Bottom-line: 다우닝 가 10번지의 유명한 검은색 문 앞에 연설대가 설치되었으며, 파운드화는 리즈 트러스의 성명문 발표가 다가올 수록 상승 중임.
The prime minister’s podium is being installed outside the famous black door of 10 Downing Street. The pound is taking all this news rather well. It’s spiking higher as the statement approaches, and is currently up 0.5% at $1.1278.
The prime minister’s podium is being installed outside the famous black door of 10 Downing Street. The pound is taking all this news rather well. It’s spiking higher as the statement approaches, and is currently up 0.5% at $1.1278.
Bottom-line: 천년 넘게 여전히 사용 중인 가장 오래 된 화폐인 파운드의 변동성이 이제 막 생겨난 비트코인의 그것과 비슷하게 됨.
The pound sterling -- regarded by Wikipedia as the world’s oldest currency still in use, and in continuous use since its inception more than a thousand years ago -- is lately almost as volatile as new-comer Bitcoin.
The pound sterling -- regarded by Wikipedia as the world’s oldest currency still in use, and in continuous use since its inception more than a thousand years ago -- is lately almost as volatile as new-comer Bitcoin.
Docent: 본격적인 기업들의 실적 발표 시기에 이 기사는 도슨트 역할을 하고자 함. 우선 2017년 이후 부진한 실적을 발표한 기업들은 평균 -1.2% 하락했지만, 지난 2분기는 반대로 0.6% 상승하면서 악재가 이미 반영되었다는 신호를 줌. 이 덕에 짧았던 여름의 랠리가 발생함. 제이피모건, 심지어 가장 강력한 약세론자인 모건스탠리의 마이클 윌슨도 이미 많은 기업들이 업황의 열악함을 경고해 가격에 악재가 상당 부분 반영되어 나쁜 소식에도 되려 단기 랠리의 가능성을 지적함. 반면, 지나 온 일을 확인하는 것보다 기업이 제시하는 전망에 주목해야 할 것이란 주장도 있는데, 골드만삭스의 경우 이번 분기 i) 달러 강세, ii) 비용 증가와 판매가격 미상승에 따른 이익률 감소, iii) 바이든 정부의 인플레이션 감축법에 따른 세금의 역풍이 우려되며, 2023년 성장률을 시장 예상치인 7%보다 낮은 3%로 제시함. 뱅크 오브 아메리카 또한 주식시장의 저점을 확인하는데 이익 추정치 지표를 써서는 안된다고 했는데, 이익 추정치 지표는 가격의 저점을 4개월 가량 후행하기 때문임.
Investor sentiment has been so negative going into this earnings season that at this point, even bad results might lead to a bounce in stocks. If this starts to happen, it could be a signal that the equity market’s bottom is near. With many companies in both the US and Europe having warned over the past two months about the impact of deteriorating business conditions on profit -- and seen their stock tumble --, expectations have already been reset to a large extent, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. strategist Mislav Matejka. Even one of the market’s most vocal bears, Morgan Stanley strategist Michael J. Wilson, sees scope for a short-term rebound in markets at a time when most firms are expected to be delivering grim messages to investors. “Share-price reactions to negative surprises will reveal if the bad news is priced in,” said Bloomberg Intelligence strategist Laurent Douillet, noting that rising short positions have been pressuring equities ahead of this earnings season. Disappointing results had already been priced into equities ahead of the last reporting season. Stocks in the S&P 500 Index that fell short of earnings expectations gained 0.6% after publishing results, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. This was in stark contrast to an average 1.2% decline seen during earnings seasons since 2017. Relief that corporate results showed at least some resilience helped fuel a mid-summer rally. Whatever earnings show, investors are likely to care more about forward guidance than they do about backward-looking results. Pricing power and the margin outlook will be key, with the gap between producer and consumer prices having narrowed significantly in the US since the last earnings season, although not in Europe. According to Goldman Sachs strategist Christian Mueller-Glissmann, there are three main risks heading into the season: Sales headwinds from a stronger dollar, the impact on margins of a weaker consumer and input cost pressure, and taxes due to President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. He expects negative earnings per share revisions for 2023 and forecasts growth of 3%, versus consensus for a 7% increase in profits. And for those trying to use earnings to define a stock market bottom, Bank of America Corp. strategist Milla Savova has a clear message: earnings are not the indicator to look at, as they usually trough four months after the market on average.
