a different model than other cryptocurrencies to create new coins. Most cryptocurrencies rely on a “proof of work” model to verify transactions: Miners solve complex mathematical problems that require lots of computational power to earn coins, which explains why traditional mining is so energy-intensive.\nChia’s approach, by contrast, is tied to storage capacity committed to being used on the blockchain, rather than computational might. And that is warping demand for high-capacity drives.\nIn a research note on Thursday, Loop Capital analyst Ananda Baruah asserts that both SeagateTechnology Holdings (ticker: STX) and Western Digital(WDC)—which together control most of the world’s disk-drive production—could see a sustained boost to both pricing and profits from the Chia-driven acceleration in demand for high-capacity drives.\nIf that demand is sustained, he asserts, Seagate’s annualized earnings could reach $12 a share, well above the Street’s consensus forecasts of profits of $5.52 a share for the June 2021 fiscal year, $7.48 for fiscal 2022, and $7.71 for fiscal 2023. For Western Digital, he writes, profits could reach the $10-$12-per-share range, which compares to Street estimates of $3.83 for the June 2021 fiscal year, $8.87 for fiscal 2022, and $10.54 for fiscal 2023.\nWhile the impact on drive pricing from Chia farming has largely been at the retail level and through distributors, Baruah sees the trend overflowing to contract pricing if the Chia trend is sustained, with higher prices possible for drives sold to both cloud-computing companies and major data-storage systems companies like Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE),Dell Technologies‘ (DELL) EMC unit, and NetApp(NTAP).\nHe contends that both Seagate and Western Digital have begun holding conversations on shifting average selling prices higher. And he adds that “if all of this holds, gross margin expansion could have a long way to go.”\nWith distributor inventories depleted, Baruah adds, the hard-drive suppliers are “in prime position” heading into the calendar second half to see elevated pricing. He notes that the last time there was an event-driven price reset in the drive market was 10 years ago, when severe flooding in Thailand knocked out a substantial portion of drive manufacturing capacity. This time, he says, there is less excess capacity in the system, with limited suppliers of both recording heads and magnetic media constraining the ability to satisfy demand.\nBaruah maintains his Buy ratings on both Seagate and Western Digital. He has price targets of $100 on Seagate and $90 on Western. Both stocks are lower in recent trading, with Seagate off 4.2%, at $88.82, and Western Digital down 3.4%, at $70.77. The S&P 500 index is down 0.04%.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"STX":0.9,"WDC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1655,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186399230,"gmtCreate":1623472113820,"gmtModify":1634032672194,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cool","listText":"Cool","text":"Cool","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186399230","repostId":"1159804717","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":407,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186973730,"gmtCreate":1623471242120,"gmtModify":1634032688077,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nooooooo","listText":"Nooooooo","text":"Nooooooo","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186973730","repostId":"1196090491","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":289,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186957087,"gmtCreate":1623470745249,"gmtModify":1634032700562,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Kk","listText":"Kk","text":"Kk","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186957087","repostId":"1104635261","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1104635261","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470020,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1104635261?