Royce333的个人主页 - 老虎社区

Royce333

Royce333

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

86关注

6粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-06-25

Oh no! That’s sad

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

Nicely said

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-22

U know it when jt happens

One Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检查</blockquote>

2021-06-22

Interesting deal!

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Sick

Nomura Warns Of Market "Reversal Risk" As FedSpeak Walks Back 'Bullard Bomb'<blockquote>野村证券警告市场“逆转风险”，美联储发言收回“布拉德炸弹”</blockquote>

2021-06-21

Thing r getting harder

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-18

Interesting drug

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-17

Thanks

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-17

Send help

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-16

Help

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-16

Help

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-15

Damn

What to Expect in This Week’s Federal Reserve Meeting<blockquote>本周美联储会议值得期待</blockquote>

2021-06-15

Stay safe

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-11

Help thx

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-10

Like comment thx

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-09

U know what to do

S&P 500 closes little changed as "meme stocks" extend rally<blockquote>“模因股票”延续涨势，标普500收盘变化不大</blockquote>

2021-06-08

Comment like

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-07

Comment like

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-07

What about appleComment thx

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-04

Comment like

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

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3582012803278187","uuid":"3582012803278187","gmtCreate":1618920693222,"gmtModify":1619925499912,"name":"Royce333","pinyin":"royce333","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":6,"headSize":86,"tweetSize":73,"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":1,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-3","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"偶像虎友","description":"加入老虎社区1500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2026.04.22","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":122319889,"gmtCreate":1624597011741,"gmtModify":1631893548688,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Oh no! That’s sad","listText":"Oh no! That’s sad","text":"Oh no! That’s sad","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122319889","repostId":"2146023477","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2276,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121167154,"gmtCreate":1624456984378,"gmtModify":1631893548691,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Nicely said","listText":"Nicely said","text":"Nicely said","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121167154","repostId":"1145825451","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1704,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129364172,"gmtCreate":1624360289796,"gmtModify":1631893548696,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"U know it when jt happens","listText":"U know it when jt happens","text":"U know it when jt happens","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129364172","repostId":"1145563175","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1145563175","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624359605,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1145563175?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 19:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"One Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检查</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1145563175","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.Putting their \"facts\" into conte","content":"<p>Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.<b>Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.</b></p><p><blockquote>核实政客、头条新闻和央行行长的事实是一回事。<b>把他们的“事实”放在上下文中是另一回事。</b></blockquote></p><p> Toward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.</p><p><blockquote>为此，至关重要的是要将所谓的 “经济增长 ”、国债市场增长、股市增长、国内生产总值增长，当然还有金价增长置于更清晰的视角，尽管全球背景十分疯狂，但这些背景并没有得到明确报道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 1: The Rising Growth Headline</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 1：增长头条上升</b></blockquote></p><p> Recently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.</p><p><blockquote>最近，拜登的经济顾问贾里德-伯恩斯坦（Jared Bernstein）又一次头条新闻吹嘘说，美国的增长速度比他们的贸易伙伴快得多，这让群众平静下来。</blockquote></p><p> Fair enough.</p><p><blockquote>很公平。</blockquote></p><p> But given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…</p><p><blockquote>但鉴于美国正面临历史记录中最大的赤字……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ac5ed804cb5613af2890f604dac56be\" tg-width=\"575\" tg-height=\"405\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> …such “growth” is not surprising.</p><p><blockquote>……这样的“增长”并不奇怪。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，以极端赤字支出为幌子吹嘘经济增长，就像一个被宠坏的孩子吹嘘用父亲的信用卡秘密购买的新保时捷一样： 只有在账单到来、汽车消失之前，它才会看起来不错。</blockquote></p><p> In a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.</p><p><blockquote>在一个疯狂的金融世界里，至关重要的是要审视什么是增长，什么是价格发现的基本原则、债务水平或供求关系。</blockquote></p><p> In short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之： 由极端债务推动的 “增长 ”根本不是增长--它只是一辆买不起的跑车的表面光泽。</blockquote></p><p> And yet&nbsp;<b>the madness continues</b>…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.</p><p><blockquote>然而<b>疯狂仍在继续</b>……以美国国债市场为例。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 2: The Treasury “Market”?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 2：国债“市场”？</b></blockquote></p><p> How can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?</p><p><blockquote>自去年 2 月以来发行的 4.5 万亿美元债券中有 56% 是由美联储自己购买的，怎么会有人看涨期权美国国债市场呢？</blockquote></p><p> Sounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?</p><p><blockquote>听起来更像是内部操纵价格，而不是 “市场 ”，不是吗？</blockquote></p><p> Such context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.</p><p><blockquote>这样的背景赋予了 “喝自己的 Kool-aide ”的想法全新的含义，并应该冷静地提醒人们，国债，尤其是债券收益率，是伪装成信贷奥林匹克的僵尸。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.</p><p><blockquote>当然，美联储会假装这种 “支持 ”和他们的 “暂时性通胀 ”备忘录一样是暂时的，但大多数市场现实主义者早就明白，更多、更疯狂的债券收益率 “支持 ”是国债泡沫（和借据）像僵尸一样存活的唯一途径。</blockquote></p><p> In short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，财政部 “支持 ”、 “通融 ”或 “刺激 ”的更好措辞很简单： “生命支持”。</blockquote></p><p> With central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.</p><p><blockquote>随着美联储等央行在遥远的未来继续创造法定货币，以将其不可持续的债务货币化，我们可以有把握地预见美元将进一步走弱，金价、矿业股和科技和工业股等关键风险资产将进一步走强。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 3: Deflation is back?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景3：通货紧缩又回来了？</b></blockquote></p><p> Hardly.</p><p><blockquote>几乎不。</blockquote></p><p> Last week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.</p><p><blockquote>上周鲍威尔、费舍尔和布拉德的口诛笔伐让市场怀疑美联储是否会在遥远的未来加息。</blockquote></p><p> The very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky&nbsp;<b>rather than “transitory”</b>and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔之所以提出这个问题，是因为美联储意识到通胀将是棘手的<b>而不是“短暂的”</b>因此，他们已经在假装自己是鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> But if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.</p><p><blockquote>但是，如果美联储加息是为了平息实际通胀而不是 “暂时性 ”通胀，市场和山姆大叔就会大发脾气。故事结束。</blockquote></p><p> As I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—<b>tanking markets or surging inflation.</b>Eventually, we foresee both.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在其他地方写过的：选择你的美联储毒药--<b>市场下滑或通胀飙升。</b>最终，我们预见到了两者。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，鲍威尔充分意识到通货膨胀率会有所下降，只会走高，因此他已经在中途使用语义学改变了规则，现在他说，他们不会 “允许 ”2% 的通货膨胀率，而是满足于 2% 的 “平均 ”通货膨胀率。</blockquote></p><p> Translated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.</p><p><blockquote>翻译成诚实的英语，这只是意味着预计更多的通货膨胀即将到来。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 4: Rising Stock Markets</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 4：股市上涨</b></blockquote></p><p> Despite reaching nosebleed levels which defy&nbsp;<i>every</i>&nbsp;traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.</p><p><blockquote>尽管流鼻血的程度<i>每一</i>传统的估值上限，从开普比率和托宾比率到账面价值和自由现金流数据，头条新闻提醒我们，股票可以走得更高——而且确实可以。</blockquote></p><p> But context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.</p><p><blockquote>但背景和历史都提醒我们，泡沫越大，均值回归的下跌就越大。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1586e90684f7b8ae0525c04b1fa4bc7\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>No Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>国库中没有宝藏 = 股票中充满空气</b></blockquote></p><p> Based upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.</p><p><blockquote>基于以上客观事实，我们现在知道，出现在美国国债拍卖中的唯一主要买家是美联储本身。</blockquote></p><p> This is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.</p><p><blockquote>这是因为世界其他地区（亚洲、欧洲等）不想要它们。</blockquote></p><p> The next question is “why”?</p><p><blockquote>下一个问题是“为什么”？</blockquote></p><p> The answer is multiple yet simple.</p><p><blockquote>答案是多重而简单的。</blockquote></p><p> First, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.</p><p><blockquote>首先，尽管美国例外论是公开的神话，但其他国家的投资者实际上可以自己思考、阅读和计算，这意味着他们并不是盲目地信任美联储或其借据。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Stated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，他们并不相信最近从联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）口中涌出的 “暂时性通胀 ”或 “强势美元 ”的说法。</blockquote></p><p> Inflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.</p><p><blockquote>通货膨胀不仅在美国上升，在其他地方也在攀升--甚至在日本，尤其是在中国。这在很大程度上是因为美国通过贸易和财政赤字将其通货膨胀（和贬值的美元）输出到海外。</blockquote></p><p> Such deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the&nbsp;<i>outflow</i>&nbsp;of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.</p><p><blockquote>美国这种蓄意的通货膨胀出口让那些借钱给山姆大叔的国家（债权人）陷入了两难境地：他们要么 1) 让本国货币与美元一起升值（几乎没有乐趣），要么 2) 试图平息<i>流出</i>出口（贬值）美元，以防止本国货币进一步贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Option 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.</p><p><blockquote>当然，方案2是更好的选择，这意味着外国投资者需要购买比名誉扫地的美国国债更具吸引力的东西。</blockquote></p><p> Sadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than&nbsp;<i>bogus</i>&nbsp;US Treasuries are&nbsp;<i>bloated</i>&nbsp;U.S. stocks.</p><p><blockquote>可悲的是，讽刺的是，但事实上，唯一比<i>假的</i>美国国债是<i>臃肿的</i>美国股票。</blockquote></p><p> In short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，定价过高的美国股票仍然是美国两害相权取其轻，因此外国人购买/将股票视为比主权债券更好的对冲美元贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t believe me?</p><p><blockquote>不相信我？</blockquote></p><p> See for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:</p><p><blockquote>你自己看看——世界其他国家正在给美国股市泡沫增加大量空气：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc5b73212bd7c3126d6a130e88169139\" tg-width=\"582\" tg-height=\"407\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This is&nbsp;<i>contextually</i>&nbsp;troublesome for a number of reasons.</p><p><blockquote>这是<i>上下文</i>麻烦有很多原因。</blockquote></p><p> First, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).</p><p><blockquote>首先，这意味着美国的衰落已经从向世界其他地方抛售债券变成了向世界其他地方抛售股票（即中国……）。</blockquote></p><p> Longer term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…</p><p><blockquote>从长远来看，这仅仅意味着通过直接持股，外国人将慢慢拥有比美国更多的美国企业股份……</blockquote></p><p> As for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.</p><p><blockquote>至于曾经伟大的美国被外国买家慢慢掏空，不要责怪数据。责怪美联储和其他政策制定者（包括劳动力外包首席执行官）出卖美国，并假装债务可以通过神奇的（假）货币创造神奇地解决。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.</p><p><blockquote>当然，股票上涨超出理智、盈利和诚实的自由现金流数据的第二个讨厌的小问题是一种叫做波动性的东西——即市场晕船。</blockquote></p><p> Nothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.</p><p><blockquote>没有什么是直线的，包括美元和市场。会有波动。</blockquote></p><p> Right now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.</p><p><blockquote>目前，美元空头是四年来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c420ec0af0df42eabb7a3d248da4db10\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"507\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Yet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果美联储有机会试图缩减或加息，所有这些涌入美国股票的外币（上图）就会产生一个总是破裂的泡沫，就像前面提到的美元空头一样，受到挤压。</blockquote></p><p> That could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.</p><p><blockquote>随着外国人抛售股票以购买更多美元，这可能会导致美国股市大规模抛售。</blockquote></p><p> In short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，有很多不同的指针指向当前的股票泡沫，在未来一个月左右的时间内出现回调的可能性很大。</blockquote></p><p> The sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage)&nbsp;<i>not</i>&nbsp;making the headlines yet&nbsp;<i>now</i>&nbsp;making all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>顺便说一句，这些针中最锋利的是美国保证金债务（即杠杆）的惊人水平<i>不</i>成为头条新闻<i>现在</i>创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/021f71bd7e78a1c275a9c9d74691c525\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">As a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.</p><p><blockquote>提醒一下，每当保证金债务达到峰值（上图）时，市场很快就会暴跌，任何记得过去互联网和次级市场惨败的人都可以证明这一点。</blockquote></p><p> Just saying…</p><p><blockquote>只是说……</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 5：“飙升”GDP 增长的阴暗面</b></blockquote></p><p> The World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.</p><p><blockquote>世界银行最近成为头条新闻，预测全球GDP增长5.6%，为80年来最快。</blockquote></p><p> Good stuff, right?</p><p><blockquote>好东西，对吧？</blockquote></p><p> Well, not when placed into&nbsp;<i>context</i>…</p><p><blockquote>嗯，当放在<i>上下文</i>…</blockquote></p><p> The last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a&nbsp;<i>global world war</i>.</p><p><blockquote>我们上一次看到5.6%的全球GDP增长是在<i>全球世界大战</i>.</blockquote></p><p> Obviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.</p><p><blockquote>显然，当世界处于全球军事废墟之中时，任何形式的增长都有可能从这样一个历史（和可怕）的基线 “激增 ”。</blockquote></p><p> Coming out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…</p><p><blockquote>二战结束后，包括美国在内的每个人都负债累累。毕竟，世界大战可以做到这一点……</blockquote></p><p> As the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.</p><p><blockquote>随着胜利和拯救文明的美国从那场战争中走出来，通过印钞、抑制债券收益率和刺激GDP增长来降低高贵但极端的债务杠杆化在一定程度上是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> What followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.</p><p><blockquote>接下来的至少是一个站得住脚的40年，在此期间，美国名义GDP比美国国债收益率高出500-800个基点。</blockquote></p><p> In short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，债券持有人受到了打击，但事业、危机和击败轴心国后的重建证明了这种牺牲是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> The same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如今情况却并非如此，因为债券持有者再次陷入一种新的异常现象，即GDP将大大（类似地）超过长期债券收益率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Needless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.</p><p><blockquote>不用说，当前的政策制定者，正是那些把全球经济鸡舍扔进当前债务废墟堆的狐狸，喜欢把这归咎于COVID，而不是他们的浴室镜子。</blockquote></p><p> Ironically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the&nbsp;<i>Wehrmacht</i>, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy&nbsp;<i>today</i>&nbsp;(with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s&nbsp;<i>Blitzkrieg</i>&nbsp;or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.</p><p><blockquote>然而，具有讽刺意味的是，央行行长（相对于<i>德国国防军</i>日本帝国或意大利的墨索里尼）对全球经济造成了同样大的损害。<i>当今</i>（采取赤字政策和假装印钞机）作为德国的<i>闪电战</i>或者裕仁在 20 世纪 40 年代的万岁突袭。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?</p><p><blockquote>说到背景，我们真的可以或应该将一场全球流感（死亡人数375万）与一场全球战争（死亡人数8500万）进行比较吗？</blockquote></p><p> The policy makers would like&nbsp;<i>you</i>&nbsp;to think so.</p><p><blockquote>政策制定者希望<i>你</i>这么想。</blockquote></p><p> Folks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real&nbsp;<i>casus belli</i>&nbsp;(reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.</p><p><blockquote>像姆努钦（去年）或耶伦、鲍威尔和国际货币基金组织（今年）这样的人实际上都在试图说服自己和世界，对抗新冠病毒的战争是真实的<i>战争理由</i>（一场正当战争的理由）我们当前的债务困境——就其对金融世界的巨大影响而言，其范围与第二次世界大战相当。</blockquote></p><p> But regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.</p><p><blockquote>但是，无论任何人对科维德 “战争 ”的看法或其可疑的政策反应如何，将其经济影响与第二次世界大战相提并论都是对历史和军事隐喻的侮辱。</blockquote></p><p> The simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was&nbsp;<i>already</i>&nbsp;in a debt crisis long&nbsp;<i>before</i>&nbsp;the first Corona headline of early 2020.</p><p><blockquote>简单、客观且经过数学验证的事实是，全球经济<i>已经</i>长期陷入债务危机<i>以前</i>2020年初的第一个电晕头条。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/173b90a9931417cc655b6129fc7dc38c\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Today, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.</p><p><blockquote>如今，美国债务占国内生产总值的比重已达到自那场悲惨的第二次世界大战以来从未见过的水平，而且预计还会更高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54e71ae4475b3449c8833ca918ddbd82\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> So, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.</p><p><blockquote>因此，如果你仍然认为美联储能够而且将会像上世纪 70 年代或 80 年代那样，有意义地加息以对抗明显的通货膨胀，请再想想。</blockquote></p><p> In the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.</p><p><blockquote>在 20 世纪 70 年代和 80 年代，美国债务与国内生产总值的比率为 30%。今天是 130%。</blockquote></p><p> Given this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于这种自我造成的（而不是科维德的）现实，美联储根本无力加息。周期。句号。</blockquote></p><p> But as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.</p><p><blockquote>但正如我的同事埃贡-冯-格雷尔茨（Egon von Greyerz）提醒的那样，这绝不意味着利率不能也不会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.</p><p><blockquote>美联储（和其他央行）可能很强大，但它们不是神。简而言之，他们仅仅通过点击鼠标来 “控制 ”利率的能力是有限的。</blockquote></p><p> At some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.</p><p><blockquote>在某些时候，没有足够可信的假币来管理收益率曲线--尤其是在长期收益率曲线上。</blockquote></p><p> As more printed and&nbsp;<b>tanking currencies</b>&nbsp;try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.</p><p><blockquote>随着更多的印刷和<b>加注货币</b>试图购买更低的收益率和利率，最终整个实验失败。</blockquote></p><p> At that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.</p><p><blockquote>在那个关键时刻，利率飙升，通货膨胀抬起了丑陋的头，当世界其他地方都在盯着毫无价值的货币被滑稽的央行数字美元所取代时，央行行长们正在寻找自己以外的东西来指责。</blockquote></p><p> Wonderful…</p><p><blockquote>太棒了…</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 6: That Barbaric Relic?