Ok_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

priswong
2021-06-07

"We Took Out The June 2007 Highs": Morgan Stanley's Sell Signal Just Hit An All Time High<blockquote>“我们打破了2007年6月的高点”：摩根士丹利的卖出信号刚刚创下历史新高</blockquote>

For the past several months, Morgan Stanley's fundamental analysts have been turning increasingly be

"We Took Out The June 2007 Highs": Morgan Stanley's Sell Signal Just Hit An All Time High<blockquote>“我们打破了2007年6月的高点”：摩根士丹利的卖出信号刚刚创下历史新高</blockquote>

免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。

推荐
最新

暂无评论

热议股票

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"magic":2,"id":114141886,"tweetId":"114141886","gmtCreate":1623060373445,"gmtModify":1634037393370,"author":{"id":3581817202947175,"idStr":"3581817202947175","authorId":3581817202947175,"authorIdStr":"3581817202947175","name":"priswong","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1c6662d0fbf1d14d728f78d18e375a47","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":2,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body>Ok</body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body>Ok</body></html>","text":"Ok","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/114141886","repostId":1194257742,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1194257742","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623059574,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1194257742?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-07 17:52","market":"us","language":"en","title":"\"We Took Out The June 2007 Highs\": Morgan Stanley's Sell Signal Just Hit An All Time High<blockquote>“我们打破了2007年6月的高点”：摩根士丹利的卖出信号刚刚创下历史新高</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1194257742","media":"zerohedge","summary":"For the past several months, Morgan Stanley's fundamental analysts have been turning increasingly be","content":"For the past several months, Morgan Stanley's fundamental analysts have been turning increasingly bearish on stocks, with the pessimistic sentimentplateauing earlier this weekwhen chief equity strategist Michael Wilson said that there is far too much optimism in the market, and that while earnings are slowly rising, forward PE multiples are far too high and are set to slide, with \"the de-rating about 75% to go or an approximate 15% decline in P/Es from here.\" As a result, in Wilson's view - which is rapidly emerging as the most bearish on Wall Street - \"earnings revisions will not be able to offset that de-rating, leaving the overall market vulnerable to a 10-15 % correction over the next 6 months.\"<blockquote>过去几个月，摩根士丹利的基本面分析师对股市的悲观情绪越来越悲观，本周早些时候，首席股票策略师迈克尔·威尔逊(Michael Wilson)表示，市场上过于乐观，而盈利正在缓慢上升，远期市盈率太高，并且将会下滑，“评级将下调约75%，市盈率将下降约15%。”因此，在威尔逊看来——这正迅速成为华尔街最悲观的人——”盈利修正将无法抵消评级下调的影响，导致整体市场在未来6个月内容易出现10-15%的调整。”</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f72ac2b1254473a56a44d443d5b0af2e\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"298\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It now appears that Morgan Stanley's fundamental bearishness has spilled over into the bank's technical analyst team and as the bank's chief Euro equity Strategist Matthew Garman writes,for only the fifth time in over 30 years, each of Morgan Stanley's five market timing indicators are giving a sell signal at the same time.<blockquote>现在看来，摩根士丹利的基本面看跌情绪已经蔓延到该行的技术分析师团队，正如该行首席欧元股票策略师马修·加曼所写，30多年来，摩根士丹利的五个市场时机指标中的每一个都同时发出卖出信号，这是第五次。</blockquote> Not only that, but the bank's Combined Market Timing Indicator - which has been in sell territory since March - just hit a new all time high of 1.19, surpassing the previous record high seen in June-2007, right around the time of the first great quant crash and before the market collapsed.<blockquote>不仅如此，该银行的综合市场时机指标（自3月份以来一直处于卖出区域）刚刚创下1.19的历史新高，超过了2007年6月创下的历史新高，当时正值第一次大规模量化崩盘和市场崩溃之前。