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:53","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1104635261","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.\n\nA multipronged bet onAMC Enter","content":"<p>  <b>Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.</b>  A multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.</p><p><blockquote><b>Mudrick Capital的亏损显示了投资模因股票的风险。</b>本月，对AMC Entertainment HoldingsINC.AMC 15.39%的多管齐下的押注在Mudrick Capital Management LP上适得其反，Mudrick Capital Management LP是最新一家成为大量日内交易者受害者的对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>知情人士称，穆德里克的旗舰基金在短短几天内损失了约10%，因为AMC股价的上涨意外引发了该基金作为复杂交易策略一部分持有的衍生品价值的变化。</blockquote></p><p> The setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.</p><p><blockquote>几个月前，一群在社交媒体上组织的交易员帮助GameStopCorp.GME5.88%和其他股票的价格在1月份飙升，远远超出了许多投资者对基本面的看法。</blockquote></p><p> The development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>这一事态发展促使许多对冲基金削减了对模因股票的投资。Mudrick Capital的损失凸显了保留对此类公司的大量投资的风险有多大，甚至会对一位与个人投资者的看涨情绪基本同步的对冲基金经理产生适得其反的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Jason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.</p><p><blockquote>该公司创始人杰森·穆德里克(Jason Mudrick)几个月来一直在交易AMC股票、期权和债券，个人投资者对这家连锁影院的热情高涨。但他也出售了看涨期权期权，这是一种衍生品合约，旨在对冲该基金在股价下跌时对AMC的敞口。知情人士称，这些衍生品合约赋予买家未来以大约40美元的价格从Mudrick购买AMC股票的权利，但当Reddit推动的购买热潮最近将AMC股票推至新纪录时，这些衍生品合约就变成了负债。</blockquote></p><p> As part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.</p><p><blockquote>作为更广泛的AMC战略的一部分，Mudrick Capital的高管正在与AMC就购买该公司的额外股票进行谈判。6月1日，AMC披露，Mudrick Capital已同意以每股27.12美元的价格直接从该公司购买2.305亿美元的新股，高于当时的交易价格。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克立即出售了该股票并获利，彭博新闻报道了这一快速抛售，并在社交媒体上引发了强烈反对。</blockquote></p><p> “Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.</p><p><blockquote>6月1日，Reddit华尔街博彩论坛上的一篇帖子写道：“穆德里克没有在背后捅AMC一刀……他们是搬起石头砸自己的脚。”当时的其他帖子称穆德里克为“失败者”、“人渣”和“一大堆没有未来的挥舞着的S-T”。论坛成员互相催促买入并持有。</blockquote></p><p> Inside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.</p><p><blockquote>随着AMC反弹势头增强，穆德里克内部的高管们越来越感到担忧。该公司的风险委员会于6月1日晚在该股收于32美元后召开会议，并决定在第二天退出所有债务和衍生品头寸。</blockquote></p><p> It was a day too late.</p><p><blockquote>晚了一天。</blockquote></p><p> AMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.</p><p><blockquote>6月2日，AMC股价在几个小时内突破40美元，触及72.62美元的盘中高点。在穆德里克资本促成的疯狂交易中，看涨期权期权价格飙升，到本周末，获胜的交易变成了失败，使该基金损失了数亿美元。Mudrick Capital出售的债务回报率约为5%，但考虑到期权交易后，该基金在AMC上的净亏损约为5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.</p><p><blockquote>其中一位知情人士表示，穆德里克的基金今年仍上涨了约12%。与此同时，年初购买AMC股票并持有的投资者已上涨约2000%。</blockquote></p><p> The impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>社交媒体推动的日内交易者的影响已成为今年市场的决定性发展，导致顶级对冲基金损失数十亿美元，引发国会听证会并受到美国证券交易委员会的审查。更多的对冲基金现在跟踪个人投资者在社交媒体上的情绪，更加关注市值较小的公司，这些公司的股价可能更容易受到个人投资者热情的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生专门从事不良债务投资，经常以高利率向陷入困境的公司提供贷款，或者在破产法庭上将其现有债务换成股权。Mudrick管理着全公司约35亿美元的投资，并通过此类交易所持有电子烟制造商NJOY Holdings Inc.和卫星通信公司GlobalStarInc.的大量非流动性股份。汇丰另类投资集团的数据显示，2018年至2020年，该旗舰基金的年回报率约为17%。</blockquote></p><p> But distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.</p><p><blockquote>但由于美联储的宽松资金甚至为陷入困境的公司提供了进入债务市场的机会，因此陷入困境的投资机会变得越来越难找到。穆德里克先生还探索了其他策略，成立了几家特殊目的收购公司，就AMC而言，最终通过大宗交易购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Mr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克最初将他的典型策略应用于AMC，以低至20美分的价格购买债券，在12月向该公司借出1亿美元，并将部分债券换成新股。在Covid-19大流行封锁期间，已经面临压力的影院上座率几乎完全消失，AMC股票交易价格低至2美元。他推断，随着越来越多的美国人接种疫苗，消费者今年将恢复对大屏幕娱乐的兴趣。</blockquote></p><p> Day traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.</p><p><blockquote>1月下旬，日内交易者首次在AMC进行了交易，在社交媒体上高呼#SaveAMC，并短暂将该股推升至20美元左右。AMC不断上涨的股票价值推高了债务价格——Mudrick Capital持有的一只债券在一周内翻了一番——很快就回报了Mudrick先生的看涨情绪。AMC利用其飙升的股价在1月底筹集了近10亿美元的新融资，使其能够避免此前预期的破产申请。</blockquote></p><p> Around that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.</p><p><blockquote>大约在那个时候，穆德里克先生出售了AMC股票的看涨期权期权，如果连锁影院确实面临问题，可以立即产生收入来抵消潜在的损失。衍生品让买家可以选择以40美元左右的价格从穆德里克资本手中购买AMC股票——当股票交易价格低于10美元时，这似乎是不太可能的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生与AMC首席执行官亚当·阿伦(Adam Aron)就提供额外资金保持联系，导致他最近购买了股票。但一位知情人士表示，作为一项保险政策，他保留了衍生品合约。</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>AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-12 11:53</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  <b>Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.