Investor sentiment has been so negative going into this earnings season that at this point, even bad results might lead to a bounce in stocks. If this starts to happen, it could be a signal that the equity market’s bottom is near. With many companies in both the US and Europe having warned over the past two months about the impact of deteriorating business conditions on profit -- and seen their stock tumble --, expectations have already been reset to a large extent, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. strategist Mislav Matejka. Even one of the market’s most vocal bears, Morgan Stanley strategist Michael J. Wilson, sees scope for a short-term rebound in markets at a time when most firms are expected to be delivering grim messages to investors. “Share-price reactions to negative surprises will reveal if the bad news is priced in,” said Bloomberg Intelligence strategist Laurent Douillet, noting that rising short positions have been pressuring equities ahead of this earnings season. Disappointing results had already been priced into equities ahead of the last reporting season. Stocks in the S&P 500 Index that fell short of earnings expectations gained 0.6% after publishing results, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. This was in stark contrast to an average 1.2% decline seen during earnings seasons since 2017. Relief that corporate results showed at least some resilience helped fuel a mid-summer rally. Whatever earnings show, investors are likely to care more about forward guidance than they do about backward-looking results. Pricing power and the margin outlook will be key, with the gap between producer and consumer prices having narrowed significantly in the US since the last earnings season, although not in Europe. According to Goldman Sachs strategist Christian Mueller-Glissmann, there are three main risks heading into the season: Sales headwinds from a stronger dollar, the impact on margins of a weaker consumer and input cost pressure, and taxes due to President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. He expects negative earnings per share revisions for 2023 and forecasts growth of 3%, versus consensus for a 7% increase in profits. And for those trying to use earnings to define a stock market bottom, Bank of America Corp. strategist Milla Savova has a clear message: earnings are not the indicator to look at, as they usually trough four months after the market on average.
Bottom-line: 바이든 정부의 중국 기술력 억제 정책이 더욱 강화될 가능성이 있음. 소식에 따르면, 최근 부상하고 있는 양자 컴퓨팅 기술과 인공 지능 분야에 대한 제한을 고려하고 있다고 함. 이것이 사실이라면 이달 초 이미 시행 된 무기 및 감시 시스템에 대한 첨단 반도체 제한과 동일한 형태를 가질 것임. 이런 미국의 행동은 경쟁자가 핵심 기술을 중국이 개발하지 못하도록 하는데 목표를 두고 있음. 관계 부처는 답변을 거부했음.
The Biden administration is exploring the possibility of new export controls that would limit China’s access to some of the most powerful emerging computing technologies, according to people familiar with the situation. The potential plans, which are in an early stage, are focused on the still-experimental field of quantum computing, as well as artificial intelligence software, according to the people, who asked not to be named discussing private deliberations. Industry experts are weighing in on how to set the parameters of the restrictions on this nascent technology, they said. The efforts, if implemented, would follow separate restrictions announced earlier this month aimed at stunting Beijing’s ability to deploy cutting-edge semiconductors in weapons and surveillance systems. The US has ramped up actions to stifle China’s ability to develop certain technologies that it sees as key in the competition with its top strategic rival. The sweeping regulations released earlier this month also limited how US citizens and residents participate in Chinese tech firms. The Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, which plays a key role in designing and enforcing export controls and announced the semiconductor restrictions on Oct. 7, declined to comment. The White House National Security Council isn’t aware of discussions on such additional controls, according to a spokesperson.