</blockquote> According to Garman, the only time equities have risen after a \"Full House\" Sell Signal was in Feb 17, shortly after the Shanghai Accord kicked in to prevent a global recession. The other previous occasions where there was a \"Full House\" Sell Signal were Mar-90, May-92, Jun-07. According to MS,\"in the 6M post the initial Full House Sell Signal, MSCI Europe has fallen on average 6%.\"<blockquote>加曼表示，股市唯一一次在“满座”卖出信号后上涨是在2月17日，即防止全球经济衰退的上海协议生效后不久。之前出现“满座”卖出信号的其他场合是1990年3月、1992年5月、2007年6月。根据MS的说法，“在最初的满仓抛售信号后的600万美元中，MSCI欧洲平均下跌了6%。”.\"</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/840d972b24ae257679bd7334982d19d8\" tg-width=\"1130\" tg-height=\"415\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">So with every in house risk indicator screaming sell, does that mean that Morgan Stanley will have the balls to tell its clients to sell? Why of course not, because in this market where stuff like the AMC, GameStop and Bed Bath squeezes force analysts to admit they no longer have any idea what's going on...<blockquote>那么，随着每一个内部风险指标都尖叫着卖出，这是否意味着摩根士丹利将有胆量告诉其客户卖出？为什么当然不是，因为在这个市场上，像AMC、游戏驿站和Bed Bath这样的东西挤压迫使分析师承认他们不再知道发生了什么……</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/79e9d638925af010cddcb25105f8a4b0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"471\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Morgan Stanley is keeping the hope and assuming that the current period will be similar to 2017 - the only other time when a massive sell signal did not result in a market plunge.<blockquote>...摩根士丹利仍然抱有希望，并假设当前时期将与2017年类似——这是唯一一次大规模卖出信号没有导致市场暴跌。</blockquote> Back in 2017, we remained constructive despite the signal given i) strong EPS growth, ii) an early cycle environment, iii) EU inflows, iv) low sentiment and v) a rise in M&amp;A. Sentiment metrics may look more elevated than in 2017, but many of those factors remain in place today. While we see a trickier risk-reward for equities globally, we maintain our view that there is a compelling case for Europe to outperform global peers. Yet even Morgan Stanley is forced to admit that while Defensives may just scrape by after a record sell signal, cyclicals are about to be hammered. The next chart shows the relative performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives after a Full House Sell Signal on. As MS notes, \"perhaps unsurprisingly, given the poor performance at the market level, Cyclicals have struggled. In the 6M post the four initial Full House Sell Signals, Cyclicals have underperformed Defensives on average 12%, and this drops to -15% looking at any day<blockquote>早在2017年，尽管发出了i)每股收益强劲增长、ii)早期周期环境、iii)欧盟资金流入、iv)情绪低迷以及v)并购增加的信号，但我们仍然保持建设性态度。情绪指标可能看起来比2017年更高，但其中许多因素今天仍然存在。尽管我们认为全球股市的风险回报更加棘手，但我们仍然认为欧洲有令人信服的理由跑赢全球同行。然而，就连摩根士丹利也被迫承认，虽然防御性股票在创纪录的卖出信号后可能只是勉强度日，但周期性股票即将受到重创。下图显示了满仓卖出信号后周期性股票与防御性股票的相对表现。正如微软指出的，“考虑到市场层面的糟糕表现，周期类股一直在苦苦挣扎，这也许并不奇怪。在最初四次抛售信号发出后的600万个交易日里，周期类股的表现平均落后于防御性股12%，而这一比例在任何一天都会降至-15%</blockquote> when the MTIs have all said sell at the same time.\"<blockquote>当MTI都同时表示卖出时。”</blockquote> This was true even in 2017 when equity markets rose: \"we previously cited similarities with the 2017 Full House Sell Signal as reasons to not get overly cautious on equity markets in aggregate at this moment in time. After the February-2017 Full House Sell Signal, MSCI Europe continued to rise pretty consistently through the rest of the year. However, despite strong performance from the market in aggregate, the performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives was much poorer. Between February and June 2017 Cyclicals underperformed Defensives by 6%.\"<blockquote>即使在2017年股市上涨时也是如此：“我们之前引用了与2017年全面抛售信号的相似之处，作为目前不要对整体股市过于谨慎的理由。在2017年2月的全面抛售信号之后，摩根士丹利资本国际欧洲指数在今年剩余时间里继续持续上涨。然而，尽管市场整体表现强劲，但周期性股票相对于防御性股票的表现要差得多。2017年2月至6月期间，周期性股票的表现落后防御性股票6%。”