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景6：那个野蛮的遗迹？</b></blockquote></p><p> What the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.</p><p><blockquote>上述通货膨胀和利率背景意味着，在未来几年，通货膨胀将走高，利率将走低（被迫/控制），直到利率和通货膨胀一起飙升。</blockquote></p><p> This further means that&nbsp;<i>real</i>&nbsp;rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.</p><p><blockquote>这进一步意味着<i>真的</i>未来几年，利率（即根据通货膨胀调整的利率）可能会低至-5%至-10%。</blockquote></p><p> Such negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.</p><p><blockquote>这样的负实际利率水平很容易超过 70 年代和 80 年代的水平，这意味着黄金（和白银）都喜欢负实际利率，但在这种完全债务扭曲的背景下，黄金（和白银）别无选择，只能上涨、上涨、下跌。</blockquote></p><p> How’s that for context?</p><p><blockquote>这对上下文有什么影响？</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>One Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检查</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\">\nOne Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检查</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-22 19:00</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.<b>Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.</b></p><p><blockquote>核实政客、头条新闻和央行行长的事实是一回事。<b>把他们的“事实”放在上下文中是另一回事。</b></blockquote></p><p> Toward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.</p><p><blockquote>为此，至关重要的是要将所谓的 “经济增长 ”、国债市场增长、股市增长、国内生产总值增长，当然还有金价增长置于更清晰的视角，尽管全球背景十分疯狂，但这些背景并没有得到明确报道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 1: The Rising Growth Headline</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 1：增长头条上升</b></blockquote></p><p> Recently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.</p><p><blockquote>最近，拜登的经济顾问贾里德-伯恩斯坦（Jared Bernstein）又一次头条新闻吹嘘说，美国的增长速度比他们的贸易伙伴快得多，这让群众平静下来。</blockquote></p><p> Fair enough.</p><p><blockquote>很公平。</blockquote></p><p> But given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…</p><p><blockquote>但鉴于美国正面临历史记录中最大的赤字……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ac5ed804cb5613af2890f604dac56be\" tg-width=\"575\" tg-height=\"405\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> …such “growth” is not surprising.</p><p><blockquote>……这样的“增长”并不奇怪。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，以极端赤字支出为幌子吹嘘经济增长，就像一个被宠坏的孩子吹嘘用父亲的信用卡秘密购买的新保时捷一样： 只有在账单到来、汽车消失之前，它才会看起来不错。</blockquote></p><p> In a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.</p><p><blockquote>在一个疯狂的金融世界里，至关重要的是要审视什么是增长，什么是价格发现的基本原则、债务水平或供求关系。</blockquote></p><p> In short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之： 由极端债务推动的 “增长 ”根本不是增长--它只是一辆买不起的跑车的表面光泽。</blockquote></p><p> And yet&nbsp;<b>the madness continues</b>…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.</p><p><blockquote>然而<b>疯狂仍在继续</b>……以美国国债市场为例。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 2: The Treasury “Market”?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 2：国债“市场”？</b></blockquote></p><p> How can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?</p><p><blockquote>自去年 2 月以来发行的 4.5 万亿美元债券中有 56% 是由美联储自己购买的，怎么会有人看涨期权美国国债市场呢？</blockquote></p><p> Sounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?</p><p><blockquote>听起来更像是内部操纵价格，而不是 “市场 ”，不是吗？</blockquote></p><p> Such context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.</p><p><blockquote>这样的背景赋予了 “喝自己的 Kool-aide ”的想法全新的含义，并应该冷静地提醒人们，国债，尤其是债券收益率，是伪装成信贷奥林匹克的僵尸。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.</p><p><blockquote>当然，美联储会假装这种 “支持 ”和他们的 “暂时性通胀 ”备忘录一样是暂时的，但大多数市场现实主义者早就明白，更多、更疯狂的债券收益率 “支持 ”是国债泡沫（和借据）像僵尸一样存活的唯一途径。</blockquote></p><p> In short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，财政部 “支持 ”、 “通融 ”或 “刺激 ”的更好措辞很简单： “生命支持”。</blockquote></p><p> With central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.</p><p><blockquote>随着美联储等央行在遥远的未来继续创造法定货币，以将其不可持续的债务货币化，我们可以有把握地预见美元将进一步走弱，金价、矿业股和科技和工业股等关键风险资产将进一步走强。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 3: Deflation is back?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景3：通货紧缩又回来了？</b></blockquote></p><p> Hardly.</p><p><blockquote>几乎不。</blockquote></p><p> Last week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.</p><p><blockquote>上周鲍威尔、费舍尔和布拉德的口诛笔伐让市场怀疑美联储是否会在遥远的未来加息。</blockquote></p><p> The very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky&nbsp;<b>rather than “transitory”</b>and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔之所以提出这个问题，是因为美联储意识到通胀将是棘手的<b>而不是“短暂的”</b>因此，他们已经在假装自己是鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> But if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.</p><p><blockquote>但是，如果美联储加息是为了平息实际通胀而不是 “暂时性 ”通胀，市场和山姆大叔就会大发脾气。故事结束。</blockquote></p><p> As I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—<b>tanking markets or surging inflation.</b>Eventually, we foresee both.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在其他地方写过的：选择你的美联储毒药--<b>市场下滑或通胀飙升。</b>最终，我们预见到了两者。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，鲍威尔充分意识到通货膨胀率会有所下降，只会走高，因此他已经在中途使用语义学改变了规则，现在他说，他们不会 “允许 ”2% 的通货膨胀率，而是满足于 2% 的 “平均 ”通货膨胀率。</blockquote></p><p> Translated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.</p><p><blockquote>翻译成诚实的英语，这只是意味着预计更多的通货膨胀即将到来。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 4: Rising Stock Markets</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 4：股市上涨</b></blockquote></p><p> Despite reaching nosebleed levels which defy&nbsp;<i>every</i>&nbsp;traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.</p><p><blockquote>尽管流鼻血的程度<i>每一</i>传统的估值上限，从开普比率和托宾比率到账面价值和自由现金流数据，头条新闻提醒我们，股票可以走得更高——而且确实可以。</blockquote></p><p> But context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.</p><p><blockquote>但背景和历史都提醒我们，泡沫越大，均值回归的下跌就越大。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1586e90684f7b8ae0525c04b1fa4bc7\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>No Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>国库中没有宝藏 = 股票中充满空气</b></blockquote></p><p> Based upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.</p><p><blockquote>基于以上客观事实，我们现在知道，出现在美国国债拍卖中的唯一主要买家是美联储本身。</blockquote></p><p> This is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.</p><p><blockquote>这是因为世界其他地区（亚洲、欧洲等）不想要它们。</blockquote></p><p> The next question is “why”?</p><p><blockquote>下一个问题是“为什么”？</blockquote></p><p> The answer is multiple yet simple.</p><p><blockquote>答案是多重而简单的。</blockquote></p><p> First, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.</p><p><blockquote>首先，尽管美国例外论是公开的神话，但其他国家的投资者实际上可以自己思考、阅读和计算，这意味着他们并不是盲目地信任美联储或其借据。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Stated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，他们并不相信最近从联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）口中涌出的 “暂时性通胀 ”或 “强势美元 ”的说法。</blockquote></p><p> Inflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.</p><p><blockquote>通货膨胀不仅在美国上升，在其他地方也在攀升--甚至在日本，尤其是在中国。这在很大程度上是因为美国通过贸易和财政赤字将其通货膨胀（和贬值的美元）输出到海外。</blockquote></p><p> Such deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the&nbsp;<i>outflow</i>&nbsp;of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.</p><p><blockquote>美国这种蓄意的通货膨胀出口让那些借钱给山姆大叔的国家（债权人）陷入了两难境地：他们要么 1) 让本国货币与美元一起升值（几乎没有乐趣），要么 2) 试图平息<i>流出</i>出口（贬值）美元，以防止本国货币进一步贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Option 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.</p><p><blockquote>当然，方案2是更好的选择，这意味着外国投资者需要购买比名誉扫地的美国国债更具吸引力的东西。</blockquote></p><p> Sadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than&nbsp;<i>bogus</i>&nbsp;US Treasuries are&nbsp;<i>bloated</i>&nbsp;U.S. stocks.</p><p><blockquote>可悲的是，讽刺的是，但事实上，唯一比<i>假的</i>美国国债是<i>臃肿的</i>美国股票。</blockquote></p><p> In short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，定价过高的美国股票仍然是美国两害相权取其轻，因此外国人购买/将股票视为比主权债券更好的对冲美元贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t believe me?</p><p><blockquote>不相信我？</blockquote></p><p> See for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:</p><p><blockquote>你自己看看——世界其他国家正在给美国股市泡沫增加大量空气：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc5b73212bd7c3126d6a130e88169139\" tg-width=\"582\" tg-height=\"407\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This is&nbsp;<i>contextually</i>&nbsp;troublesome for a number of reasons.</p><p><blockquote>这是<i>上下文</i>麻烦有很多原因。</blockquote></p><p> First, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).</p><p><blockquote>首先，这意味着美国的衰落已经从向世界其他地方抛售债券变成了向世界其他地方抛售股票（即中国……）。</blockquote></p><p> Longer term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…</p><p><blockquote>从长远来看，这仅仅意味着通过直接持股，外国人将慢慢拥有比美国更多的美国企业股份……</blockquote></p><p> As for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.</p><p><blockquote>至于曾经伟大的美国被外国买家慢慢掏空，不要责怪数据。责怪美联储和其他政策制定者（包括劳动力外包首席执行官）出卖美国，并假装债务可以通过神奇的（假）货币创造神奇地解决。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.</p><p><blockquote>当然，股票上涨超出理智、盈利和诚实的自由现金流数据的第二个讨厌的小问题是一种叫做波动性的东西——即市场晕船。</blockquote></p><p> Nothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.</p><p><blockquote>没有什么是直线的，包括美元和市场。会有波动。</blockquote></p><p> Right now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.</p><p><blockquote>目前，美元空头是四年来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c420ec0af0df42eabb7a3d248da4db10\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"507\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Yet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果美联储有机会试图缩减或加息，所有这些涌入美国股票的外币（上图）就会产生一个总是破裂的泡沫，就像前面提到的美元空头一样，受到挤压。</blockquote></p><p> That could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.</p><p><blockquote>随着外国人抛售股票以购买更多美元，这可能会导致美国股市大规模抛售。</blockquote></p><p> In short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，有很多不同的指针指向当前的股票泡沫，在未来一个月左右的时间内出现回调的可能性很大。</blockquote></p><p> The sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage)&nbsp;<i>not</i>&nbsp;making the headlines yet&nbsp;<i>now</i>&nbsp;making all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>顺便说一句，这些针中最锋利的是美国保证金债务（即杠杆）的惊人水平<i>不</i>成为头条新闻<i>现在</i>创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/021f71bd7e78a1c275a9c9d74691c525\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">As a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.</p><p><blockquote>提醒一下，每当保证金债务达到峰值（上图）时，市场很快就会暴跌，任何记得过去互联网和次级市场惨败的人都可以证明这一点。</blockquote></p><p> Just saying…</p><p><blockquote>只是说……</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 5：“飙升”GDP 增长的阴暗面</b></blockquote></p><p> The World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.</p><p><blockquote>世界银行最近成为头条新闻，预测全球GDP增长5.6%，为80年来最快。</blockquote></p><p> Good stuff, right?</p><p><blockquote>好东西，对吧？</blockquote></p><p> Well, not when placed into&nbsp;<i>context</i>…</p><p><blockquote>嗯，当放在<i>上下文</i>…</blockquote></p><p> The last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a&nbsp;<i>global world war</i>.</p><p><blockquote>我们上一次看到5.6%的全球GDP增长是在<i>全球世界大战</i>.</blockquote></p><p> Obviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.</p><p><blockquote>显然，当世界处于全球军事废墟之中时，任何形式的增长都有可能从这样一个历史（和可怕）的基线 “激增 ”。</blockquote></p><p> Coming out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…</p><p><blockquote>二战结束后，包括美国在内的每个人都负债累累。毕竟，世界大战可以做到这一点……</blockquote></p><p> As the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.</p><p><blockquote>随着胜利和拯救文明的美国从那场战争中走出来，通过印钞、抑制债券收益率和刺激GDP增长来降低高贵但极端的债务杠杆化在一定程度上是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> What followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.</p><p><blockquote>接下来的至少是一个站得住脚的40年，在此期间，美国名义GDP比美国国债收益率高出500-800个基点。</blockquote></p><p> In short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，债券持有人受到了打击，但事业、危机和击败轴心国后的重建证明了这种牺牲是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> The same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如今情况却并非如此，因为债券持有者再次陷入一种新的异常现象，即GDP将大大（类似地）超过长期债券收益率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Needless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.</p><p><blockquote>不用说，当前的政策制定者，正是那些把全球经济鸡舍扔进当前债务废墟堆的狐狸，喜欢把这归咎于COVID，而不是他们的浴室镜子。</blockquote></p><p> Ironically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the&nbsp;<i>Wehrmacht</i>, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy&nbsp;<i>today</i>&nbsp;(with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s&nbsp;<i>Blitzkrieg</i>&nbsp;or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.</p><p><blockquote>然而，具有讽刺意味的是，央行行长（相对于<i>德国国防军</i>日本帝国或意大利的墨索里尼）对全球经济造成了同样大的损害。<i>当今</i>（采取赤字政策和假装印钞机）作为德国的<i>闪电战</i>或者裕仁在 20 世纪 40 年代的万岁突袭。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?</p><p><blockquote>说到背景，我们真的可以或应该将一场全球流感（死亡人数375万）与一场全球战争（死亡人数8500万）进行比较吗？</blockquote></p><p> The policy makers would like&nbsp;<i>you</i>&nbsp;to think so.</p><p><blockquote>政策制定者希望<i>你</i>这么想。</blockquote></p><p> Folks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real&nbsp;<i>casus belli</i>&nbsp;(reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.</p><p><blockquote>像姆努钦（去年）或耶伦、鲍威尔和国际货币基金组织（今年）这样的人实际上都在试图说服自己和世界，对抗新冠病毒的战争是真实的<i>战争理由</i>（一场正当战争的理由）我们当前的债务困境——就其对金融世界的巨大影响而言，其范围与第二次世界大战相当。</blockquote></p><p> But regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.</p><p><blockquote>但是，无论任何人对科维德 “战争 ”的看法或其可疑的政策反应如何，将其经济影响与第二次世界大战相提并论都是对历史和军事隐喻的侮辱。</blockquote></p><p> The simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was&nbsp;<i>already</i>&nbsp;in a debt crisis long&nbsp;<i>before</i>&nbsp;the first Corona headline of early 2020.</p><p><blockquote>简单、客观且经过数学验证的事实是，全球经济<i>已经</i>长期陷入债务危机<i>以前</i>2020年初的第一个电晕头条。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/173b90a9931417cc655b6129fc7dc38c\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Today, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.</p><p><blockquote>如今，美国债务占国内生产总值的比重已达到自那场悲惨的第二次世界大战以来从未见过的水平，而且预计还会更高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54e71ae4475b3449c8833ca918ddbd82\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> So, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.</p><p><blockquote>因此，如果你仍然认为美联储能够而且将会像上世纪 70 年代或 80 年代那样，有意义地加息以对抗明显的通货膨胀，请再想想。</blockquote></p><p> In the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.</p><p><blockquote>在 20 世纪 70 年代和 80 年代，美国债务与国内生产总值的比率为 30%。今天是 130%。</blockquote></p><p> Given this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于这种自我造成的（而不是科维德的）现实，美联储根本无力加息。周期。句号。</blockquote></p><p> But as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.</p><p><blockquote>但正如我的同事埃贡-冯-格雷尔茨（Egon von Greyerz）提醒的那样，这绝不意味着利率不能也不会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.</p><p><blockquote>美联储（和其他央行）可能很强大，但它们不是神。简而言之，他们仅仅通过点击鼠标来 “控制 ”利率的能力是有限的。</blockquote></p><p> At some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.</p><p><blockquote>在某些时候，没有足够可信的假币来管理收益率曲线--尤其是在长期收益率曲线上。</blockquote></p><p> As more printed and&nbsp;<b>tanking currencies</b>&nbsp;try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.</p><p><blockquote>随着更多的印刷和<b>加注货币</b>试图购买更低的收益率和利率，最终整个实验失败。</blockquote></p><p> At that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.</p><p><blockquote>在那个关键时刻，利率飙升，通货膨胀抬起了丑陋的头，当世界其他地方都在盯着毫无价值的货币被滑稽的央行数字美元所取代时，央行行长们正在寻找自己以外的东西来指责。</blockquote></p><p> Wonderful…</p><p><blockquote>太棒了…</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 6: That Barbaric Relic?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景6：那个野蛮的遗迹？</b></blockquote></p><p> What the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.</p><p><blockquote>上述通货膨胀和利率背景意味着，在未来几年，通货膨胀将走高，利率将走低（被迫/控制），直到利率和通货膨胀一起飙升。</blockquote></p><p> This further means that&nbsp;<i>real</i>&nbsp;rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.</p><p><blockquote>这进一步意味着<i>真的</i>未来几年，利率（即根据通货膨胀调整的利率）可能会低至-5%至-10%。</blockquote></p><p> Such negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.</p><p><blockquote>这样的负实际利率水平很容易超过 70 年代和 80 年代的水平，这意味着黄金（和白银）都喜欢负实际利率，但在这种完全债务扭曲的背景下，黄金（和白银）别无选择，只能上涨、上涨、下跌。</blockquote></p><p> How’s that for context?</p><p><blockquote>这对上下文有什么影响？</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-mad-market-six-cold-reality-checks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-mad-market-six-cold-reality-checks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1145563175","content_text":"Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.\nToward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.\nContext 1: The Rising Growth Headline\nRecently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.\nFair enough.\nBut given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…\n\n…such “growth” is not surprising.\nIn other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.\nIn a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.\nIn short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.\nAnd yet the madness continues…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.\nContext 2: The Treasury “Market”?\nHow can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?\nSounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?\nSuch context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.\nThe Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.\nIn short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”\nWith central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.\nContext 3: Deflation is back?\nHardly.\nLast week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.\nThe very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky rather than “transitory”and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.\nBut if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.\nAs I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—tanking markets or surging inflation.Eventually, we foresee both.\nMeanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.\nTranslated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.\nContext 4: Rising Stock Markets\nDespite reaching nosebleed levels which defy every traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.\nBut context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.\n\nNo Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks\nBased upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.\nThis is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.\nThe next question is “why”?\nThe answer is multiple yet simple.