The Biden administration is exploring the possibility of new export controls that would limit China’s access to some of the most powerful emerging computing technologies, according to people familiar with the situation. The potential plans, which are in an early stage, are focused on the still-experimental field of quantum computing, as well as artificial intelligence software, according to the people, who asked not to be named discussing private deliberations. Industry experts are weighing in on how to set the parameters of the restrictions on this nascent technology, they said. The efforts, if implemented, would follow separate restrictions announced earlier this month aimed at stunting Beijing’s ability to deploy cutting-edge semiconductors in weapons and surveillance systems. The US has ramped up actions to stifle China’s ability to develop certain technologies that it sees as key in the competition with its top strategic rival. The sweeping regulations released earlier this month also limited how US citizens and residents participate in Chinese tech firms. The Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, which plays a key role in designing and enforcing export controls and announced the semiconductor restrictions on Oct. 7, declined to comment. The White House National Security Council isn’t aware of discussions on such additional controls, according to a spokesperson.
Bottom-line: 선물시장에서 중앙은행에 대한 최종금리에 대한 베팅은 올해 내도록 상승해 이제 5%에 도달했음. 일부 중앙은행 인사들도 이러한 수준에 이르도록 인상이 필요하다는 의견을 내고 있으며, 블룸버그 내부 예상치는 7월 5%에서 현재 6%로 올라섰음. 그러나 주식시장은 기업들의 실적 발표에 초점을 두면서 금리인상 위험은 뒤로 두고 있음. 역사적으로 가격은 이익을 따르지만, 금리인상 위험이 전면에 부각될 때 또 다시 위협이 될 것임. 과거 5% 이상의 정책금리 시기를 살펴보면 주가수익비율은 16.1배까지 하락하는데, S&P 500 지수의 수요일 종가 기준(주당순이익 추정치가 하향되지 않는다는 가정 하에)으로 -11% 하방 위험을 지님. 정책금리가 높아질수록 주가수익비율은 낮아지는 경향이 있어 때때로 정점에 도달했을 때 주가수익비율은 15.3배까지 하락하기도 함. 올해 시장 참여자들은 중앙은행의 정책금리에 대해 지속 과소평가 해왔기 때문에 선물 시장의 가파른 정책금리 반영을 주식시장은 늦게 뒤따르고 있음.
On Wall Street, the consensus is that the Federal Reserve’s key overnight rate will peak at 5% in the first half of next year as the central bank keeps hiking in the face of stubbornly high inflation. If that’s correct, then stock valuations are likely to fall even further. Fed funds futures show traders bet the rate -- now in a range of 3-3.25% -- will hit 5% by March 2023. Some Fed speakers have openly endorsed such expectations and markets are slowly adjusting to that possibility. Treasury yields are now well over 4% across the curve, with the policy sensitive two-year note over 4.6%. Equities have been slower to follow, given that earnings season is dominating everyone’s attention. Historically, earnings have lifted stock prices. But investors are likely to face more pressure once rate-hike risk is back in the foreground. Markets have consistently underestimated how far the Fed will go, with wagers for where the rate will peak rising steadily all year. Bloomberg Economics, which anticipated a terminal rate of 5% back in July, is now making the case for it hitting 6%. Veteran fund manager Mark Mobius warned of 9%. It hasn’t been that high since the late 1980s. Looking at past times when the Fed pushed its rate up to 5%, the median S&P 500 price-to-earnings ratio was 16.1 when it first reached that level, according to quarterly data going back to 1954. It was at 18 by Wednesday’s close. Assuming earnings don’t change from current levels, a P/E ratio of 16.1 would imply an S&P 500 index at 3,276.3, or an 11.3% decline from Wednesday’s close. It’s worth noting that past tightening cycles have typically gone past 5%. And as rates went higher, valuations went lower. The median S&P 500 P/E low reached during past Fed tightening cycles that took rates to 5% and above was 15.3.