</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8dcf00cdefd33fef071981aa4a5547a7\" tg-width=\"1084\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It's not just the bank's sell signal that is prompting concerns about the future returns of cyclicals: Borrowing a page from our own warnings (see \"China's Credit Impulse Just Turned Negative, Unleashing Global Deflationary Shockwave\"), Morgan Stanley looks at \"a number of China data points which are giving warning signs\" first and foremost the collapse in China's credit impulse, to wit:<blockquote>引发人们对周期性股票未来回报担忧的不仅仅是央行的卖出信号：借用我们自己的警告（参见“中国的信贷冲动刚刚转为负面，释放全球通缩冲击波”），摩根士丹利着眼于“一些中国数据点发出警告信号”，首先是中国信贷冲动的崩溃，即：</blockquote> While credit tightening has been front-loaded in 1H21, as outlined here, our economists remain constructive on China's growth recovery. Having said that, a number of Chinese data points do suggest the Cyclical bounce looks overextended.China's credit impulse has just turned negative, and historically this has provided a lead indicator for the year-on-year performance of European Cyclicals (Exhibit 5).Similarly, the relative performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives has closely tracked moves in Chinese 10Y bond yields, which are now at their lowest levels since September 2020, standing in sharp contrast to the performance of Cyclicals.<blockquote>尽管信贷紧缩已在2021年上半年提前实施，但我们的经济学家对中国的增长复苏仍持建设性态度。话虽如此，一些中国数据确实表明周期性反弹看起来过度。中国的信贷冲动刚刚转负，从历史上看，这为欧洲周期类股的同比表现提供了领先指标（图表5）。同样，周期性股票与防御性股票的相对表现密切跟踪中国10年期债券收益率的走势，目前中国10年期债券收益率处于2020年9月以来的最低水平，与周期性股票的表现形成鲜明对比。</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c85032415626480364933f91dda387bf\" tg-width=\"1065\" tg-height=\"409\"><blockquote></blockquote> Putting it all together, readers have to ask themselves if what is coming will be an analog of the one and only episode on history when the market did not plunge after all Morgan Stanley market timing indicators hit a sell (and were at an all time high), or will this case be similar to Mar-90, May-92, Jun-07 when the outcome was anything but a happy ending.<blockquote>综上所述，读者不得不问自己，即将到来的事件是否会类似于历史上唯一一次在摩根士丹利所有市场时机指标都达到卖出（并处于历史高位）后市场没有暴跌的事件，或者这种情况会类似于1990年3月、1992年5月、2007年6月，结果绝不是一个幸福的结局。</blockquote>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>\"We Took Out The June 2007 Highs\": Morgan Stanley's Sell Signal Just Hit An All Time High<blockquote>“我们打破了2007年6月的高点”：摩根士丹利的卖出信号刚刚创下历史新高</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\">\n\"We Took Out The June 2007 Highs\": Morgan Stanley's Sell Signal Just Hit An All Time High<blockquote>“我们打破了2007年6月的高点”：摩根士丹利的卖出信号刚刚创下历史新高</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nzerohedge2021-06-07 17:52\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nFor the past several months, Morgan Stanley's fundamental analysts have been turning increasingly bearish on stocks, with the pessimistic sentimentplateauing earlier this weekwhen chief equity strategist Michael Wilson said that there is far too much optimism in the market, and that while earnings are slowly rising, forward PE multiples are far too high and are set to slide, with \"the de-rating about 75% to go or an approximate 15% decline in P/Es from here.\" As a result, in Wilson's view - which is rapidly emerging as the most bearish on Wall Street - \"earnings revisions will not be able to offset that de-rating, leaving the overall market vulnerable to a 10-15 % correction over the next 6 months.\"<blockquote>过去几个月，摩根士丹利的基本面分析师对股市的悲观情绪越来越悲观，本周早些时候，首席股票策略师迈克尔·威尔逊(Michael Wilson)表示，市场上过于乐观，而盈利正在缓慢上升，远期市盈率太高，并且将会下滑，“评级将下调约75%，市盈率将下降约15%。”因此，在威尔逊看来——这正迅速成为华尔街最悲观的人——”盈利修正将无法抵消评级下调的影响，导致整体市场在未来6个月内容易出现10-15%的调整。”</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f72ac2b1254473a56a44d443d5b0af2e\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"298\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It now appears that Morgan Stanley's fundamental bearishness has spilled over into the bank's technical analyst team and as the bank's chief Euro equity Strategist Matthew Garman writes,for only the fifth time in over 30 years, each of Morgan Stanley's five market timing indicators are giving a sell signal at the same time.<blockquote>现在看来，摩根士丹利的基本面看跌情绪已经蔓延到该行的技术分析师团队，正如该行首席欧元股票策略师马修·加曼所写，30多年来，摩根士丹利的五个市场时机指标中的每一个都同时发出卖出信号，这是第五次。