\nFirst, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.\nStated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.\nInflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.\nSuch deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the outflow of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.\nOption 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.\nSadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than bogus US Treasuries are bloated U.S. stocks.\nIn short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.\nDon’t believe me?\nSee for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:\nThis is contextually troublesome for a number of reasons.\nFirst, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).\nLonger term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…\nAs for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.\nOf course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.\nNothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.\nRight now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.\nYet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.\nThat could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.\nIn short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.\nThe sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage) not making the headlines yet now making all-time highs.\nAs a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.\nJust saying…\nContext 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth\nThe World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.\nGood stuff, right?\nWell, not when placed into context…\nThe last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a global world war.\nObviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.\nComing out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…\nAs the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.\nWhat followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.\nIn short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.\nThe same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.\nNeedless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.\nIronically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the Wehrmacht, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy today (with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s Blitzkrieg or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.\nWhen it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?\nThe policy makers would like you to think so.\nFolks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real casus belli (reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.\nBut regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.\nThe simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was already in a debt crisis long before the first Corona headline of early 2020.\nToday, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.\n\nSo, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.\nIn the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.\nGiven this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.\nBut as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.\nThe Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.\nAt some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.\nAs more printed and tanking currencies try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.\nAt that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.\nWonderful…\nContext 6: That Barbaric Relic?\nWhat the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.\nThis further means that real rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.\nSuch negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.\nHow’s that for context?","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3203,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129364020,"gmtCreate":1624360258560,"gmtModify":1631893548697,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Interesting deal!","listText":"Interesting deal!","text":"Interesting deal!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129364020","repostId":"1105214513","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3631,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167715079,"gmtCreate":1624284657291,"gmtModify":1631893548702,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Sick&nbsp;","listText":"Sick&nbsp;","text":"Sick","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167715079","repostId":"1133913488","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1133913488","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624283796,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1133913488?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 21:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Nomura Warns Of Market \"Reversal Risk\" As FedSpeak Walks Back 'Bullard Bomb'<blockquote>野村证券警告市场“逆转风险”，美联储发言收回“布拉德炸弹”</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1133913488","media":"zerohedge","summary":"After last week’s market fireworks on the Fed's \"hawkish surprise\" and Jim Bullard's \"you think that's hawkish, hold my beer\" moment on Friday morning, which has many market participants screaming “policy error\", Nomura's Charlie McElligott warnstraders now need to be ready for some potential “reversal of the rhetoric” this week-especially as we are looking at an astounding sixteen (!) Fed speakers on the calendar ahead......which is notable in that bothTreasury Yields and Equities are already s","content":"<p>After last week’s market fireworks on the Fed's \"hawkish surprise\" and Jim Bullard's \"you think that's hawkish, hold my beer\" moment on Friday morning, which has many market participants screaming “policy error\", Nomura's Charlie McElligott warns<b>traders now need to be ready for some potential “reversal of the rhetoric” this week</b>-<i>especially as we are looking at an astounding sixteen (!) Fed speakers on the calendar ahead...</i></p><p><blockquote>继上周市场对美联储 “鹰派惊喜 ”和吉姆-布拉德（Jim Bullard）周五上午发表的 “你认为那是鹰派，拿着我的啤酒 ”的言论之后，野村证券（Nomura）的查理-麦切利戈特（Charlie McElligott）警告说：“政策错误”。<b>交易员现在需要为本周可能出现的 “言论逆转 ”做好准备</b>-<i>尤其是当我们看到一个惊人的十六（!）美联储发言人在未来的日历上……</i></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9c98ddf2dc1b15c2d57d8c2421a348\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"235\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><i>...which is notable in that both</i><i><b>Treasury Yields and Equities are already substantially higher versus Asian reopening lows</b></i><i>...</i></p><p><blockquote><i>值得注意的是</i><i><b>美国国债收益率和股市已大幅高于亚洲重新开盘低点</b></i><i>...</i></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/51d6b2b76cf82953faef9bf5fab63418\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"312\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Which McElligott warns,<b>risks creating a counter-trend reversal which could catch many flat-footed again as tactically, any semblance of walking-back from the Fed could then elicit an optic of “Reflation,”</b>&nbsp;particularly if USD were to weaken further from here, Real Yields were to again tilt more negative and UST curves then again “bear-steepen” after their eye-water liquidations / stop-out last week—which too would then likely trigger a concurrent bounceback of the prior “Cyclical Value over Secular Growth” trend in US Equities,&nbsp;<i>after said expressions were powerfully de-grossed last week</i>&nbsp;(Nasdaq +0.4% last wk vs Russell -4.1%)</p><p><blockquote>麦克埃利戈特警告说，<b>风险可能会造成逆势逆转，这可能会让许多人再次措手不及。从战术上讲，美联储任何退缩的迹象都可能引发 “再通胀 ”的前景。</b>特别是如果美元在此基础上进一步走弱，实际收益率将再次向负倾斜，UST曲线将在上周引人注目的清算/止损之后再次 “熊市陡峭”--这也可能引发美国股市此前 “周期价值高于长期增长 ”趋势的同时反弹，<i>在上述表达式上周被强烈扣除后</i>（纳斯达克上周+0.4%，罗素-4.1%）</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Equities “Reflation” last week: Nomura 10 Yr Yield Sensitive Factor -4.6%; Cyclical Value Factor -3.5%; Growth Nowcast -3.1%; LT Momentum -3.1%; Wolfe AVID Value -2.7%; Defensive Value -2.4%</i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>上周股市“再膨胀”：野村10年期收益率敏感因子-4.6%；循环价值因子-3.5%；增长预测-3.1%；LT动量-3.1%；沃尔夫狂热价值-2.7%；防御值 -2.4%</i></li></ul></blockquote></p><p></li>  <li><i>Equities “Duration” last week: IG Credit Sensitive Factor +2.7%; HF Crowding +2.2%; Low Risk +2.0%; Size (Big-Small) +1.3%; Dividend +1.0%</i></p><p><blockquote><li><i>上周股票“持续时间”：IG信用敏感因子+2.7%；高频拥挤+2.2%；低风险+2.0%；尺寸（大-小）+1.3%；股息 +1.0%</i></li></blockquote></p><p></li> </ul> <b>This is what the unspoken “third Fed mandate” of maintaining “easy financial conditions at all costs” hath wrought</b><i>-</i>an absurd cycle where Fed policy and the US economy actually works to a point where in “old” central banking, the Fed would accordingly pivot “hawkish” and begin tightening policy; but in the “Fed Put” world order, market forces now pull-ahead the negative economic slowdown implications of said “tightening” and have “taper tantrums” creating market volatility,&nbsp;<b>ultimately forcing the Fed to walk-back hawkish tone shifts if the market.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>这就是 “不惜一切代价维持宽松金融环境 ”的不言而喻的 “美联储第三项任务 ”所造成的后果</b><i>-</i>这是一个荒谬的循环，美联储政策和美国经济实际上会发挥作用，以至于在 “旧 ”央行中，美联储会相应地转向 “鹰派 ”并开始收紧政策；但在 “美联储看跌 ”的世界秩序中，市场力量现在推动了上述 “紧缩 ”的负面经济放缓影响，并产生了 “缩减收缩发脾气 ”，造成了市场波动、<b>如果市场发生变化，最终迫使美联储收回鹰派基调。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ca8c1b6e282ef937647386ccbcdc21b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In this case,<b>the risk this week then becomes that some portion of the very active calendar of Fed speakers will now voice a “concern” that last week’s dot plot and SEP will work against their previously stated FAIT desire and impede future growth- and inflation- expectations,and could then message on just how “conditional” those forecasts are -</b><i>i.e. downplaying their forecasting ability, in an attempt to reverse some of the market’s pull-forward of “tighter financial conditions” due to perceived “hawkish pivot” from Fed which nullifies their own prior efforts to reset future inflation expectations!</i></p><p><blockquote>在这种情况下，<b>本周的风险变成了，美联储非常活跃的发言人日程表中的一部分人现在将表达一种 “担忧”，即上周的点阵图和 SEP 将违背他们之前陈述的事实愿望，阻碍未来的增长和通胀预期，然后可能会传达这些预测有多 “有条件”的信息。</b><i>即淡化他们的预测能力，试图扭转市场对 “金融环境收紧 ”的一些预期，因为美联储认为 “鹰派转向 ”会抵消他们之前重置未来通胀预期的努力!</i></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/72edd0892cdcb8696310f135ba5dec38\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">And as we have now seen countless times before, if the Fed then again “bends the knee” to market forces, the vol spike and forced deleveraging / hedging of risk-assets is then reversed with “rich vols” then sold into, which in standard lagging-fashion will mean that as trailing rVol then resets lower following the expected “Fed back-track,” a large covering of dynamic hedges (shorts) and / or mechancial re-leveraging of risk-asset exposure from “Target Volatility / Vol Control” universe will then see markets resume their rise, as vols are smashed<b><i>- “Crash-down, then crash-up” rinse / repeat.</i></b></p><p><blockquote>正如我们之前无数次看到的那样，如果美联储再次向市场力量“屈服”，那么vol飙升和对风险资产的强制去杠杆化/对冲就会逆转，“丰富的vol”随后被抛售。按照标准的滞后模式，这意味着随着rVol在预期的“美联储回调”之后重置更低，随着vol被打破，大量动态对冲（空头）和/或来自“目标波动性/vol控制”领域的风险资产敞口的机械再杠杆化将使市场恢复上涨。<b><i>- “崩溃，然后崩溃”冲洗/重复。</i></b></blockquote></p><p> To further contribute to these potential “sling-shot” (crash-down, then crash-up) optics,&nbsp;<b>we now inherently see much “cleaner” options positioning (current ES at 4167, which is the “Delta Neutral vs Spot” level) post last week’s abnormally outsized Op-Ex&nbsp;</b><b><i>(although worth-noting that we are now in “short Gamma vs spot” territory at 4167 last vs 4237 “Gamma neutral” line).</i></b></p><p><blockquote>为了进一步有助于这些潜在的“弹射”（撞击下降，然后撞击）光学器件，<b>在上周异常超额的 Op-Ex 之后，我们现在自然而然地看到了更“干净”的期权定位（当前 ES 为 4167，这是 “Delta 中性与现货”水平）。</b><b><i>(不过值得注意的是，我们现在处于 “短伽马 vs 现货 ”区域，最后 4167 对 4237 “伽马中性 ”线）。</i></b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/db8e096623b51035a7813c45b7dc2b02\" tg-width=\"996\" tg-height=\"618\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> <b>And in the case that the incremental “hawkish Fed surprise” vol spike is sold into Dealers by the VRP crowd&nbsp;</b><b><i>(particular with any semblance of “Fed walk-back” this wk),</i></b><b>&nbsp;this impulse supply of Volatility- and Gamma- will again then perpetuate a more stable, insulated market thereafter, as Dealer “long Gamma” means hedging flows will further squelch the potential for market moves</b>- hence, the virtuous cycle phase of the “vol selling” feedback loop.</p><p><blockquote><b>如果 VRP 人群将 “鹰派美联储惊喜 ”的增量飙升卖给了交易商。</b><b><i>（特别是本周任何“美联储回归”的迹象），</i></b><b>此后，这种波动性和伽马的脉冲供应将再次延续一个更加稳定、绝缘的市场，因为交易商的“长伽马”意味着对冲流量将进一步抑制市场波动的潜力</b>-因此，“销量”反馈循环的良性循环阶段。</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>Nomura Warns Of Market \"Reversal Risk\" As FedSpeak Walks Back 'Bullard Bomb'<blockquote>野村证券警告市场“逆转风险”，美联储发言收回“布拉德炸弹”</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\">\nNomura Warns Of Market \"Reversal Risk\" As FedSpeak Walks Back 'Bullard Bomb'<blockquote>野村证券警告市场“逆转风险”，美联储发言收回“布拉德炸弹”</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 21:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>After last week’s market fireworks on the Fed's \"hawkish surprise\" and Jim Bullard's \"you think that's hawkish, hold my beer\" moment on Friday morning, which has many market participants screaming “policy error\", Nomura's Charlie McElligott warns<b>traders now need to be ready for some potential “reversal of the rhetoric” this week</b>-<i>especially as we are looking at an astounding sixteen (!) Fed speakers on the calendar ahead...</i></p><p><blockquote>继上周市场对美联储 “鹰派惊喜 ”和吉姆-布拉德（Jim Bullard）周五上午发表的 “你认为那是鹰派，拿着我的啤酒 ”的言论之后，野村证券（Nomura）的查理-麦切利戈特（Charlie McElligott）警告说：“政策错误”。<b>交易员现在需要为本周可能出现的 “言论逆转 ”做好准备</b>-<i>尤其是当我们看到一个惊人的十六（!）美联储发言人在未来的日历上……</i></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9c98ddf2dc1b15c2d57d8c2421a348\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"235\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><i>...which is notable in that both</i><i><b>Treasury Yields and Equities are already substantially higher versus Asian reopening lows</b></i><i>...</i></p><p><blockquote><i>值得注意的是</i><i><b>美国国债收益率和股市已大幅高于亚洲重新开盘低点</b></i><i>...</i></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/51d6b2b76cf82953faef9bf5fab63418\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"312\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Which McElligott warns,<b>risks creating a counter-trend reversal which could catch many flat-footed again as tactically, any semblance of walking-back from the Fed could then elicit an optic of “Reflation,”</b>&nbsp;particularly if USD were to weaken further from here, Real Yields were to again tilt more negative and UST curves then again “bear-steepen” after their eye-water liquidations / stop-out last week—which too would then likely trigger a concurrent bounceback of the prior “Cyclical Value over Secular Growth” trend in US Equities,&nbsp;<i>after said expressions were powerfully de-grossed last week</i>&nbsp;(Nasdaq +0.4% last wk vs Russell -4.1%)</p><p><blockquote>麦克埃利戈特警告说，<b>风险可能会造成逆势逆转，这可能会让许多人再次措手不及。从战术上讲，美联储任何退缩的迹象都可能引发 “再通胀 ”的前景。</b>特别是如果美元在此基础上进一步走弱，实际收益率将再次向负倾斜，UST曲线将在上周引人注目的清算/止损之后再次 “熊市陡峭”--这也可能引发美国股市此前 “周期价值高于长期增长 ”趋势的同时反弹，<i>在上述表达式上周被强烈扣除后</i>（纳斯达克上周+0.4%，罗素-4.1%）</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Equities “Reflation” last week: Nomura 10 Yr Yield Sensitive Factor -4.6%; Cyclical Value Factor -3.5%; Growth Nowcast -3.1%; LT Momentum -3.1%; Wolfe AVID Value -2.7%; Defensive Value -2.4%</i></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>上周股市“再膨胀”：野村10年期收益率敏感因子-4.6%；循环价值因子-3.5%；增长预测-3.1%；LT动量-3.1%；沃尔夫狂热价值-2.7%；防御值 -2.4%</i></li></ul></blockquote></p><p></li>  <li><i>Equities “Duration” last week: IG Credit Sensitive Factor +2.7%; HF Crowding +2.2%; Low Risk +2.0%; Size (Big-Small) +1.3%; Dividend +1.0%</i></p><p><blockquote><li><i>上周股票“持续时间”：IG信用敏感因子+2.7%；高频拥挤+2.2%；低风险+2.0%；尺寸（大-小）+1.3%；股息 +1.0%</i></li></blockquote></p><p></li> </ul> <b>This is what the unspoken “third Fed mandate” of maintaining “easy financial conditions at all costs” hath wrought</b><i>-</i>an absurd cycle where Fed policy and the US economy actually works to a point where in “old” central banking, the Fed would accordingly pivot “hawkish” and begin tightening policy; but in the “Fed Put” world order, market forces now pull-ahead the negative economic slowdown implications of said “tightening” and have “taper tantrums” creating market volatility,&nbsp;<b>ultimately forcing the Fed to walk-back hawkish tone shifts if the market.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>这就是 “不惜一切代价维持宽松金融环境 ”的不言而喻的 “美联储第三项任务 ”所造成的后果</b><i>-</i>这是一个荒谬的循环，美联储政策和美国经济实际上会发挥作用，以至于在 “旧 ”央行中，美联储会相应地转向 “鹰派 ”并开始收紧政策；但在 “美联储看跌 ”的世界秩序中，市场力量现在推动了上述 “紧缩 ”的负面经济放缓影响，并产生了 “缩减收缩发脾气 ”，造成了市场波动、<b>如果市场发生变化，最终迫使美联储收回鹰派基调。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ca8c1b6e282ef937647386ccbcdc21b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In this case,<b>the risk this week then becomes that some portion of the very active calendar of Fed speakers will now voice a “concern” that last week’s dot plot and SEP will work against their previously stated FAIT desire and impede future growth- and inflation- expectations,and could then message on just how “conditional” those forecasts are -</b><i>i.e. downplaying their forecasting ability, in an attempt to reverse some of the market’s pull-forward of “tighter financial conditions” due to perceived “hawkish pivot” from Fed which nullifies their own prior efforts to reset future inflation expectations!</i></p><p><blockquote>在这种情况下，<b>本周的风险变成了，美联储非常活跃的发言人日程表中的一部分人现在将表达一种 “担忧”，即上周的点阵图和 SEP 将违背他们之前陈述的事实愿望，阻碍未来的增长和通胀预期，然后可能会传达这些预测有多 “有条件”的信息。</b><i>即淡化他们的预测能力，试图扭转市场对 “金融环境收紧 ”的一些预期，因为美联储认为 “鹰派转向 ”会抵消他们之前重置未来通胀预期的努力!