</b>  A multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.</p><p><blockquote><b>Mudrick Capital的亏损显示了投资模因股票的风险。</b>本月，对AMC Entertainment HoldingsINC.AMC 15.39%的多管齐下的押注在Mudrick Capital Management LP上适得其反，Mudrick Capital Management LP是最新一家成为大量日内交易者受害者的对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>知情人士称，穆德里克的旗舰基金在短短几天内损失了约10%，因为AMC股价的上涨意外引发了该基金作为复杂交易策略一部分持有的衍生品价值的变化。</blockquote></p><p> The setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.</p><p><blockquote>几个月前，一群在社交媒体上组织的交易员帮助GameStopCorp.GME5.88%和其他股票的价格在1月份飙升，远远超出了许多投资者对基本面的看法。</blockquote></p><p> The development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>这一事态发展促使许多对冲基金削减了对模因股票的投资。Mudrick Capital的损失凸显了保留对此类公司的大量投资的风险有多大，甚至会对一位与个人投资者的看涨情绪基本同步的对冲基金经理产生适得其反的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Jason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.</p><p><blockquote>该公司创始人杰森·穆德里克(Jason Mudrick)几个月来一直在交易AMC股票、期权和债券，个人投资者对这家连锁影院的热情高涨。但他也出售了看涨期权期权，这是一种衍生品合约，旨在对冲该基金在股价下跌时对AMC的敞口。知情人士称，这些衍生品合约赋予买家未来以大约40美元的价格从Mudrick购买AMC股票的权利，但当Reddit推动的购买热潮最近将AMC股票推至新纪录时，这些衍生品合约就变成了负债。</blockquote></p><p> As part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.</p><p><blockquote>作为更广泛的AMC战略的一部分，Mudrick Capital的高管正在与AMC就购买该公司的额外股票进行谈判。6月1日，AMC披露，Mudrick Capital已同意以每股27.12美元的价格直接从该公司购买2.305亿美元的新股，高于当时的交易价格。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克立即出售了该股票并获利，彭博新闻报道了这一快速抛售，并在社交媒体上引发了强烈反对。</blockquote></p><p> “Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.</p><p><blockquote>6月1日，Reddit华尔街博彩论坛上的一篇帖子写道：“穆德里克没有在背后捅AMC一刀……他们是搬起石头砸自己的脚。”当时的其他帖子称穆德里克为“失败者”、“人渣”和“一大堆没有未来的挥舞着的S-T”。论坛成员互相催促买入并持有。</blockquote></p><p> Inside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.</p><p><blockquote>随着AMC反弹势头增强，穆德里克内部的高管们越来越感到担忧。该公司的风险委员会于6月1日晚在该股收于32美元后召开会议，并决定在第二天退出所有债务和衍生品头寸。</blockquote></p><p> It was a day too late.</p><p><blockquote>晚了一天。</blockquote></p><p> AMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.</p><p><blockquote>6月2日，AMC股价在几个小时内突破40美元，触及72.62美元的盘中高点。在穆德里克资本促成的疯狂交易中，看涨期权期权价格飙升，到本周末，获胜的交易变成了失败，使该基金损失了数亿美元。Mudrick Capital出售的债务回报率约为5%，但考虑到期权交易后，该基金在AMC上的净亏损约为5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.</p><p><blockquote>其中一位知情人士表示，穆德里克的基金今年仍上涨了约12%。与此同时，年初购买AMC股票并持有的投资者已上涨约2000%。</blockquote></p><p> The impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>社交媒体推动的日内交易者的影响已成为今年市场的决定性发展，导致顶级对冲基金损失数十亿美元，引发国会听证会并受到美国证券交易委员会的审查。更多的对冲基金现在跟踪个人投资者在社交媒体上的情绪，更加关注市值较小的公司，这些公司的股价可能更容易受到个人投资者热情的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生专门从事不良债务投资，经常以高利率向陷入困境的公司提供贷款，或者在破产法庭上将其现有债务换成股权。Mudrick管理着全公司约35亿美元的投资，并通过此类交易所持有电子烟制造商NJOY Holdings Inc.和卫星通信公司GlobalStarInc.的大量非流动性股份。汇丰另类投资集团的数据显示，2018年至2020年，该旗舰基金的年回报率约为17%。</blockquote></p><p> But distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.</p><p><blockquote>但由于美联储的宽松资金甚至为陷入困境的公司提供了进入债务市场的机会，因此陷入困境的投资机会变得越来越难找到。穆德里克先生还探索了其他策略，成立了几家特殊目的收购公司，就AMC而言，最终通过大宗交易购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Mr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克最初将他的典型策略应用于AMC，以低至20美分的价格购买债券，在12月向该公司借出1亿美元，并将部分债券换成新股。在Covid-19大流行封锁期间，已经面临压力的影院上座率几乎完全消失，AMC股票交易价格低至2美元。他推断，随着越来越多的美国人接种疫苗，消费者今年将恢复对大屏幕娱乐的兴趣。</blockquote></p><p> Day traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.</p><p><blockquote>1月下旬，日内交易者首次在AMC进行了交易，在社交媒体上高呼#SaveAMC，并短暂将该股推升至20美元左右。AMC不断上涨的股票价值推高了债务价格——Mudrick Capital持有的一只债券在一周内翻了一番——很快就回报了Mudrick先生的看涨情绪。AMC利用其飙升的股价在1月底筹集了近10亿美元的新融资，使其能够避免此前预期的破产申请。</blockquote></p><p> Around that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.</p><p><blockquote>大约在那个时候，穆德里克先生出售了AMC股票的看涨期权期权，如果连锁影院确实面临问题，可以立即产生收入来抵消潜在的损失。衍生品让买家可以选择以40美元左右的价格从穆德里克资本手中购买AMC股票——当股票交易价格低于10美元时，这似乎是不太可能的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生与AMC首席执行官亚当·阿伦(Adam Aron)就提供额外资金保持联系，导致他最近购买了股票。但一位知情人士表示，作为一项保险政策，他保留了衍生品合约。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/amc-bet-by-hedge-fund-unravels-thanks-to-meme-stock-traders-11623431320?mod=markets_lead_pos2\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/amc-bet-by-hedge-fund-unravels-thanks-to-meme-stock-traders-11623431320?mod=markets_lead_pos2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1104635261","content_text":"Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.\n\nA multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.\nMudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.\nThe setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.\nThe development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.\nJason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.\nAs part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.\nMudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.\n“Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.\nInside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.\nIt was a day too late.\nAMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.\nMr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.\nThe impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.\nMr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.\nBut distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.\nMr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.\nDay traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.\nAround that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.\nMr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":233,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186955298,"gmtCreate":1623470706514,"gmtModify":1634032702085,"author":{"id":"3581771143434296","authorId":"3581771143434296","name":"3a9ede5b","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581771143434296","authorIdStr":"3581771143434296"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186955298","repostId":"1147474880","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147474880","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470168,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1147474880?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147474880","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless ris","content":"<p>  Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.  I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</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>Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</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\">\nInvestor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-12 11:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.  I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147474880","content_text":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.\nIf you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.\nWhenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.\nYou’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.\nOf course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%areinvestors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.\nAn investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.\nThe word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.\nNevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”\nHe wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)\n“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”\nGraham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.\nIn that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”\nHowever, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”\nMost investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.\nIf you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.\nTake speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.\nI think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.\n“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”\nI hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.\nCalling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.\nIna recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”\nIn her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.\nThe currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)\nPAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.\nMs. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”\nIn Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":431,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}