</blockquote> Not only that, but the bank's Combined Market Timing Indicator - which has been in sell territory since March - just hit a new all time high of 1.19, surpassing the previous record high seen in June-2007, right around the time of the first great quant crash and before the market collapsed.<blockquote>不仅如此，该银行的综合市场时机指标（自3月份以来一直处于卖出区域）刚刚创下1.19的历史新高，超过了2007年6月创下的历史新高，当时正值第一次大规模量化崩盘和市场崩溃之前。</blockquote> According to Garman, the only time equities have risen after a \"Full House\" Sell Signal was in Feb 17, shortly after the Shanghai Accord kicked in to prevent a global recession. The other previous occasions where there was a \"Full House\" Sell Signal were Mar-90, May-92, Jun-07. According to MS,\"in the 6M post the initial Full House Sell Signal, MSCI Europe has fallen on average 6%.\"<blockquote>加曼表示，股市唯一一次在“满座”卖出信号后上涨是在2月17日，即防止全球经济衰退的上海协议生效后不久。之前出现“满座”卖出信号的其他场合是1990年3月、1992年5月、2007年6月。根据MS的说法，“在最初的满仓抛售信号后的600万美元中，MSCI欧洲平均下跌了6%。”.\"</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/840d972b24ae257679bd7334982d19d8\" tg-width=\"1130\" tg-height=\"415\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">So with every in house risk indicator screaming sell, does that mean that Morgan Stanley will have the balls to tell its clients to sell? Why of course not, because in this market where stuff like the AMC, GameStop and Bed Bath squeezes force analysts to admit they no longer have any idea what's going on...<blockquote>那么，随着每一个内部风险指标都尖叫着卖出，这是否意味着摩根士丹利将有胆量告诉其客户卖出？为什么当然不是，因为在这个市场上，像AMC、游戏驿站和Bed Bath这样的东西挤压迫使分析师承认他们不再知道发生了什么……</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/79e9d638925af010cddcb25105f8a4b0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"471\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Morgan Stanley is keeping the hope and assuming that the current period will be similar to 2017 - the only other time when a massive sell signal did not result in a market plunge.<blockquote>...摩根士丹利仍然抱有希望，并假设当前时期将与2017年类似——这是唯一一次大规模卖出信号没有导致市场暴跌。</blockquote> Back in 2017, we remained constructive despite the signal given i) strong EPS growth, ii) an early cycle environment, iii) EU inflows, iv) low sentiment and v) a rise in M&amp;A. Sentiment metrics may look more elevated than in 2017, but many of those factors remain in place today. While we see a trickier risk-reward for equities globally, we maintain our view that there is a compelling case for Europe to outperform global peers. Yet even Morgan Stanley is forced to admit that while Defensives may just scrape by after a record sell signal, cyclicals are about to be hammered. The next chart shows the relative performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives after a Full House Sell Signal on. As MS notes, \"perhaps unsurprisingly, given the poor performance at the market level, Cyclicals have struggled. In the 6M post the four initial Full House Sell Signals, Cyclicals have underperformed Defensives on average 12%, and this drops to -15% looking at any day<blockquote>早在2017年，尽管发出了i)每股收益强劲增长、ii)早期周期环境、iii)欧盟资金流入、iv)情绪低迷以及v)并购增加的信号，但我们仍然保持建设性态度。情绪指标可能看起来比2017年更高，但其中许多因素今天仍然存在。尽管我们认为全球股市的风险回报更加棘手，但我们仍然认为欧洲有令人信服的理由跑赢全球同行。然而，就连摩根士丹利也被迫承认，虽然防御性股票在创纪录的卖出信号后可能只是勉强度日，但周期性股票即将受到重创。下图显示了满仓卖出信号后周期性股票与防御性股票的相对表现。正如微软指出的，“考虑到市场层面的糟糕表现，周期类股一直在苦苦挣扎，这也许并不奇怪。在最初四次抛售信号发出后的600万个交易日里，周期类股的表现平均落后于防御性股12%，而这一比例在任何一天都会降至-15%</blockquote> when the MTIs have all said sell at the same time.\"<blockquote>当MTI都同时表示卖出时。”</blockquote> This was true even in 2017 when equity markets rose: \"we previously cited similarities with the 2017 Full House Sell Signal as reasons to not get overly cautious on equity markets in aggregate at this moment in time. After the February-2017 Full House Sell Signal, MSCI Europe continued to rise pretty consistently through the rest of the year. However, despite strong performance from the market in aggregate, the performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives was much poorer. Between February and June 2017 Cyclicals underperformed Defensives by 6%.\"<blockquote>即使在2017年股市上涨时也是如此：“我们之前引用了与2017年全面抛售信号的相似之处，作为目前不要对整体股市过于谨慎的理由。在2017年2月的全面抛售信号之后，摩根士丹利资本国际欧洲指数在今年剩余时间里继续持续上涨。