</i></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/72edd0892cdcb8696310f135ba5dec38\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">And as we have now seen countless times before, if the Fed then again “bends the knee” to market forces, the vol spike and forced deleveraging / hedging of risk-assets is then reversed with “rich vols” then sold into, which in standard lagging-fashion will mean that as trailing rVol then resets lower following the expected “Fed back-track,” a large covering of dynamic hedges (shorts) and / or mechancial re-leveraging of risk-asset exposure from “Target Volatility / Vol Control” universe will then see markets resume their rise, as vols are smashed<b><i>- “Crash-down, then crash-up” rinse / repeat.</i></b></p><p><blockquote>正如我们之前无数次看到的那样，如果美联储再次向市场力量“屈服”，那么vol飙升和对风险资产的强制去杠杆化/对冲就会逆转，“丰富的vol”随后被抛售。按照标准的滞后模式，这意味着随着rVol在预期的“美联储回调”之后重置更低，随着vol被打破，大量动态对冲（空头）和/或来自“目标波动性/vol控制”领域的风险资产敞口的机械再杠杆化将使市场恢复上涨。<b><i>- “崩溃，然后崩溃”冲洗/重复。</i></b></blockquote></p><p> To further contribute to these potential “sling-shot” (crash-down, then crash-up) optics,&nbsp;<b>we now inherently see much “cleaner” options positioning (current ES at 4167, which is the “Delta Neutral vs Spot” level) post last week’s abnormally outsized Op-Ex&nbsp;</b><b><i>(although worth-noting that we are now in “short Gamma vs spot” territory at 4167 last vs 4237 “Gamma neutral” line).</i></b></p><p><blockquote>为了进一步有助于这些潜在的“弹射”（撞击下降，然后撞击）光学器件，<b>在上周异常超额的 Op-Ex 之后，我们现在自然而然地看到了更“干净”的期权定位（当前 ES 为 4167，这是 “Delta 中性与现货”水平）。</b><b><i>(不过值得注意的是，我们现在处于 “短伽马 vs 现货 ”区域，最后 4167 对 4237 “伽马中性 ”线）。</i></b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/db8e096623b51035a7813c45b7dc2b02\" tg-width=\"996\" tg-height=\"618\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> <b>And in the case that the incremental “hawkish Fed surprise” vol spike is sold into Dealers by the VRP crowd&nbsp;</b><b><i>(particular with any semblance of “Fed walk-back” this wk),</i></b><b>&nbsp;this impulse supply of Volatility- and Gamma- will again then perpetuate a more stable, insulated market thereafter, as Dealer “long Gamma” means hedging flows will further squelch the potential for market moves</b>- hence, the virtuous cycle phase of the “vol selling” feedback loop.</p><p><blockquote><b>如果 VRP 人群将 “鹰派美联储惊喜 ”的增量飙升卖给了交易商。</b><b><i>（特别是本周任何“美联储回归”的迹象），</i></b><b>此后，这种波动性和伽马的脉冲供应将再次延续一个更加稳定、绝缘的市场，因为交易商的“长伽马”意味着对冲流量将进一步抑制市场波动的潜力</b>-因此，“销量”反馈循环的良性循环阶段。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/nomura-warns-market-reversal-risk-fedspeak-walks-back-bulard-bomb?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/nomura-warns-market-reversal-risk-fedspeak-walks-back-bulard-bomb?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1133913488","content_text":"After last week’s market fireworks on the Fed's \"hawkish surprise\" and Jim Bullard's \"you think that's hawkish, hold my beer\" moment on Friday morning, which has many market participants screaming “policy error\", Nomura's Charlie McElligott warnstraders now need to be ready for some potential “reversal of the rhetoric” this week-especially as we are looking at an astounding sixteen (!) Fed speakers on the calendar ahead...\n...which is notable in that bothTreasury Yields and Equities are already substantially higher versus Asian reopening lows...\nWhich McElligott warns,risks creating a counter-trend reversal which could catch many flat-footed again as tactically, any semblance of walking-back from the Fed could then elicit an optic of “Reflation,” particularly if USD were to weaken further from here, Real Yields were to again tilt more negative and UST curves then again “bear-steepen” after their eye-water liquidations / stop-out last week—which too would then likely trigger a concurrent bounceback of the prior “Cyclical Value over Secular Growth” trend in US Equities, after said expressions were powerfully de-grossed last week (Nasdaq +0.4% last wk vs Russell -4.1%)\n\nEquities “Reflation” last week: Nomura 10 Yr Yield Sensitive Factor -4.6%; Cyclical Value Factor -3.5%; Growth Nowcast -3.1%; LT Momentum -3.1%; Wolfe AVID Value -2.7%; Defensive Value -2.4%\nEquities “Duration” last week: IG Credit Sensitive Factor +2.7%; HF Crowding +2.2%; Low Risk +2.0%; Size (Big-Small) +1.3%; Dividend +1.0%\n\nThis is what the unspoken “third Fed mandate” of maintaining “easy financial conditions at all costs” hath wrought-an absurd cycle where Fed policy and the US economy actually works to a point where in “old” central banking, the Fed would accordingly pivot “hawkish” and begin tightening policy; but in the “Fed Put” world order, market forces now pull-ahead the negative economic slowdown implications of said “tightening” and have “taper tantrums” creating market volatility, ultimately forcing the Fed to walk-back hawkish tone shifts if the market.\nIn this case,the risk this week then becomes that some portion of the very active calendar of Fed speakers will now voice a “concern” that last week’s dot plot and SEP will work against their previously stated FAIT desire and impede future growth- and inflation- expectations,and could then message on just how “conditional” those forecasts are -i.e. downplaying their forecasting ability, in an attempt to reverse some of the market’s pull-forward of “tighter financial conditions” due to perceived “hawkish pivot” from Fed which nullifies their own prior efforts to reset future inflation expectations!\nAnd as we have now seen countless times before, if the Fed then again “bends the knee” to market forces, the vol spike and forced deleveraging / hedging of risk-assets is then reversed with “rich vols” then sold into, which in standard lagging-fashion will mean that as trailing rVol then resets lower following the expected “Fed back-track,” a large covering of dynamic hedges (shorts) and / or mechancial re-leveraging of risk-asset exposure from “Target Volatility / Vol Control” universe will then see markets resume their rise, as vols are smashed- “Crash-down, then crash-up” rinse / repeat.\nTo further contribute to these potential “sling-shot” (crash-down, then crash-up) optics, we now inherently see much “cleaner” options positioning (current ES at 4167, which is the “Delta Neutral vs Spot” level) post last week’s abnormally outsized Op-Ex (although worth-noting that we are now in “short Gamma vs spot” territory at 4167 last vs 4237 “Gamma neutral” line).\n\nAnd in the case that the incremental “hawkish Fed surprise” vol spike is sold into Dealers by the VRP crowd (particular with any semblance of “Fed walk-back” this wk), this impulse supply of Volatility- and Gamma- will again then perpetuate a more stable, insulated market thereafter, as Dealer “long Gamma” means hedging flows will further squelch the potential for market moves- hence, the virtuous cycle phase of the “vol selling” feedback loop.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3493,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167716844,"gmtCreate":1624284606688,"gmtModify":1631893548702,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Thing r getting harder","listText":"Thing r getting harder","text":"Thing r getting harder","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167716844","repostId":"1154249454","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2123,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166536624,"gmtCreate":1624016664168,"gmtModify":1631893548707,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Interesting drug","listText":"Interesting drug","text":"Interesting drug","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166536624","repostId":"1133025835","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1799,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":161237469,"gmtCreate":1623928109951,"gmtModify":1631893548710,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Thanks","listText":"Thanks","text":"Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/161237469","repostId":"1167971135","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3101,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":161237275,"gmtCreate":1623928100297,"gmtModify":1631893548717,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Send help","listText":"Send help","text":"Send help","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/161237275","repostId":"2144674345","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3375,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":163970987,"gmtCreate":1623858468849,"gmtModify":1631893548716,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Help","listText":"Help","text":"Help","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/163970987","repostId":"2143978737","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2229,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":163947428,"gmtCreate":1623858455764,"gmtModify":1634026928263,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Help","listText":"Help","text":"Help","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/163947428","repostId":"2143797877","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":830,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":187336960,"gmtCreate":1623739700650,"gmtModify":1634029292639,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Damn","listText":"Damn","text":"Damn","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/187336960","repostId":"1138219989","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1138219989","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623650085,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1138219989?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-14 13:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"What to Expect in This Week’s Federal Reserve Meeting<blockquote>本周美联储会议值得期待</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138219989","media":"Barrons","summary":"As the Federal Open Market Committee holds its regular policy meeting this coming week, once again a","content":"<p>As the Federal Open Market Committee holds its regular policy meeting this coming week, once again analysts and investors should flip the Nixon-era cliché and watch what they say, not what they do. What everybody wants to know is whether the panel finally has gotten around to talking about talking about moving away from its ubereasy monetary policy.</p><p><blockquote>随着联邦公开市场委员会下周召开定期政策会议，分析师和投资者应该再次颠覆尼克松时代的陈词滥调，关注他们所说的，而不是他们所做的。每个人都想知道的是，该小组是否最终开始谈论放弃其超级宽松的货币政策。</blockquote></p><p> We all know that the FOMC won’t take any substantive steps in terms of its massive securities purchases, which are still running at $120 billion a month. As for its key federal-funds rate target, that’s stuck at 0% to 0.25% (although there’s an outside chance of technical tweaking of some other Fed-administered rates to address the billions in excess cash sloshing around in the money markets).</p><p><blockquote>我们都知道，联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）不会在其大规模证券购买方面采取任何实质性措施，而这些证券购买仍在以每月1200亿美元的速度进行。至于其主要的联邦基金利率目标，则停留在 0% 至 0.25%（尽管美联储管理的其他一些利率有可能进行技术性调整，以解决货币市场上数十亿美元的过剩现金问题）。</blockquote></p><p> We’ll be looking for what’s in the FOMC’s formal policy statement and the panel’s updated Summary of Economic Projections, which will include the amalgam of the committee members’ guesses on key economic gauges, such as gross domestic product, inflation, and unemployment. Most likely, when that is posted&nbsp;on the Fed’s website&nbsp;at 2 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on Wednesday, most folks will probably head straight for the FOMC’s guesses on the fed-funds rate, and specifically when liftoff from near-zero is finally expected.</p><p><blockquote>我们将关注联邦公开市场委员会的正式政策声明和该小组最新的经济预测摘要，其中将包括委员会成员对国内生产总值、通货膨胀和失业率等关键经济指标的猜测。最有可能的是，当美联储网站于美国东部时间周三下午 2 点公布这一消息时，大多数人可能会直奔联邦公开市场委员会对联邦基金利率的猜测，特别是何时最终有望从接近于零的水平回升。</blockquote></p><p> The “dot plot”—or graph of the FOMC members’ consensus guesses—puts the first hike all the way out past 2023. That seems a very long-term forecast, and as John Maynard Keynes famously pointed out, in the long run we’re all dead. Some Fed watchers, such as J.P. Morgan’s chief U.S. economist, Michael Feroli, look for the dots to show a 2023 liftoff.</p><p><blockquote>“点阵图”--或联邦公开市场委员会成员一致猜测的图表--将首次加息一直推迟到 2023 年之后。这似乎是一个非常长期的预测，正如约翰-梅纳德-凯恩斯（John Maynard Keynes）的名言，从长远来看，我们都死了。摩根大通（J.P. Morgan）首席美国经济学家迈克尔-费罗利（Michael Feroli）等一些美联储观察家认为，美联储将在2023年有所回升。</blockquote></p><p> The markets, however, already had been pricing in one or more fed-funds rate hikes by 2023. But concurrent with the previously discussed slide in longer-term bond yields, the interest-rate futures markets have effectively priced out one of those short-term rate increases. In addition, the derivatives market now sees the fed-funds rate peaking under 2%, some 0.4 of a percentage point lower than what it had priced in earlier this year, according to analysts for&nbsp;Natixis.</p><p><blockquote>然而，市场已经预计到 2023 年联邦基金将加息一次或多次。但在之前讨论的长期债券收益率下滑的同时，利率期货市场实际上已经将其中一次短期加息定价。此外，据 Natixis 分析师称，衍生品市场目前联邦基金利率峰值低于 2%，比今年早些时候的定价低约 0.4 个百分点。</blockquote></p><p> Long before making any rate hikes, the Fed will begin to lessen its accommodation by slowing its current pace of securities purchases, which consist of $80 billion of Treasuries and $40 billion of agency mortgage-backed securities every month. The trillions that the Federal Reserve and other central banks have created have gone a long way to boost the values of assets, which rose by $5 trillion, to $136.9 trillion, in the first quarter, according to new Fed data released this past week. That includes a $3.2 trillion rise in the value of equities owned by households and a $968 billion rise in their real estate holdings.</p><p><blockquote>早在加息之前，美联储就会开始通过放缓目前的证券购买步伐来减少宽松，其中包括每月 800 亿美元的国债和 400 亿美元的机构抵押贷款支持证券。根据美联储上周发布的新数据，美联储和其他央行创造的数万亿美元对第一季度资产价值的提升大有帮助，资产价值增加了5万亿美元，达到136.9万亿美元。其中包括家庭持有的股票价值增加 3.2 万亿美元，家庭持有的房地产增加 9,680 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The key criterion for reduced Fed accommodation is whether the monetary authorities see “substantial further progress” toward reaching what they deem as maximum employment, probably a deliberately ambiguous standard.</p><p><blockquote>美联储减少宽松政策的关键标准是货币当局是否认为在实现他们认为的最大就业方面取得了 “实质性的进一步进展”，这可能是一个故意模糊的标准。</blockquote></p><p> But the increase in payrolls appears to be constrained as much by the supply of labor as businesses’ desire to hire. The latest Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or Jolts, showed&nbsp;a record 9.3 million unfilled openings&nbsp;in April. In addition, 384,000 people left their positions that month, bringing the total of voluntary job quitters to a record four million.</p><p><blockquote>但就业人数的增长似乎既受到劳动力供应的制约，也受到企业招聘意愿的制约。最新的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查（Jolts）显示，4月份有创纪录的930万个职位空缺。此外，当月有384,000人离职，使自愿离职的总人数达到创纪录的400万。</blockquote></p><p> Anecdotal evidence, including some in the Fed’s beige book summary of economic conditions prepared for the coming meeting, suggests that employers aren’t finding enough workers because of generous unemployment compensation. Unusual for a social science such as economics, there will be a real-time experiment to test this hypothesis as 25 states end the extra $300 weekly payment early.</p><p><blockquote>一些轶事证据，包括美联储为即将召开的会议准备的褐皮书《经济状况摘要》中的一些轶事证据，表明由于丰厚的失业救济金，雇主找不到足够的工人。对于经济学等社会科学来说，这是不寻常的，随着 25 个州提前结束每周额外 300 美元的付款，将会有一个实时实验来检验这一假设。</blockquote></p><p> Jefferies economists Aneta Markowska and Thomas Simons write in a research note that these 25 states account for about a quarter of all the unemployed workers. Ending their extra jobless benefits could boost employment by roughly two million in the next few months, they estimate. Another growth spurt should follow in September and October after the extra unemployment insurance expires in the remaining states; schools reopen—providing free daycare for some would-be workers, especially women; and many office employees return to their desks, they add.</p><p><blockquote>杰富瑞经济学家Aneta Markowska和Thomas Simons在一份研究报告中写道，这25个州约占所有失业工人的四分之一。他们估计，结束额外的失业救济金可能会在未来几个月内增加大约200万人的就业机会。在其余州的额外失业保险到期后，9月和10月应该会出现另一次增长激增；学校重新开放——为一些未来的工人，尤其是妇女提供免费日托；他们补充说，许多上班族回到了办公桌前。</blockquote></p><p> At that point, the Fed might start talking about actually reducing its massive securities purchases. Given the “taper tantrum” thrown by the markets when the central bank slowed its bond buying in 2013, this Fed will want to disclose how, when, and how fast it plans to slow its pour into the punch bowl. That’s what we’ll be listening for this week.</p><p><blockquote>到那时，美联储可能会开始谈论实际减少其大规模证券购买。鉴于美联储在 2013 年放缓债券购买速度时市场掀起了 “缩减债券狂潮”，本届美联储将希望披露其计划如何、何时以及以多快的速度放缓向潘趣酒碗中注入债券。这就是我们本周将收听的内容。</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>What to Expect in This Week’s Federal Reserve Meeting<blockquote>本周美联储会议值得期待</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\">\nWhat to Expect in This Week’s Federal Reserve Meeting<blockquote>本周美联储会议值得期待</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-14 13:54</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>As the Federal Open Market Committee holds its regular policy meeting this coming week, once again analysts and investors should flip the Nixon-era cliché and watch what they say, not what they do. What everybody wants to know is whether the panel finally has gotten around to talking about talking about moving away from its ubereasy monetary policy.</p><p><blockquote>随着联邦公开市场委员会下周召开定期政策会议，分析师和投资者应该再次颠覆尼克松时代的陈词滥调，关注他们所说的，而不是他们所做的。每个人都想知道的是，该小组是否最终开始谈论放弃其超级宽松的货币政策。</blockquote></p><p> We all know that the FOMC won’t take any substantive steps in terms of its massive securities purchases, which are still running at $120 billion a month. As for its key federal-funds rate target, that’s stuck at 0% to 0.25% (although there’s an outside chance of technical tweaking of some other Fed-administered rates to address the billions in excess cash sloshing around in the money markets).</p><p><blockquote>我们都知道，联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）不会在其大规模证券购买方面采取任何实质性措施，而这些证券购买仍在以每月1200亿美元的速度进行。至于其主要的联邦基金利率目标，则停留在 0% 至 0.25%（尽管美联储管理的其他一些利率有可能进行技术性调整，以解决货币市场上数十亿美元的过剩现金问题）。</blockquote></p><p> We’ll be looking for what’s in the FOMC’s formal policy statement and the panel’s updated Summary of Economic Projections, which will include the amalgam of the committee members’ guesses on key economic gauges, such as gross domestic product, inflation, and unemployment. Most likely, when that is posted&nbsp;on the Fed’s website&nbsp;at 2 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on Wednesday, most folks will probably head straight for the FOMC’s guesses on the fed-funds rate, and specifically when liftoff from near-zero is finally expected.</p><p><blockquote>我们将关注联邦公开市场委员会的正式政策声明和该小组最新的经济预测摘要，其中将包括委员会成员对国内生产总值、通货膨胀和失业率等关键经济指标的猜测。最有可能的是，当美联储网站于美国东部时间周三下午 2 点公布这一消息时，大多数人可能会直奔联邦公开市场委员会对联邦基金利率的猜测，特别是何时最终有望从接近于零的水平回升。</blockquote></p><p> The “dot plot”—or graph of the FOMC members’ consensus guesses—puts the first hike all the way out past 2023. That seems a very long-term forecast, and as John Maynard Keynes famously pointed out, in the long run we’re all dead. Some Fed watchers, such as J.P. Morgan’s chief U.S. economist, Michael Feroli, look for the dots to show a 2023 liftoff.</p><p><blockquote>“点阵图”--或联邦公开市场委员会成员一致猜测的图表--将首次加息一直推迟到 2023 年之后。这似乎是一个非常长期的预测，正如约翰-梅纳德-凯恩斯（John Maynard Keynes）的名言，从长远来看，我们都死了。摩根大通（J.P. Morgan）首席美国经济学家迈克尔-费罗利（Michael Feroli）等一些美联储观察家认为，美联储将在2023年有所回升。</blockquote></p><p> The markets, however, already had been pricing in one or more fed-funds rate hikes by 2023. But concurrent with the previously discussed slide in longer-term bond yields, the interest-rate futures markets have effectively priced out one of those short-term rate increases. In addition, the derivatives market now sees the fed-funds rate peaking under 2%, some 0.4 of a percentage point lower than what it had priced in earlier this year, according to analysts for&nbsp;Natixis.</p><p><blockquote>然而，市场已经预计到 2023 年联邦基金将加息一次或多次。但在之前讨论的长期债券收益率下滑的同时，利率期货市场实际上已经将其中一次短期加息定价。此外，据 Natixis 分析师称，衍生品市场目前联邦基金利率峰值低于 2%，比今年早些时候的定价低约 0.4 个百分点。</blockquote></p><p> Long before making any rate hikes, the Fed will begin to lessen its accommodation by slowing its current pace of securities purchases, which consist of $80 billion of Treasuries and $40 billion of agency mortgage-backed securities every month. The trillions that the Federal Reserve and other central banks have created have gone a long way to boost the values of assets, which rose by $5 trillion, to $136.9 trillion, in the first quarter, according to new Fed data released this past week. That includes a $3.2 trillion rise in the value of equities owned by households and a $968 billion rise in their real estate holdings.</p><p><blockquote>早在加息之前，美联储就会开始通过放缓目前的证券购买步伐来减少宽松，其中包括每月 800 亿美元的国债和 400 亿美元的机构抵押贷款支持证券。根据美联储上周发布的新数据，美联储和其他央行创造的数万亿美元对第一季度资产价值的提升大有帮助，资产价值增加了5万亿美元，达到136.9万亿美元。其中包括家庭持有的股票价值增加 3.2 万亿美元，家庭持有的房地产增加 9,680 亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> The key criterion for reduced Fed accommodation is whether the monetary authorities see “substantial further progress” toward reaching what they deem as maximum employment, probably a deliberately ambiguous standard.</p><p><blockquote>美联储减少宽松政策的关键标准是货币当局是否认为在实现他们认为的最大就业方面取得了 “实质性的进一步进展”，这可能是一个故意模糊的标准。</blockquote></p><p> But the increase in payrolls appears to be constrained as much by the supply of labor as businesses’ desire to hire. The latest Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or Jolts, showed&nbsp;a record 9.3 million unfilled openings&nbsp;in April. In addition, 384,000 people left their positions that month, bringing the total of voluntary job quitters to a record four million.</p><p><blockquote>但就业人数的增长似乎既受到劳动力供应的制约，也受到企业招聘意愿的制约。最新的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查（Jolts）显示，4月份有创纪录的930万个职位空缺。此外，当月有384,000人离职，使自愿离职的总人数达到创纪录的400万。</blockquote></p><p> Anecdotal evidence, including some in the Fed’s beige book summary of economic conditions prepared for the coming meeting, suggests that employers aren’t finding enough workers because of generous unemployment compensation. Unusual for a social science such as economics, there will be a real-time experiment to test this hypothesis as 25 states end the extra $300 weekly payment early.</p><p><blockquote>一些轶事证据，包括美联储为即将召开的会议准备的褐皮书《经济状况摘要》中的一些轶事证据，表明由于丰厚的失业救济金，雇主找不到足够的工人。对于经济学等社会科学来说，这是不寻常的，随着 25 个州提前结束每周额外 300 美元的付款，将会有一个实时实验来检验这一假设。</blockquote></p><p> Jefferies economists Aneta Markowska and Thomas Simons write in a research note that these 25 states account for about a quarter of all the unemployed workers. Ending their extra jobless benefits could boost employment by roughly two million in the next few months, they estimate. Another growth spurt should follow in September and October after the extra unemployment insurance expires in the remaining states; schools reopen—providing free daycare for some would-be workers, especially women; and many office employees return to their desks, they add.</p><p><blockquote>杰富瑞经济学家Aneta Markowska和Thomas Simons在一份研究报告中写道，这25个州约占所有失业工人的四分之一。他们估计，结束额外的失业救济金可能会在未来几个月内增加大约200万人的就业机会。在其余州的额外失业保险到期后，9月和10月应该会出现另一次增长激增；学校重新开放——为一些未来的工人，尤其是妇女提供免费日托；他们补充说，许多上班族回到了办公桌前。</blockquote></p><p> At that point, the Fed might start talking about actually reducing its massive securities purchases. Given the “taper tantrum” thrown by the markets when the central bank slowed its bond buying in 2013, this Fed will want to disclose how, when, and how fast it plans to slow its pour into the punch bowl. That’s what we’ll be listening for this week.</p><p><blockquote>到那时，美联储可能会开始谈论实际减少其大规模证券购买。鉴于美联储在 2013 年放缓债券购买速度时市场掀起了 “缩减债券狂潮”，本届美联储将希望披露其计划如何、何时以及以多快的速度放缓向潘趣酒碗中注入债券。这就是我们本周将收听的内容。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/what-to-expect-in-next-weeks-federal-reserve-meeting-51623457837?mod=RTA\">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":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/what-to-expect-in-next-weeks-federal-reserve-meeting-51623457837?mod=RTA","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138219989","content_text":"As the Federal Open Market Committee holds its regular policy meeting this coming week, once again analysts and investors should flip the Nixon-era cliché and watch what they say, not what they do. What everybody wants to know is whether the panel finally has gotten around to talking about talking about moving away from its ubereasy monetary policy.\nWe all know that the FOMC won’t take any substantive steps in terms of its massive securities purchases, which are still running at $120 billion a month. As for its key federal-funds rate target, that’s stuck at 0% to 0.25% (although there’s an outside chance of technical tweaking of some other Fed-administered rates to address the billions in excess cash sloshing around in the money markets).\nWe’ll be looking for what’s in the FOMC’s formal policy statement and the panel’s updated Summary of Economic Projections, which will include the amalgam of the committee members’ guesses on key economic gauges, such as gross domestic product, inflation, and unemployment. Most likely, when that is posted on the Fed’s website at 2 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on Wednesday, most folks will probably head straight for the FOMC’s guesses on the fed-funds rate, and specifically when liftoff from near-zero is finally expected.\nThe “dot plot”—or graph of the FOMC members’ consensus guesses—puts the first hike all the way out past 2023. That seems a very long-term forecast, and as John Maynard Keynes famously pointed out, in the long run we’re all dead. Some Fed watchers, such as J.P. Morgan’s chief U.S. economist, Michael Feroli, look for the dots to show a 2023 liftoff.\nThe markets, however, already had been pricing in one or more fed-funds rate hikes by 2023. But concurrent with the previously discussed slide in longer-term bond yields, the interest-rate futures markets have effectively priced out one of those short-term rate increases. In addition, the derivatives market now sees the fed-funds rate peaking under 2%, some 0.4 of a percentage point lower than what it had priced in earlier this year, according to analysts for Natixis.\nLong before making any rate hikes, the Fed will begin to lessen its accommodation by slowing its current pace of securities purchases, which consist of $80 billion of Treasuries and $40 billion of agency mortgage-backed securities every month. The trillions that the Federal Reserve and other central banks have created have gone a long way to boost the values of assets, which rose by $5 trillion, to $136.9 trillion, in the first quarter, according to new Fed data released this past week. That includes a $3.2 trillion rise in the value of equities owned by households and a $968 billion rise in their real estate holdings.\nThe key criterion for reduced Fed accommodation is whether the monetary authorities see “substantial further progress” toward reaching what they deem as maximum employment, probably a deliberately ambiguous standard.\nBut the increase in payrolls appears to be constrained as much by the supply of labor as businesses’ desire to hire. The latest Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or Jolts, showed a record 9.3 million unfilled openings in April. In addition, 384,000 people left their positions that month, bringing the total of voluntary job quitters to a record four million.\nAnecdotal evidence, including some in the Fed’s beige book summary of economic conditions prepared for the coming meeting, suggests that employers aren’t finding enough workers because of generous unemployment compensation. Unusual for a social science such as economics, there will be a real-time experiment to test this hypothesis as 25 states end the extra $300 weekly payment early.\nJefferies economists Aneta Markowska and Thomas Simons write in a research note that these 25 states account for about a quarter of all the unemployed workers. Ending their extra jobless benefits could boost employment by roughly two million in the next few months, they estimate. Another growth spurt should follow in September and October after the extra unemployment insurance expires in the remaining states; schools reopen—providing free daycare for some would-be workers, especially women; and many office employees return to their desks, they add.\nAt that point, the Fed might start talking about actually reducing its massive securities purchases. Given the “taper tantrum” thrown by the markets when the central bank slowed its bond buying in 2013, this Fed will want to disclose how, when, and how fast it plans to slow its pour into the punch bowl. That’s what we’ll be listening for this week.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":715,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":187338522,"gmtCreate":1623739681566,"gmtModify":1634029292884,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Stay safe","listText":"Stay safe","text":"Stay safe","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/187338522","repostId":"2143178756","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":702,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":188985604,"gmtCreate":1623419468408,"gmtModify":1634033452859,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Help thx","listText":"Help thx","text":"Help thx","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/188985604","repostId":"2142022769","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":725,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":183436771,"gmtCreate":1623339944493,"gmtModify":1634034372034,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Like comment thx","listText":"Like comment thx","text":"Like comment thx","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/183436771","repostId":"1107871315","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":621,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":180502954,"gmtCreate":1623210006378,"gmtModify":1634035763847,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"U know what to do","listText":"U know what to do","text":"U know what to do","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/180502954","repostId":"1128909306","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1128909306","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623193560,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1128909306?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-09 07:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"S&P 500 closes little changed as \"meme stocks\" extend rally<blockquote>“模因股票”延续涨势，标普500收盘变化不大</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1128909306","media":"reuters","summary":"NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of c","content":"<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of clear market catalysts kept institutional investors on the sidelines, while retail traders fueled the ongoing meme stocks rally.</p><p><blockquote>纽约（路透社） - 华尔街股市周二难以维持收盘涨幅，因为缺乏明确的市场催化剂使机构投资者观望，而散户交易员则推动了模因股的持续上涨。</blockquote></p><p>All three major U.S. stock indexes ended the range-bound session near flat or higher, with the S&amp;P 500 and the Dow closing within about 0.5% of record highs.</p><p><blockquote>美国三大股指均以接近持平或更高的区间收盘，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数收盘较历史高点约0.5%。</blockquote></p><p>The tech-laded Nasdaq Composite fared best, with Amazon.com Inc and Apple Inc providing the biggest boost.</p><p><blockquote>科技含量最高的纳斯达克综合指数表现最好，亚马逊和苹果提供了最大的提振。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re waiting for inflation numbers, waiting for more from the (Federal Reserve), waiting for earnings season,” said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Asset Management in Chicago. “There’s not a lot motivating the market today.”</p><p><blockquote>“芝加哥 Kingsview Asset Management 投资组合经理保罗-诺尔特（Paul Nolte）说：”我们在等待通胀数据，等待（美联储）的更多数据，等待财报季。“目前市场没有太多动力”。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re in this twilight zone until probably right after the Fourth of July, when we see earnings season kick in,” Nolte added.</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特补充说：”我们将处于这种阴暗地带，直到国庆节刚过，我们才会看到财报季的到来。</blockquote></p><p>The CBOE volatility index, a measure of investor anxiety, touched its lowest level in over a year.</p><p><blockquote>衡量投资者焦虑程度的芝加哥期权交易所波动率指数触及一年多来的最低水平。</blockquote></p><p>Smallcaps, once again buoyed by the ongoing meme stock retail frenzy, were outperforming their larger counterparts.</p><p><blockquote>小盘股再次受到持续的模因股票零售狂潮的提振，其表现优于大型同行。</blockquote></p><p>Clover Health Investments seized top billing among meme stocks, surging 85.8%, the biggest percentage winner in the Nasdaq.</p><p><blockquote>Clover Health Investments 在 meme 股票中名列前茅，飙升 85.8%，是纳斯达克最大的百分比赢家。</blockquote></p><p>Other stocks whose recent explosive trading volumes have been attributed to social media buzz, including GameStop Corp, Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc, Workhorse Group and others, ended the session between 7% and 12% higher.</p><p><blockquote>其他近期交易量爆炸性的股票，包括游戏驿站公司、Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc、Workhorse Group 等，收盘上涨 7% 至 12%。</blockquote></p><p>“(Meme stocks) are where the action is, but you flip it over and look crypto and that’s a mess,” Nolte said. “Now the meme stocks are taking over from crypto as the place to be and it’s all a consequence of very easy monetary policy.”</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特说：”（备忘录股票）是活跃的地方，但你把它翻过来，看看加密货币，那就一团糟了。“现在，迷因股正在取代加密货币成为主流，这一切都是非常宽松的货币政策的结果。”</blockquote></p><p>Reports from the U.S. Labor Department and National Federation of Independent Business appeared to confirm a labor shortage even as demand roars back to life, which could put upward pressure on wages, a precursor to wider inflation.</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部和全国独立企业联合会的报告似乎证实了劳动力短缺，尽管需求正在复苏，这可能会给工资带来上行压力，这是更广泛通胀的前兆。</blockquote></p><p>Market participants look to Thursday’s consumer price index data for further clues regarding inflation, and how it could influence the Federal Reserve’s timetable for tightening its monetary policy.</p><p><blockquote>市场参与者期待着周四的消费者价格指数数据，以获取有关通胀的进一步线索，以及它将如何影响美联储收紧货币政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 30.42 points, or 0.09%, to 34,599.82; the S&amp;P 500 gained 0.74 points, or 0.02%, at 4,227.26; and the Nasdaq Composite added 43.19 points, or 0.31%, at 13,924.91.</p><p><blockquote>道琼斯工业平均指数下跌30.42点，跌幅0.09%，报34,599.82点；标普500上涨 0.74 点，或 0.02%，至 4,227.26 点；纳斯达克综合指数上涨 43.19 点，即 0.31%，至 13,924.91 点。</blockquote></p><p>Of the 11 major sectors in the S&amp;P 500, consumer discretionary enjoyed the biggest percentage gain, and utilities suffered the largest loss.</p><p><blockquote>在标普500的11个主要行业中，非必需消费品的百分比涨幅最大，公用事业的跌幅最大。</blockquote></p><p>Sales of Tesla Inc’s China-made electric cars jumped in May by 29%, marking a 177% year-on-year increase, according to the China Passenger Car Association. The stock erased initial gains on the news to close down 0.3%.</p><p><blockquote>根据中国乘用车联会的数据，特斯拉公司5月份中国产电动汽车的销量猛增29%，同比增长177%。消息传出后，该股抹去了最初的涨幅，收盘下跌 0.3%。</blockquote></p><p>Boeing Co shares were boosted by Southwest Airlines’ announcement that it had ordered 34 new 737 MAX aircraft, but the planemaker’s shares pared gains to end the session flat.</p><p><blockquote>西南航空公司宣布订购了 34 架新的 737 MAX 飞机，提振了波音公司的股价，但该飞机制造商的股价收盘持平。</blockquote></p><p>GameStop, the company most closely associated with the Reddit-driven short squeeze phenomenon, is expected to report quarterly results after markets close on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>游戏驿站是与 Reddit 驱动的空头挤压现象关系密切的公司，预计将在周三收盘后公布季度业绩。</blockquote></p><p>Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.74-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.66-to-1 ratio favored advancers.