然而，尽管市场整体表现强劲，但周期性股票相对于防御性股票的表现要差得多。2017年2月至6月期间，周期性股票的表现落后防御性股票6%。”</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8dcf00cdefd33fef071981aa4a5547a7\" tg-width=\"1084\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">It's not just the bank's sell signal that is prompting concerns about the future returns of cyclicals: Borrowing a page from our own warnings (see \"China's Credit Impulse Just Turned Negative, Unleashing Global Deflationary Shockwave\"), Morgan Stanley looks at \"a number of China data points which are giving warning signs\" first and foremost the collapse in China's credit impulse, to wit:<blockquote>引发人们对周期性股票未来回报担忧的不仅仅是央行的卖出信号：借用我们自己的警告（参见“中国的信贷冲动刚刚转为负面，释放全球通缩冲击波”），摩根士丹利着眼于“一些中国数据点发出警告信号”，首先是中国信贷冲动的崩溃，即：</blockquote> While credit tightening has been front-loaded in 1H21, as outlined here, our economists remain constructive on China's growth recovery. Having said that, a number of Chinese data points do suggest the Cyclical bounce looks overextended.China's credit impulse has just turned negative, and historically this has provided a lead indicator for the year-on-year performance of European Cyclicals (Exhibit 5).Similarly, the relative performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives has closely tracked moves in Chinese 10Y bond yields, which are now at their lowest levels since September 2020, standing in sharp contrast to the performance of Cyclicals.<blockquote>尽管信贷紧缩已在2021年上半年提前实施，但我们的经济学家对中国的增长复苏仍持建设性态度。话虽如此，一些中国数据确实表明周期性反弹看起来过度。中国的信贷冲动刚刚转负，从历史上看，这为欧洲周期类股的同比表现提供了领先指标（图表5）。同样，周期性股票与防御性股票的相对表现密切跟踪中国10年期债券收益率的走势，目前中国10年期债券收益率处于2020年9月以来的最低水平，与周期性股票的表现形成鲜明对比。</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c85032415626480364933f91dda387bf\" tg-width=\"1065\" tg-height=\"409\"><blockquote></blockquote> Putting it all together, readers have to ask themselves if what is coming will be an analog of the one and only episode on history when the market did not plunge after all Morgan Stanley market timing indicators hit a sell (and were at an all time high), or will this case be similar to Mar-90, May-92, Jun-07 when the outcome was anything but a happy ending.<blockquote>综上所述，读者不得不问自己，即将到来的事件是否会类似于历史上唯一一次在摩根士丹利所有市场时机指标都达到卖出（并处于历史高位）后市场没有暴跌的事件，或者这种情况会类似于1990年3月、1992年5月、2007年6月，结果绝不是一个幸福的结局。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/we-took-out-june-2007-highs-morgan-stanleys-sell-signal-just-hit-all-time-high\">zerohedge</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/we-took-out-june-2007-highs-morgan-stanleys-sell-signal-just-hit-all-time-high","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1194257742","content_text":"For the past several months, Morgan Stanley's fundamental analysts have been turning increasingly bearish on stocks, with the pessimistic sentimentplateauing earlier this weekwhen chief equity strategist Michael Wilson said that there is far too much optimism in the market, and that while earnings are slowly rising, forward PE multiples are far too high and are set to slide, with \"the de-rating about 75% to go or an approximate 15% decline in P/Es from here.\" As a result, in Wilson's view - which is rapidly emerging as the most bearish on Wall Street - \"earnings revisions will not be able to offset that de-rating, leaving the overall market vulnerable to a 10-15 % correction over the next 6 months.\"\nIt now appears that Morgan Stanley's fundamental bearishness has spilled over into the bank's technical analyst team and as the bank's chief Euro equity Strategist Matthew Garman writes,for only the fifth time in over 30 years, each of Morgan Stanley's five market timing indicators are giving a sell signal at the same time.\nNot only that, but the bank's Combined Market Timing Indicator - which has been in sell territory since March - just hit a new all time high of 1.19, surpassing the previous record high seen in June-2007, right around the time of the first great quant crash and before the market collapsed.