</p><p><blockquote>纽约证券交易所上涨股票的数量比下跌股票的数量多 1.74 比 1；在纳斯达克，1.66比1的比率有利于进步人士。</blockquote></p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 54 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 172 new highs and 16 new lows.</p><p><blockquote>标普500创下54个52周新高和一个新低；纳斯达克综合指数创下172个新高和16个新低。</blockquote></p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.82 billion shares, compared with the 10.75 billion average over the last 20 trading days.</p><p><blockquote>美国交易所的成交量为 118.2 亿股，而过去 20 个交易日的平均成交量为 107.5 亿股。</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>S&P 500 closes little changed as \"meme stocks\" extend rally<blockquote>“模因股票”延续涨势，标普500收盘变化不大</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\">\nS&P 500 closes little changed as \"meme stocks\" extend rally<blockquote>“模因股票”延续涨势，标普500收盘变化不大</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">reuters</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-09 07:06</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of clear market catalysts kept institutional investors on the sidelines, while retail traders fueled the ongoing meme stocks rally.</p><p><blockquote>纽约（路透社） - 华尔街股市周二难以维持收盘涨幅，因为缺乏明确的市场催化剂使机构投资者观望，而散户交易员则推动了模因股的持续上涨。</blockquote></p><p>All three major U.S. stock indexes ended the range-bound session near flat or higher, with the S&amp;P 500 and the Dow closing within about 0.5% of record highs.</p><p><blockquote>美国三大股指均以接近持平或更高的区间收盘，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数收盘较历史高点约0.5%。</blockquote></p><p>The tech-laded Nasdaq Composite fared best, with Amazon.com Inc and Apple Inc providing the biggest boost.</p><p><blockquote>科技含量最高的纳斯达克综合指数表现最好，亚马逊和苹果提供了最大的提振。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re waiting for inflation numbers, waiting for more from the (Federal Reserve), waiting for earnings season,” said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Asset Management in Chicago. “There’s not a lot motivating the market today.”</p><p><blockquote>“芝加哥 Kingsview Asset Management 投资组合经理保罗-诺尔特（Paul Nolte）说：”我们在等待通胀数据，等待（美联储）的更多数据，等待财报季。“目前市场没有太多动力”。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re in this twilight zone until probably right after the Fourth of July, when we see earnings season kick in,” Nolte added.</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特补充说：”我们将处于这种阴暗地带，直到国庆节刚过，我们才会看到财报季的到来。</blockquote></p><p>The CBOE volatility index, a measure of investor anxiety, touched its lowest level in over a year.</p><p><blockquote>衡量投资者焦虑程度的芝加哥期权交易所波动率指数触及一年多来的最低水平。</blockquote></p><p>Smallcaps, once again buoyed by the ongoing meme stock retail frenzy, were outperforming their larger counterparts.</p><p><blockquote>小盘股再次受到持续的模因股票零售狂潮的提振，其表现优于大型同行。</blockquote></p><p>Clover Health Investments seized top billing among meme stocks, surging 85.8%, the biggest percentage winner in the Nasdaq.</p><p><blockquote>Clover Health Investments 在 meme 股票中名列前茅，飙升 85.8%，是纳斯达克最大的百分比赢家。</blockquote></p><p>Other stocks whose recent explosive trading volumes have been attributed to social media buzz, including GameStop Corp, Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc, Workhorse Group and others, ended the session between 7% and 12% higher.</p><p><blockquote>其他近期交易量爆炸性的股票，包括游戏驿站公司、Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc、Workhorse Group 等，收盘上涨 7% 至 12%。</blockquote></p><p>“(Meme stocks) are where the action is, but you flip it over and look crypto and that’s a mess,” Nolte said. “Now the meme stocks are taking over from crypto as the place to be and it’s all a consequence of very easy monetary policy.”</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特说：”（备忘录股票）是活跃的地方，但你把它翻过来，看看加密货币，那就一团糟了。“现在，迷因股正在取代加密货币成为主流，这一切都是非常宽松的货币政策的结果。”</blockquote></p><p>Reports from the U.S. Labor Department and National Federation of Independent Business appeared to confirm a labor shortage even as demand roars back to life, which could put upward pressure on wages, a precursor to wider inflation.</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部和全国独立企业联合会的报告似乎证实了劳动力短缺，尽管需求正在复苏，这可能会给工资带来上行压力，这是更广泛通胀的前兆。</blockquote></p><p>Market participants look to Thursday’s consumer price index data for further clues regarding inflation, and how it could influence the Federal Reserve’s timetable for tightening its monetary policy.</p><p><blockquote>市场参与者期待着周四的消费者价格指数数据，以获取有关通胀的进一步线索，以及它将如何影响美联储收紧货币政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 30.42 points, or 0.09%, to 34,599.82; the S&amp;P 500 gained 0.74 points, or 0.02%, at 4,227.26; and the Nasdaq Composite added 43.19 points, or 0.31%, at 13,924.91.</p><p><blockquote>道琼斯工业平均指数下跌30.42点，跌幅0.09%，报34,599.82点；标普500上涨 0.74 点，或 0.02%，至 4,227.26 点；纳斯达克综合指数上涨 43.19 点，即 0.31%，至 13,924.91 点。</blockquote></p><p>Of the 11 major sectors in the S&amp;P 500, consumer discretionary enjoyed the biggest percentage gain, and utilities suffered the largest loss.</p><p><blockquote>在标普500的11个主要行业中，非必需消费品的百分比涨幅最大，公用事业的跌幅最大。</blockquote></p><p>Sales of Tesla Inc’s China-made electric cars jumped in May by 29%, marking a 177% year-on-year increase, according to the China Passenger Car Association. The stock erased initial gains on the news to close down 0.3%.</p><p><blockquote>根据中国乘用车联会的数据，特斯拉公司5月份中国产电动汽车的销量猛增29%，同比增长177%。消息传出后，该股抹去了最初的涨幅，收盘下跌 0.3%。</blockquote></p><p>Boeing Co shares were boosted by Southwest Airlines’ announcement that it had ordered 34 new 737 MAX aircraft, but the planemaker’s shares pared gains to end the session flat.</p><p><blockquote>西南航空公司宣布订购了 34 架新的 737 MAX 飞机，提振了波音公司的股价，但该飞机制造商的股价收盘持平。</blockquote></p><p>GameStop, the company most closely associated with the Reddit-driven short squeeze phenomenon, is expected to report quarterly results after markets close on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>游戏驿站是与 Reddit 驱动的空头挤压现象关系密切的公司，预计将在周三收盘后公布季度业绩。</blockquote></p><p>Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.74-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.66-to-1 ratio favored advancers.</p><p><blockquote>纽约证券交易所上涨股票的数量比下跌股票的数量多 1.74 比 1；在纳斯达克，1.66比1的比率有利于进步人士。</blockquote></p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 54 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 172 new highs and 16 new lows.</p><p><blockquote>标普500创下54个52周新高和一个新低；纳斯达克综合指数创下172个新高和16个新低。</blockquote></p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.82 billion shares, compared with the 10.75 billion average over the last 20 trading days.</p><p><blockquote>美国交易所的成交量为 118.2 亿股，而过去 20 个交易日的平均成交量为 107.5 亿股。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-stocks/us-stocks-sp-500-closes-little-changed-as-meme-stocks-extend-rally-idUSL2N2NQ2NX\">reuters</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","CLOV":"Clover Health Corp",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-stocks/us-stocks-sp-500-closes-little-changed-as-meme-stocks-extend-rally-idUSL2N2NQ2NX","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1128909306","content_text":"NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of clear market catalysts kept institutional investors on the sidelines, while retail traders fueled the ongoing meme stocks rally.All three major U.S. stock indexes ended the range-bound session near flat or higher, with the S&P 500 and the Dow closing within about 0.5% of record highs.The tech-laded Nasdaq Composite fared best, with Amazon.com Inc and Apple Inc providing the biggest boost.“We’re waiting for inflation numbers, waiting for more from the (Federal Reserve), waiting for earnings season,” said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Asset Management in Chicago. “There’s not a lot motivating the market today.”“We’re in this twilight zone until probably right after the Fourth of July, when we see earnings season kick in,” Nolte added.The CBOE volatility index, a measure of investor anxiety, touched its lowest level in over a year.Smallcaps, once again buoyed by the ongoing meme stock retail frenzy, were outperforming their larger counterparts.Clover Health Investments seized top billing among meme stocks, surging 85.8%, the biggest percentage winner in the Nasdaq.Other stocks whose recent explosive trading volumes have been attributed to social media buzz, including GameStop Corp, Bed Bath & Beyond Inc, Workhorse Group and others, ended the session between 7% and 12% higher.“(Meme stocks) are where the action is, but you flip it over and look crypto and that’s a mess,” Nolte said. “Now the meme stocks are taking over from crypto as the place to be and it’s all a consequence of very easy monetary policy.”Reports from the U.S. Labor Department and National Federation of Independent Business appeared to confirm a labor shortage even as demand roars back to life, which could put upward pressure on wages, a precursor to wider inflation.Market participants look to Thursday’s consumer price index data for further clues regarding inflation, and how it could influence the Federal Reserve’s timetable for tightening its monetary policy.The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 30.42 points, or 0.09%, to 34,599.82; the S&P 500 gained 0.74 points, or 0.02%, at 4,227.26; and the Nasdaq Composite added 43.19 points, or 0.31%, at 13,924.91.Of the 11 major sectors in the S&P 500, consumer discretionary enjoyed the biggest percentage gain, and utilities suffered the largest loss.Sales of Tesla Inc’s China-made electric cars jumped in May by 29%, marking a 177% year-on-year increase, according to the China Passenger Car Association. The stock erased initial gains on the news to close down 0.3%.Boeing Co shares were boosted by Southwest Airlines’ announcement that it had ordered 34 new 737 MAX aircraft, but the planemaker’s shares pared gains to end the session flat.GameStop, the company most closely associated with the Reddit-driven short squeeze phenomenon, is expected to report quarterly results after markets close on Wednesday.Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.74-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.66-to-1 ratio favored advancers.The S&P 500 posted 54 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 172 new highs and 16 new lows.Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.82 billion shares, compared with the 10.75 billion average over the last 20 trading days.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"CLOV":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":522,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":117781218,"gmtCreate":1623160830234,"gmtModify":1634036300973,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comment like&nbsp;","listText":"Comment like&nbsp;","text":"Comment like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/117781218","repostId":"1154765176","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":743,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":114862750,"gmtCreate":1623066679870,"gmtModify":1634037346708,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comment like&nbsp;","listText":"Comment like&nbsp;","text":"Comment like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/114862750","repostId":"1184606456","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":860,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":114862286,"gmtCreate":1623066650245,"gmtModify":1634037346949,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"What about appleComment thx","listText":"What about appleComment thx","text":"What about appleComment thx","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/114862286","repostId":"2141286115","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":805,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":116257286,"gmtCreate":1622807024445,"gmtModify":1634097837792,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comment like","listText":"Comment like","text":"Comment like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/116257286","repostId":"1122373606","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1122373606","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1622793373,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1122373606?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-04 15:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？需要考虑什么</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1122373606","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nApple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.</li>  <li>Apple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.</li>  <li>Shares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f2ea192ed76d9772c2c6a820098faf5\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Photo by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果在过去十年中是一项伟大的投资，但未来十年可能会大不相同。</li><li>苹果在过去十年中增长放缓，未来几年也不太可能成为增长怪物。</li><li>股票具有充足的长期上涨空间，但投资者在做出决定之前应考虑当前的估值。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>摄影：Paopano/iStock 社论来自 Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.</p><p><blockquote>苹果 (AAPL) 是过去十年中最好的投资之一。然而，在接下来的十年里，它的增长可能不会一样。然而，由于大规模的股东回报计划和向服务业的转变，十年后苹果的股价可能仍会大幅上涨——尽管目前的估值相当高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:</p><p><blockquote>在过去十年中，苹果公司一直是一项伟大的投资：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5d29aa34bdbc5bab7d0730a4095954e6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据由YCharts提供</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.</p><p><blockquote>在这十年中，扣除股息前的股票回报率为 900%，年复合回报率约为 26%，轻松超过了该时期大盘的回报率。重要的是，股价的涨幅远远超过了公司的市值，而公司的市值在过去十年中仅增长了 550%。这种差异可以用该公司的大规模股票回购计划来解释，该计划在过去十年中大幅降低了股票数量。当然，过去十年对苹果来说是一个非常成功的商业时期，因为该公司受益于智能手机的崛起，同时在手表和平板电脑等新产品方面也取得了成功，苹果或多或少地将其作为一个新的产品类别推出。目前，股价为 125 美元，比过去 12 个月上涨了 57%，但 2021 年迄今下跌了 6%。继2020年强劲上涨之后，股价目前似乎处于盘整模式，这并不奇怪，因为苹果的估值在最近的过去扩大了很多，而且该公司的业务增长似乎必须赶上最近的股价上涨。目前一致的目标价为 156 美元，这意味着上涨潜力为 25%。由于目前没有迹象表明股票会离开当前的交易区间，我个人认为苹果短期内不会突破150美元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股票10年后会在哪里</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.</p><p><blockquote>当然，2031年苹果的股价是无法精确预测的。历史一次又一次地表明，甚至不可能在更短的时间内准确预测股价。然而，可以制定情景，看看在特定条件下未来股价可能会处于什么位置，以了解对未来的合理预期。</blockquote></p><p> To craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.</p><p><blockquote>为了制定这样一个场景，我们必须考虑苹果的业务增长、苹果的股东回报计划以及股票未来可能交易的估值倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's business growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的业务增长</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去经历了几年的强劲增长和几年的疲软增长。这主要可以用新产品推出等因素来解释。手表或iPad，以及各自当前iPhone型号的实力，这些型号的需求因年份而异。其他因素，如经济增长或贸易问题，也起着一定的作用。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5b8bd8ef6cdaa13850c1380e870554c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据由YCharts提供</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Overall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，过去十年收入增长了 154%，但正如我们在上图中看到的，收入增长相对不均衡。在2010年代初，苹果在iPhone“胜利之路”的支持下实现了巨大的增长，而在接下来的几年里，收入增长放缓得多。甚至有一些年份收入同比下降，例如2016年。过去十年的平均年收入增长率为10%，但当我们考虑到2011年和2012年非常强劲的增长推动了这一增长时，假设苹果未来每年也将增长10%可能不太合理。投资者还应该考虑到，公司规模越大，保持高增长率就越困难。然而，这并不意味着苹果的收入增长将放缓至零。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> On the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in&nbsp;high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.</p><p><blockquote>在苹果产品价格上涨以及在中国等高增长国家市场份额增长潜力的背景下，越来越多的人将能够购买苹果价格更高的产品，似乎有理由假设苹果将至少从其核心业务中产生一些增长。再加上服务领域的增长——人们越来越多地使用手机，这应该会导致应用程序支出增加——并考虑新产品发布的潜力（尽管我认为没有一款产品会像 iPhone 那样大规模），苹果应该能够以坚实的速度发展其业务。我个人认为，未来几年5%-7%的收入增长率可能是一个现实的估计，尽管一些读者当然会有不同的看法。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's shareholder returns</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股东回报</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.</p><p><blockquote>如上所示，苹果过去曾大幅降低其股票数量，我相信，有理由假设未来也会发生同样的情况。过去十年，苹果回购了 36% 的股份。如果未来十年发生同样的情况，每股剩余股份在公司价值中所占份额将增长 56%，即年化增长 4.6%。不过，由于苹果目前的估值明显高于其历史估值，回购在未来的影响可能会较小。例如，苹果去年仅将其股票数量减少了 2.6%。</blockquote></p><p> This is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么我相信未来十年股份数量不会再下降36%。当我们将其向下调整至 25% 时，当我们查看每股指标时，这将为苹果的增长带来约 3% 的年度推动力，而每股指标是苹果股价增长的决定性因素。结合我 5%-7% 的业务增长预期，我因此假设苹果从长远来看每股将增长 8%-10%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's future valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果未来估值</b></blockquote></p><p> AAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:</p><p><blockquote>AAPL 过去的估值范围非常广泛，其股票交易倍数在某些时候非常低，而投资者则愿意在其他时候支付更高的价格：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be5cb8bbc04ff0e0a13ee64f6f2bd90a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"470\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据由YCharts提供</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.</p><p><blockquote>五年前，可以以非常低的 10 倍净利润购买股票，这自然是进入或扩大头寸的好时机。然而，到 2020 年底，股价交易价格高达公司净利润的 40 倍，这似乎是一个相当高的估值。目前，AAPL 的历史市盈率为 28 倍，远期利润约为 24 倍。在上图中，我们还看到了过去 3 年、5 年、7 年和 10 年的中位数收益倍数。很明显，苹果的估值多年来一直在扩大，这就是为什么在较短的“回顾”期间，中值更高。我不相信 AAPL 的交易价格会达到过去十年平均净利润的 15.5 倍，因为对于苹果这样一家拥有强大品牌、庞大规模、巨大利润和堡垒资产负债表的优质公司来说，这似乎是一个相当低的估值。另一方面，我也不相信苹果会永远以 24-28 倍的市盈率进行交易——对于一家以中个位数实现稳健但并不引人注目的业务增长的公司来说，这似乎相当昂贵。当我们考虑到十年后利率可能会更高时，情况尤其如此，这应该会给所有股票的估值带来压力，而其他条件相同。因此，我认为 2031 年净利润 20 倍左右的估值可能是一个合理的估计，这或多或少与 3 年市盈率中位数一致。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Is AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AAPL 现在是买入还是卖出</b></blockquote></p><p> Starting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>从 2021 年每股收益估计值 5.15 美元开始计算，并假设到 2031 年每年增长 7%-10%，我们的每股收益范围为 10.10 美元至 13.40 美元。将 20 倍市盈率放在该市盈率上，目标价约为每股 200-270 美元。因此，在 235 美元左右的中点，股价将比当前水平上涨约 90%，即年化上涨约 6.5%。这当然不是一个糟糕的回报，当我们加上股息时，我们将获得大约7%的年化回报率。另一方面，我相信这也不是一个惊人的大回报。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，AAPL 在未来十年具有巨大的上涨潜力，但这并不令人意外——许多公司将在这么长的时间内实现显着增长。我个人对7%的预期长期回报不太兴奋。当我们考虑到如果苹果估值下降（例如由于利率上升），未来1-3年内股价确实存在相当大的下行风险时，暂时保持观望可能是更好的选择。长期投资者在当前水平购买股票时可能不会表现不佳，但也可能不会表现得很好。目前，我将苹果评级为持有，如果其估值接近长期平均水平，则可能会买入。那些对新产品发布更乐观的人可能不同意，更喜欢在这里购买，但事实证明，等待更好的机会是这里的最佳选择。</blockquote></p><p> Summing it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.</p><p><blockquote>总而言之，我想说股票在未来十年确实具有巨大的上涨潜力，但上涨潜力还不足以让我以当前较高的估值购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？