\nAccording to Garman, the only time equities have risen after a \"Full House\" Sell Signal was in Feb 17, shortly after the Shanghai Accord kicked in to prevent a global recession. The other previous occasions where there was a \"Full House\" Sell Signal were Mar-90, May-92, Jun-07. According to MS,\"in the 6M post the initial Full House Sell Signal, MSCI Europe has fallen on average 6%.\"\nSo with every in house risk indicator screaming sell, does that mean that Morgan Stanley will have the balls to tell its clients to sell? Why of course not, because in this market where stuff like the AMC, GameStop and Bed Bath squeezes force analysts to admit they no longer have any idea what's going on...\n... Morgan Stanley is keeping the hope and assuming that the current period will be similar to 2017 - the only other time when a massive sell signal did not result in a market plunge.\n\nBack in 2017, we remained constructive despite the signal given i) strong EPS growth, ii) an early cycle environment, iii) EU inflows, iv) low sentiment and v) a rise in M&A. Sentiment metrics may look more elevated than in 2017, but many of those factors remain in place today. While we see a trickier risk-reward for equities globally, we maintain our view that there is a compelling case for Europe to outperform global peers.\n\nYet even Morgan Stanley is forced to admit that while Defensives may just scrape by after a record sell signal, cyclicals are about to be hammered. The next chart shows the relative performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives after a Full House Sell Signal on. As MS notes, \"perhaps unsurprisingly, given the poor performance at the market level, Cyclicals have struggled. In the 6M post the four initial Full House Sell Signals, Cyclicals have underperformed Defensives on average 12%, and this drops to -15% looking at any day\nwhen the MTIs have all said sell at the same time.\"\nThis was true even in 2017 when equity markets rose: \"we previously cited similarities with the 2017 Full House Sell Signal as reasons to not get overly cautious on equity markets in aggregate at this moment in time. After the February-2017 Full House Sell Signal, MSCI Europe continued to rise pretty consistently through the rest of the year. However, despite strong performance from the market in aggregate, the performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives was much poorer. Between February and June 2017 Cyclicals underperformed Defensives by 6%.\"\nIt's not just the bank's sell signal that is prompting concerns about the future returns of cyclicals: Borrowing a page from our own warnings (see \"China's Credit Impulse Just Turned Negative, Unleashing Global Deflationary Shockwave\"), Morgan Stanley looks at \"a number of China data points which are giving warning signs\" first and foremost the collapse in China's credit impulse, to wit:\nWhile credit tightening has been front-loaded in 1H21, as outlined here, our economists remain constructive on China's growth recovery. Having said that, a number of Chinese data points do suggest the Cyclical bounce looks overextended.China's credit impulse has just turned negative, and historically this has provided a lead indicator for the year-on-year performance of European Cyclicals (Exhibit 5).Similarly, the relative performance of Cyclicals versus Defensives has closely tracked moves in Chinese 10Y bond yields, which are now at their lowest levels since September 2020, standing in sharp contrast to the performance of Cyclicals.\n\nPutting it all together, readers have to ask themselves if what is coming will be an analog of the one and only episode on history when the market did not plunge after all Morgan Stanley market timing indicators hit a sell (and were at an all time high), or will this case be similar to Mar-90, May-92, Jun-07 when the outcome was anything but a happy ending.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1893,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":2,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"hasMoreComment":false,"orderType":2}