需要考虑什么</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhere Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years? What To Consider<blockquote>10年后苹果股票会在哪里？需要考虑什么</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-04 15:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.</li>  <li>Apple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.</li>  <li>Shares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f2ea192ed76d9772c2c6a820098faf5\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Photo by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果在过去十年中是一项伟大的投资，但未来十年可能会大不相同。</li><li>苹果在过去十年中增长放缓，未来几年也不太可能成为增长怪物。</li><li>股票具有充足的长期上涨空间，但投资者在做出决定之前应考虑当前的估值。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>摄影：Paopano/iStock 社论来自 Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.</p><p><blockquote>苹果 (AAPL) 是过去十年中最好的投资之一。然而，在接下来的十年里，它的增长可能不会一样。然而，由于大规模的股东回报计划和向服务业的转变，十年后苹果的股价可能仍会大幅上涨——尽管目前的估值相当高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Over the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:</p><p><blockquote>在过去十年中，苹果公司一直是一项伟大的投资：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5d29aa34bdbc5bab7d0730a4095954e6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据由YCharts提供</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.</p><p><blockquote>在这十年中，扣除股息前的股票回报率为 900%，年复合回报率约为 26%，轻松超过了该时期大盘的回报率。重要的是，股价的涨幅远远超过了公司的市值，而公司的市值在过去十年中仅增长了 550%。这种差异可以用该公司的大规模股票回购计划来解释，该计划在过去十年中大幅降低了股票数量。当然，过去十年对苹果来说是一个非常成功的商业时期，因为该公司受益于智能手机的崛起，同时在手表和平板电脑等新产品方面也取得了成功，苹果或多或少地将其作为一个新的产品类别推出。目前，股价为 125 美元，比过去 12 个月上涨了 57%，但 2021 年迄今下跌了 6%。继2020年强劲上涨之后，股价目前似乎处于盘整模式，这并不奇怪，因为苹果的估值在最近的过去扩大了很多，而且该公司的业务增长似乎必须赶上最近的股价上涨。目前一致的目标价为 156 美元，这意味着上涨潜力为 25%。由于目前没有迹象表明股票会离开当前的交易区间，我个人认为苹果短期内不会突破150美元。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Where Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股票10年后会在哪里</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.</p><p><blockquote>当然，2031年苹果的股价是无法精确预测的。历史一次又一次地表明，甚至不可能在更短的时间内准确预测股价。然而，可以制定情景，看看在特定条件下未来股价可能会处于什么位置，以了解对未来的合理预期。</blockquote></p><p> To craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.</p><p><blockquote>为了制定这样一个场景，我们必须考虑苹果的业务增长、苹果的股东回报计划以及股票未来可能交易的估值倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's business growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果的业务增长</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.</p><p><blockquote>苹果公司过去经历了几年的强劲增长和几年的疲软增长。这主要可以用新产品推出等因素来解释。手表或iPad，以及各自当前iPhone型号的实力，这些型号的需求因年份而异。其他因素，如经济增长或贸易问题，也起着一定的作用。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5b8bd8ef6cdaa13850c1380e870554c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据由YCharts提供</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Overall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，过去十年收入增长了 154%，但正如我们在上图中看到的，收入增长相对不均衡。在2010年代初，苹果在iPhone“胜利之路”的支持下实现了巨大的增长，而在接下来的几年里，收入增长放缓得多。甚至有一些年份收入同比下降，例如2016年。过去十年的平均年收入增长率为10%，但当我们考虑到2011年和2012年非常强劲的增长推动了这一增长时，假设苹果未来每年也将增长10%可能不太合理。投资者还应该考虑到，公司规模越大，保持高增长率就越困难。然而，这并不意味着苹果的收入增长将放缓至零。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> On the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in&nbsp;high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.</p><p><blockquote>在苹果产品价格上涨以及在中国等高增长国家市场份额增长潜力的背景下，越来越多的人将能够购买苹果价格更高的产品，似乎有理由假设苹果将至少从其核心业务中产生一些增长。再加上服务领域的增长——人们越来越多地使用手机，这应该会导致应用程序支出增加——并考虑新产品发布的潜力（尽管我认为没有一款产品会像 iPhone 那样大规模），苹果应该能够以坚实的速度发展其业务。我个人认为，未来几年5%-7%的收入增长率可能是一个现实的估计，尽管一些读者当然会有不同的看法。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's shareholder returns</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果股东回报</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.</p><p><blockquote>如上所示，苹果过去曾大幅降低其股票数量，我相信，有理由假设未来也会发生同样的情况。过去十年，苹果回购了 36% 的股份。如果未来十年发生同样的情况，每股剩余股份在公司价值中所占份额将增长 56%，即年化增长 4.6%。不过，由于苹果目前的估值明显高于其历史估值，回购在未来的影响可能会较小。例如，苹果去年仅将其股票数量减少了 2.6%。</blockquote></p><p> This is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.</p><p><blockquote>这就是为什么我相信未来十年股份数量不会再下降36%。当我们将其向下调整至 25% 时，当我们查看每股指标时，这将为苹果的增长带来约 3% 的年度推动力，而每股指标是苹果股价增长的决定性因素。结合我 5%-7% 的业务增长预期，我因此假设苹果从长远来看每股将增长 8%-10%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Apple's future valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>苹果未来估值</b></blockquote></p><p> AAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:</p><p><blockquote>AAPL 过去的估值范围非常广泛，其股票交易倍数在某些时候非常低，而投资者则愿意在其他时候支付更高的价格：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be5cb8bbc04ff0e0a13ee64f6f2bd90a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"470\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据由YCharts提供</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.</p><p><blockquote>五年前，可以以非常低的 10 倍净利润购买股票，这自然是进入或扩大头寸的好时机。然而，到 2020 年底，股价交易价格高达公司净利润的 40 倍，这似乎是一个相当高的估值。目前，AAPL 的历史市盈率为 28 倍，远期利润约为 24 倍。在上图中，我们还看到了过去 3 年、5 年、7 年和 10 年的中位数收益倍数。很明显，苹果的估值多年来一直在扩大，这就是为什么在较短的“回顾”期间，中值更高。我不相信 AAPL 的交易价格会达到过去十年平均净利润的 15.5 倍，因为对于苹果这样一家拥有强大品牌、庞大规模、巨大利润和堡垒资产负债表的优质公司来说，这似乎是一个相当低的估值。另一方面，我也不相信苹果会永远以 24-28 倍的市盈率进行交易——对于一家以中个位数实现稳健但并不引人注目的业务增长的公司来说，这似乎相当昂贵。当我们考虑到十年后利率可能会更高时，情况尤其如此，这应该会给所有股票的估值带来压力，而其他条件相同。因此，我认为 2031 年净利润 20 倍左右的估值可能是一个合理的估计，这或多或少与 3 年市盈率中位数一致。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Is AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AAPL 现在是买入还是卖出</b></blockquote></p><p> Starting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>从 2021 年每股收益估计值 5.15 美元开始计算，并假设到 2031 年每年增长 7%-10%，我们的每股收益范围为 10.10 美元至 13.40 美元。将 20 倍市盈率放在该市盈率上，目标价约为每股 200-270 美元。因此，在 235 美元左右的中点，股价将比当前水平上涨约 90%，即年化上涨约 6.5%。这当然不是一个糟糕的回报，当我们加上股息时，我们将获得大约7%的年化回报率。另一方面，我相信这也不是一个惊人的大回报。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，AAPL 在未来十年具有巨大的上涨潜力，但这并不令人意外——许多公司将在这么长的时间内实现显着增长。我个人对7%的预期长期回报不太兴奋。当我们考虑到如果苹果估值下降（例如由于利率上升），未来1-3年内股价确实存在相当大的下行风险时，暂时保持观望可能是更好的选择。长期投资者在当前水平购买股票时可能不会表现不佳，但也可能不会表现得很好。目前，我将苹果评级为持有，如果其估值接近长期平均水平，则可能会买入。那些对新产品发布更乐观的人可能不同意，更喜欢在这里购买，但事实证明，等待更好的机会是这里的最佳选择。</blockquote></p><p> Summing it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.</p><p><blockquote>总而言之，我想说股票在未来十年确实具有巨大的上涨潜力，但上涨潜力还不足以让我以当前较高的估值购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4432703-apple-stock-in-10-years\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4432703-apple-stock-in-10-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1122373606","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple has been a great investment over the last decade, but the next decade may look quite different.\nApple has seen its growth slow down over the last decade, and it will likely not be a growth monster in the coming years, either.\nShares have ample long-term upside, but investors should consider the current valuation before jumping to decisions.\n\nPhoto by Paopano/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nApple (AAPL) has been one of the best investments one could have made over the last decade. Over the next decade, its growth may not be the same, however. Yet, thanks to massive shareholder return programs and a move towards services, Apple's stock will likely still be significantly higher a decade from now - even though the current valuation is rather high.\nApple Stock Price\nOver the last decade, Apple Inc. has been a great investment:\nData by YCharts\nShares have returned 900% in those ten years, before dividends, for a compounded annual return of approximately 26%, easily trouncing the returns of the broad market during that time frame. Importantly, shares have risen a lot more than the company's market capitalization, which grew by only 550% over the last decade. The difference can be explained by the company's large share repurchase programs, which have lowered the share count drastically over the last decade. The last decade, of course, was a highly successful period for Apple on a business basis, as the company benefited from the rise of smartphones while also having success with new products such as its Watch and tablets, which Apple more or less introduced as a new product category. Right now, shares trade for $125, up 57% over the last twelve months, but down 6% in 2021 to date. Following strong gains during 2020, shares seem to be in a consolidation pattern for now, which is not too much of a surprise, as Apple's valuation had expanded a lot in the recent past, and it seems that the company's business growth has to catch up to the recent share price increases now. The current consensus price target is $156, which implies an upside potential of 25%. Since there are no signs of shares leaving their current trading range right now, I personally do not think that Apple will breach $150 in the near term.\nWhere Will Apple Stock Be In 10 Years\nApple's stock price in 2031 is, of course, nothing that can be forecasted with any precision. As history has shown, again and again, it is not even possible to forecast share prices precisely over a much shorter period of time. It is, however, possible to craft scenarios to see where share prices could be in the future under certain conditions, to get a feel for what might be a reasonable expectation for the future.\nTo craft one such scenario, we have to consider Apple's business growth, Apple's shareholder return program, and the valuation multiple that shares might trade at in the future.\nApple's business growth\nApple Inc. has seen years of stronger growth and years of weaker growth in the past. This mostly can be explained by factors such as new product introductions, e.g. Watch or iPad, and by the strength of the respective current iPhone models, which see varying demand depending on the year. Other factors, such as economic growth or trade issues, play a role as well.\nData by YCharts\nOverall, revenues have grown by 154% over the last decade, but as we see in the above chart, revenue growth has been relatively uneven. During the early 2010s, Apple generated massive growth on the back of the iPhones \"road to victory\", whereas revenue growth declined to a much slower pace in the following years. There were even some years during which revenues declined on a year-over-year basis, such as 2016. The average annual revenue growth pace was 10% over the last decade, but when we factor in that this was lifted up by the very strong growth in 2011 and 2012, it may not be too reasonable to assume that Apple will grow by 10% a year in the future, too. Investors should also consider that maintaining a high growth rate becomes ever more difficult the larger a company gets. This does, however, not mean that Apple's revenue growth will slow down to zero.\nOn the back of price increases for its products and the potential for market share gains in high-growth countries such as China, where more and more people will be able to buy Apple's higher-priced products, it seems reasonable to assume that Apple will generate at least some growth from its core businesses. Add in growth in the services segment - people use their phones more and more, which should lead to higher app spending - and consider the potential for new product launches (although I assume none will be as massive as the iPhone), and Apple should be able to grow its business at a solid pace. I personally assume that a 5%-7% revenue growth rate could be a realistic estimate for the coming years, although some readers will of course have different opinions.\nApple's shareholder returns\nApple has lowered its share count massively in the past, as shown above, and it is, I believe, reasonable to assume that the same will happen going forward. Over the last decade, Apple bought back 36% of its shares. If the same were to happen over the next decade, each remaining share's portion of the company's value would rise by 56%, or 4.6% annualized. Due to the fact that Apple's current valuation is significantly higher than its historic valuation, buybacks could be less impactful in the future, though. Apple has, for example, only reduced its share count by 2.6% over the last year.\nThis is why I believe that the share count will not decline by another 36% over the coming decade. When we adjust that downward to 25%, this would result in a ~3% annual tailwind for Apple's growth when we look at per-share metrics, which are the deciding factor for Apple's share price growth. Combined with my 5%-7% business growth estimate, I thus assume that Apple will grow by 8%-10% on a per-share basis in the long term.\nApple's future valuation\nAAPL has been valued in a very wide range in the past, seeing its shares trade for very low multiples at some points, whereas investors were willing to pay significantly more at other times:\nData by YCharts\nShares could, five years ago, be bought for a very low 10x net earnings, which naturally was a great time to enter or expand positions. In late 2020, however, shares were trading for as much as 40x the company's net earnings, which seems like a quite high valuation. Right now, AAPL trades at 28x trailing earnings, and at around 24x forward profits. In the above chart, we also see the median earnings multiples over the last 3, 5, 7, and 10 years. It is pretty clear that Apple's valuation has expanded over the years, which is why the median values are higher for the shorter \"lookback\" periods. I do not believe that AAPL will trade at the 15.5x net earnings that it has traded at, on average, over the last decade, as this seems like a rather low valuation for a quality company like Apple with a strong brand, massive scale, great margins, and a fortress balance sheet. On the other hand, I also don't believe that Apple will trade at a 24-28x earnings multiple forever - for a company that generates solid but unspectacular business growth in the mid-single-digits, that seems quite expensive. This is especially true when we consider that interest rates will likely be higher a decade from now, which should pressure valuations for all equities, all else equal. I thus believe that a valuation of around 20x net earnings could be a reasonable estimate for 2031, which would be more or less in line with the 3-year median earnings multiple.\nIs AAPL A Buy Or Sell Now\nStarting our calculation with an EPS estimate of $5.15 for 2021 and assuming that this will grow by 7%-10% a year through 2031, we reach an EPS range of $10.10 to $13.40. Putting a 20x earnings multiple on that leads to a target price of around $200-$270/share. At the midpoint of around $235, shares would thus see gains of around 90% from the current level, or around 6.5% annualized. That surely is not a bad return, and when we add in the dividend, we would get to an annualized return of roughly 7%. This is, on the other hand, also not an outrageously great return, I believe.\nAAPL has, I believe, significant upside potential over the next decade, but that should not be a large surprise - many companies will see significant growth over a time span this long. I personally am not too excited about a 7% expected long-term return. When we consider that shares do have considerable downside risk in the next 1-3 years if Apple's valuation declines, e.g. due to rising interest rates, it may be a better choice to stay on the sidelines for now. Long-term investors will likely not do badly when they buy shares at current levels, but they will likely also not do great. For now, I'd rate Apple a hold, and a potential buy if its valuation comes closer to the longer-term average. Those that are more optimistic about new product launches may disagree and favor buying here, but it could turn out that waiting for a better opportunity is the best choice here.\nSumming it up, I'd say shares do have significant upside potential over the next decade, but the upside potential is not large enough to make me buy shares at current, elevated, valuations.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":610,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":106108360,"gmtCreate":1620091126450,"gmtModify":1634207904381,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Mad stuff.... 37 years!Comment thanks","listText":"Mad stuff.... 37 years!Comment thanks","text":"Mad stuff.... 37 years!Comment thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":5,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/106108360","repostId":"1147234999","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":688,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":195273183,"gmtCreate":1621299419842,"gmtModify":1634192680519,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comment n like thx","listText":"Comment n like thx","text":"Comment n like thx","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/195273183","repostId":"2136295438","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":499,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":106101732,"gmtCreate":1620091084226,"gmtModify":1634207904620,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comment thx","listText":"Comment thx","text":"Comment thx","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/106101732","repostId":"1147234999","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":659,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":183436771,"gmtCreate":1623339944493,"gmtModify":1634034372034,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Like comment thx","listText":"Like comment thx","text":"Like comment thx","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/183436771","repostId":"1107871315","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":621,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":111568568,"gmtCreate":1622687044654,"gmtModify":1634099134665,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comment like","listText":"Comment like","text":"Comment like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/111568568","repostId":"1115876867","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":676,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":137177509,"gmtCreate":1622333934201,"gmtModify":1634102315690,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comments likee","listText":"Comments likee","text":"Comments likee","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/137177509","repostId":"2138948877","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":557,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":190924947,"gmtCreate":1620573545289,"gmtModify":1634197966991,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Comment n like&nbsp;","listText":"Comment n like&nbsp;","text":"Comment n like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/190924947","repostId":"2133837186","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":533,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":102828624,"gmtCreate":1620195874068,"gmtModify":1634207048353,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Like and comment&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/102828624","repostId":"1119680465","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":761,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":101558121,"gmtCreate":1619925034463,"gmtModify":1634209074469,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Berkshire is the OG!","listText":"Berkshire is the OG!","text":"Berkshire is the OG!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/101558121","repostId":"1103106179","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":426,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":180502954,"gmtCreate":1623210006378,"gmtModify":1634035763847,"author":{"id":"3582012803278187","authorId":"3582012803278187","name":"Royce333","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e8f380d16068c756ab6408555011ec4","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3582012803278187","idStr":"3582012803278187"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"U know what to do","listText":"U know what to do","text":"U know what to do","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/180502954","repostId":"1128909306","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1128909306","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623193560,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1128909306?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-09 07:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"S&P 500 closes little changed as \"meme stocks\" extend rally<blockquote>“模因股票”延续涨势，标普500收盘变化不大</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1128909306","media":"reuters","summary":"NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of c","content":"<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of clear market catalysts kept institutional investors on the sidelines, while retail traders fueled the ongoing meme stocks rally.</p><p><blockquote>纽约（路透社） - 华尔街股市周二难以维持收盘涨幅，因为缺乏明确的市场催化剂使机构投资者观望，而散户交易员则推动了模因股的持续上涨。</blockquote></p><p>All three major U.S. stock indexes ended the range-bound session near flat or higher, with the S&amp;P 500 and the Dow closing within about 0.5% of record highs.</p><p><blockquote>美国三大股指均以接近持平或更高的区间收盘，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数收盘较历史高点约0.5%。</blockquote></p><p>The tech-laded Nasdaq Composite fared best, with Amazon.com Inc and Apple Inc providing the biggest boost.</p><p><blockquote>科技含量最高的纳斯达克综合指数表现最好，亚马逊和苹果提供了最大的提振。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re waiting for inflation numbers, waiting for more from the (Federal Reserve), waiting for earnings season,” said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Asset Management in Chicago. “There’s not a lot motivating the market today.”</p><p><blockquote>“芝加哥 Kingsview Asset Management 投资组合经理保罗-诺尔特（Paul Nolte）说：”我们在等待通胀数据，等待（美联储）的更多数据，等待财报季。“目前市场没有太多动力”。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re in this twilight zone until probably right after the Fourth of July, when we see earnings season kick in,” Nolte added.</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特补充说：”我们将处于这种阴暗地带，直到国庆节刚过，我们才会看到财报季的到来。</blockquote></p><p>The CBOE volatility index, a measure of investor anxiety, touched its lowest level in over a year.</p><p><blockquote>衡量投资者焦虑程度的芝加哥期权交易所波动率指数触及一年多来的最低水平。</blockquote></p><p>Smallcaps, once again buoyed by the ongoing meme stock retail frenzy, were outperforming their larger counterparts.</p><p><blockquote>小盘股再次受到持续的模因股票零售狂潮的提振，其表现优于大型同行。</blockquote></p><p>Clover Health Investments seized top billing among meme stocks, surging 85.8%, the biggest percentage winner in the Nasdaq.</p><p><blockquote>Clover Health Investments 在 meme 股票中名列前茅，飙升 85.8%，是纳斯达克最大的百分比赢家。</blockquote></p><p>Other stocks whose recent explosive trading volumes have been attributed to social media buzz, including GameStop Corp, Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc, Workhorse Group and others, ended the session between 7% and 12% higher.</p><p><blockquote>其他近期交易量爆炸性的股票，包括游戏驿站公司、Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc、Workhorse Group 等，收盘上涨 7% 至 12%。</blockquote></p><p>“(Meme stocks) are where the action is, but you flip it over and look crypto and that’s a mess,” Nolte said. “Now the meme stocks are taking over from crypto as the place to be and it’s all a consequence of very easy monetary policy.”</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特说：”（备忘录股票）是活跃的地方，但你把它翻过来，看看加密货币，那就一团糟了。“现在，迷因股正在取代加密货币成为主流，这一切都是非常宽松的货币政策的结果。”</blockquote></p><p>Reports from the U.S. Labor Department and National Federation of Independent Business appeared to confirm a labor shortage even as demand roars back to life, which could put upward pressure on wages, a precursor to wider inflation.</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部和全国独立企业联合会的报告似乎证实了劳动力短缺，尽管需求正在复苏，这可能会给工资带来上行压力，这是更广泛通胀的前兆。</blockquote></p><p>Market participants look to Thursday’s consumer price index data for further clues regarding inflation, and how it could influence the Federal Reserve’s timetable for tightening its monetary policy.</p><p><blockquote>市场参与者期待着周四的消费者价格指数数据，以获取有关通胀的进一步线索，以及它将如何影响美联储收紧货币政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 30.42 points, or 0.09%, to 34,599.82; the S&amp;P 500 gained 0.74 points, or 0.02%, at 4,227.26; and the Nasdaq Composite added 43.19 points, or 0.31%, at 13,924.91.</p><p><blockquote>道琼斯工业平均指数下跌30.42点，跌幅0.09%，报34,599.82点；标普500上涨 0.74 点，或 0.02%，至 4,227.26 点；纳斯达克综合指数上涨 43.19 点，即 0.31%，至 13,924.91 点。</blockquote></p><p>Of the 11 major sectors in the S&amp;P 500, consumer discretionary enjoyed the biggest percentage gain, and utilities suffered the largest loss.</p><p><blockquote>在标普500的11个主要行业中，非必需消费品的百分比涨幅最大，公用事业的跌幅最大。</blockquote></p><p>Sales of Tesla Inc’s China-made electric cars jumped in May by 29%, marking a 177% year-on-year increase, according to the China Passenger Car Association. The stock erased initial gains on the news to close down 0.3%.</p><p><blockquote>根据中国乘用车联会的数据，特斯拉公司5月份中国产电动汽车的销量猛增29%，同比增长177%。消息传出后，该股抹去了最初的涨幅，收盘下跌 0.3%。</blockquote></p><p>Boeing Co shares were boosted by Southwest Airlines’ announcement that it had ordered 34 new 737 MAX aircraft, but the planemaker’s shares pared gains to end the session flat.</p><p><blockquote>西南航空公司宣布订购了 34 架新的 737 MAX 飞机，提振了波音公司的股价，但该飞机制造商的股价收盘持平。</blockquote></p><p>GameStop, the company most closely associated with the Reddit-driven short squeeze phenomenon, is expected to report quarterly results after markets close on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>游戏驿站是与 Reddit 驱动的空头挤压现象关系密切的公司，预计将在周三收盘后公布季度业绩。</blockquote></p><p>Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.74-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.66-to-1 ratio favored advancers.</p><p><blockquote>纽约证券交易所上涨股票的数量比下跌股票的数量多 1.74 比 1；在纳斯达克，1.66比1的比率有利于进步人士。</blockquote></p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 54 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 172 new highs and 16 new lows.</p><p><blockquote>标普500创下54个52周新高和一个新低；纳斯达克综合指数创下172个新高和16个新低。</blockquote></p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.82 billion shares, compared with the 10.75 billion average over the last 20 trading days.</p><p><blockquote>美国交易所的成交量为 118.2 亿股，而过去 20 个交易日的平均成交量为 107.5 亿股。</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>S&P 500 closes little changed as \"meme stocks\" extend rally<blockquote>“模因股票”延续涨势，标普500收盘变化不大</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\">\nS&P 500 closes little changed as \"meme stocks\" extend rally<blockquote>“模因股票”延续涨势，标普500收盘变化不大</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">reuters</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-09 07:06</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of clear market catalysts kept institutional investors on the sidelines, while retail traders fueled the ongoing meme stocks rally.</p><p><blockquote>纽约（路透社） - 华尔街股市周二难以维持收盘涨幅，因为缺乏明确的市场催化剂使机构投资者观望，而散户交易员则推动了模因股的持续上涨。</blockquote></p><p>All three major U.S. stock indexes ended the range-bound session near flat or higher, with the S&amp;P 500 and the Dow closing within about 0.5% of record highs.</p><p><blockquote>美国三大股指均以接近持平或更高的区间收盘，标普500和道琼斯工业平均指数收盘较历史高点约0.5%。</blockquote></p><p>The tech-laded Nasdaq Composite fared best, with Amazon.com Inc and Apple Inc providing the biggest boost.</p><p><blockquote>科技含量最高的纳斯达克综合指数表现最好，亚马逊和苹果提供了最大的提振。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re waiting for inflation numbers, waiting for more from the (Federal Reserve), waiting for earnings season,” said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Asset Management in Chicago. “There’s not a lot motivating the market today.”</p><p><blockquote>“芝加哥 Kingsview Asset Management 投资组合经理保罗-诺尔特（Paul Nolte）说：”我们在等待通胀数据，等待（美联储）的更多数据，等待财报季。“目前市场没有太多动力”。</blockquote></p><p>“We’re in this twilight zone until probably right after the Fourth of July, when we see earnings season kick in,” Nolte added.</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特补充说：”我们将处于这种阴暗地带，直到国庆节刚过，我们才会看到财报季的到来。</blockquote></p><p>The CBOE volatility index, a measure of investor anxiety, touched its lowest level in over a year.</p><p><blockquote>衡量投资者焦虑程度的芝加哥期权交易所波动率指数触及一年多来的最低水平。</blockquote></p><p>Smallcaps, once again buoyed by the ongoing meme stock retail frenzy, were outperforming their larger counterparts.</p><p><blockquote>小盘股再次受到持续的模因股票零售狂潮的提振，其表现优于大型同行。</blockquote></p><p>Clover Health Investments seized top billing among meme stocks, surging 85.8%, the biggest percentage winner in the Nasdaq.</p><p><blockquote>Clover Health Investments 在 meme 股票中名列前茅，飙升 85.8%，是纳斯达克最大的百分比赢家。</blockquote></p><p>Other stocks whose recent explosive trading volumes have been attributed to social media buzz, including GameStop Corp, Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc, Workhorse Group and others, ended the session between 7% and 12% higher.</p><p><blockquote>其他近期交易量爆炸性的股票，包括游戏驿站公司、Bed Bath &amp; Beyond Inc、Workhorse Group 等，收盘上涨 7% 至 12%。</blockquote></p><p>“(Meme stocks) are where the action is, but you flip it over and look crypto and that’s a mess,” Nolte said. “Now the meme stocks are taking over from crypto as the place to be and it’s all a consequence of very easy monetary policy.”</p><p><blockquote>“诺尔特说：”（备忘录股票）是活跃的地方，但你把它翻过来，看看加密货币，那就一团糟了。“现在，迷因股正在取代加密货币成为主流，这一切都是非常宽松的货币政策的结果。”</blockquote></p><p>Reports from the U.S. Labor Department and National Federation of Independent Business appeared to confirm a labor shortage even as demand roars back to life, which could put upward pressure on wages, a precursor to wider inflation.</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部和全国独立企业联合会的报告似乎证实了劳动力短缺，尽管需求正在复苏，这可能会给工资带来上行压力，这是更广泛通胀的前兆。</blockquote></p><p>Market participants look to Thursday’s consumer price index data for further clues regarding inflation, and how it could influence the Federal Reserve’s timetable for tightening its monetary policy.</p><p><blockquote>市场参与者期待着周四的消费者价格指数数据，以获取有关通胀的进一步线索，以及它将如何影响美联储收紧货币政策的时间表。</blockquote></p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 30.42 points, or 0.09%, to 34,599.82; the S&amp;P 500 gained 0.74 points, or 0.02%, at 4,227.26; and the Nasdaq Composite added 43.19 points, or 0.31%, at 13,924.91.</p><p><blockquote>道琼斯工业平均指数下跌30.42点，跌幅0.09%，报34,599.82点；标普500上涨 0.74 点，或 0.02%，至 4,227.26 点；纳斯达克综合指数上涨 43.19 点，即 0.31%，至 13,924.91 点。</blockquote></p><p>Of the 11 major sectors in the S&amp;P 500, consumer discretionary enjoyed the biggest percentage gain, and utilities suffered the largest loss.</p><p><blockquote>在标普500的11个主要行业中，非必需消费品的百分比涨幅最大，公用事业的跌幅最大。</blockquote></p><p>Sales of Tesla Inc’s China-made electric cars jumped in May by 29%, marking a 177% year-on-year increase, according to the China Passenger Car Association. The stock erased initial gains on the news to close down 0.3%.</p><p><blockquote>根据中国乘用车联会的数据，特斯拉公司5月份中国产电动汽车的销量猛增29%，同比增长177%。消息传出后，该股抹去了最初的涨幅，收盘下跌 0.3%。</blockquote></p><p>Boeing Co shares were boosted by Southwest Airlines’ announcement that it had ordered 34 new 737 MAX aircraft, but the planemaker’s shares pared gains to end the session flat.</p><p><blockquote>西南航空公司宣布订购了 34 架新的 737 MAX 飞机，提振了波音公司的股价，但该飞机制造商的股价收盘持平。</blockquote></p><p>GameStop, the company most closely associated with the Reddit-driven short squeeze phenomenon, is expected to report quarterly results after markets close on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>游戏驿站是与 Reddit 驱动的空头挤压现象关系密切的公司，预计将在周三收盘后公布季度业绩。</blockquote></p><p>Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.74-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.66-to-1 ratio favored advancers.</p><p><blockquote>纽约证券交易所上涨股票的数量比下跌股票的数量多 1.74 比 1；在纳斯达克，1.66比1的比率有利于进步人士。</blockquote></p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 54 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 172 new highs and 16 new lows.</p><p><blockquote>标普500创下54个52周新高和一个新低；纳斯达克综合指数创下172个新高和16个新低。</blockquote></p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.82 billion shares, compared with the 10.75 billion average over the last 20 trading days.</p><p><blockquote>美国交易所的成交量为 118.2 亿股，而过去 20 个交易日的平均成交量为 107.5 亿股。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-stocks/us-stocks-sp-500-closes-little-changed-as-meme-stocks-extend-rally-idUSL2N2NQ2NX\">reuters</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","CLOV":"Clover Health Corp",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-stocks/us-stocks-sp-500-closes-little-changed-as-meme-stocks-extend-rally-idUSL2N2NQ2NX","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1128909306","content_text":"NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street stocks struggled to eke out closing gains on Tuesday as a lack of clear market catalysts kept institutional investors on the sidelines, while retail traders fueled the ongoing meme stocks rally.All three major U.S. stock indexes ended the range-bound session near flat or higher, with the S&P 500 and the Dow closing within about 0.5% of record highs.The tech-laded Nasdaq Composite fared best, with Amazon.com Inc and Apple Inc providing the biggest boost.“We’re waiting for inflation numbers, waiting for more from the (Federal Reserve), waiting for earnings season,” said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Asset Management in Chicago. “There’s not a lot motivating the market today.”“We’re in this twilight zone until probably right after the Fourth of July, when we see earnings season kick in,” Nolte added.The CBOE volatility index, a measure of investor anxiety, touched its lowest level in over a year.Smallcaps, once again buoyed by the ongoing meme stock retail frenzy, were outperforming their larger counterparts.Clover Health Investments seized top billing among meme stocks, surging 85.8%, the biggest percentage winner in the Nasdaq.Other stocks whose recent explosive trading volumes have been attributed to social media buzz, including GameStop Corp, Bed Bath & Beyond Inc, Workhorse Group and others, ended the session between 7% and 12% higher.“(Meme stocks) are where the action is, but you flip it over and look crypto and that’s a mess,” Nolte said. “Now the meme stocks are taking over from crypto as the place to be and it’s all a consequence of very easy monetary policy.”Reports from the U.S. Labor Department and National Federation of Independent Business appeared to confirm a labor shortage even as demand roars back to life, which could put upward pressure on wages, a precursor to wider inflation.Market participants look to Thursday’s consumer price index data for further clues regarding inflation, and how it could influence the Federal Reserve’s timetable for tightening its monetary policy.The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 30.42 points, or 0.09%, to 34,599.82; the S&P 500 gained 0.74 points, or 0.02%, at 4,227.26; and the Nasdaq Composite added 43.19 points, or 0.31%, at 13,924.91.Of the 11 major sectors in the S&P 500, consumer discretionary enjoyed the biggest percentage gain, and utilities suffered the largest loss.Sales of Tesla Inc’s China-made electric cars jumped in May by 29%, marking a 177% year-on-year increase, according to the China Passenger Car Association. The stock erased initial gains on the news to close down 0.3%.Boeing Co shares were boosted by Southwest Airlines’ announcement that it had ordered 34 new 737 MAX aircraft, but the planemaker’s shares pared gains to end the session flat.GameStop, the company most closely associated with the Reddit-driven short squeeze phenomenon, is expected to report quarterly results after markets close on Wednesday.Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.74-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.66-to-1 ratio favored advancers.The S&P 500 posted 54 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 172 new highs and 16 new lows.Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.82 billion shares, compared with the 10.75 billion average over the last 20 trading days.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"CLOV":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":522,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}