On Wall Street, the consensus is that the Federal Reserve’s key overnight rate will peak at 5% in the first half of next year as the central bank keeps hiking in the face of stubbornly high inflation. If that’s correct, then stock valuations are likely to fall even further. Fed funds futures show traders bet the rate -- now in a range of 3-3.25% -- will hit 5% by March 2023. Some Fed speakers have openly endorsed such expectations and markets are slowly adjusting to that possibility. Treasury yields are now well over 4% across the curve, with the policy sensitive two-year note over 4.6%. Equities have been slower to follow, given that earnings season is dominating everyone’s attention. Historically, earnings have lifted stock prices. But investors are likely to face more pressure once rate-hike risk is back in the foreground. Markets have consistently underestimated how far the Fed will go, with wagers for where the rate will peak rising steadily all year. Bloomberg Economics, which anticipated a terminal rate of 5% back in July, is now making the case for it hitting 6%. Veteran fund manager Mark Mobius warned of 9%. It hasn’t been that high since the late 1980s. Looking at past times when the Fed pushed its rate up to 5%, the median S&P 500 price-to-earnings ratio was 16.1 when it first reached that level, according to quarterly data going back to 1954. It was at 18 by Wednesday’s close. Assuming earnings don’t change from current levels, a P/E ratio of 16.1 would imply an S&P 500 index at 3,276.3, or an 11.3% decline from Wednesday’s close. It’s worth noting that past tightening cycles have typically gone past 5%. And as rates went higher, valuations went lower. The median S&P 500 P/E low reached during past Fed tightening cycles that took rates to 5% and above was 15.3.
Bloomberg
Bloomberg Link
Bloomberg Links: cross-platform sharing of Bloomberg Terminal and Mobile content
Bottom-line: 메리 데일리는 경제지표들이 도움을 주고 있지 않지만, 최종 정책금리가 다가 올 수록 한 번에 인상하는 금리 폭을 50bp 혹은 25bp로 낮춰야 한다고 생각함. 또한 시장 참여자들도 75bp 금리인상이 끊임없이 연속 될 것이라 단정짓지 말것을 권고함.
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President Mary Daly said that policymakers should start planning for a reduction in the size of interest-rate increases, though it’s not yet time to “step down” from large hikes. “It should at least be something we’re considering at this point, but the data haven’t been cooperating,” Daly said Friday in a fireside chat hosted by the University of California Berkeley. At the November meeting, “we might find ourselves, and the markets have certainly priced this in, with another 75 basis-point increase, but I would really recommend people don’t take that away as, it’s 75 forever.”. A slowdown to more incremental increases of 50 or 25 basis points will be appropriate as the Fed’s benchmark rate gets closer to its terminal level for this hiking cycle, Daly said.
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President Mary Daly said that policymakers should start planning for a reduction in the size of interest-rate increases, though it’s not yet time to “step down” from large hikes. “It should at least be something we’re considering at this point, but the data haven’t been cooperating,” Daly said Friday in a fireside chat hosted by the University of California Berkeley. At the November meeting, “we might find ourselves, and the markets have certainly priced this in, with another 75 basis-point increase, but I would really recommend people don’t take that away as, it’s 75 forever.”. A slowdown to more incremental increases of 50 or 25 basis points will be appropriate as the Fed’s benchmark rate gets closer to its terminal level for this hiking cycle, Daly said.
Bottom-line: 비트코인의 가격 움직임이 S&P 500 지수 및 나스닥 100 지수와 각각 0.69, 0.72의 상관관계를 가지고 있지만, 이는 몇개월 전까지 거의 똑같은 자산같이 움직이던 때보다 낮아지는 추세에 있음. 반면 8월까지 0의 상관관계를 가지던 금과 현재 0.50의 상관관계까지 가파르게 높아짐. 뱅크 오브 아메리카는 거시경제 환경이 불확실하고 시장의 저점을 향한 하락이 남았단 생각이 투자자들로 하여금 비트코인을 다시 안전자산처럼 여기도록 어떤 변화의 과정에 있지 않나 추정함.
Bitcoin’s movements in relation to other assets may indicate that investors see it becoming a haven again, after a stretch where it’s traded basically as a risk asset, according to Bank of America Corp. The largest cryptocurrency has a 40-day correlation with gold of about 0.50, up from around zero in mid-August. While the correlations are higher with the S&P 500, at 0.69, and Nasdaq 100 at 0.72, they’ve flattened out and are below record levels from a few months ago. BofA digital strategists Alkesh Shah and Andrew Moss see that as a sign that things could be changing. “A decelerating positive correlation with SPX/QQQ and a rapidly rising correlation with XAU indicate that investors may view Bitcoin as a relative safe haven as macro uncertainty continues and a market bottom remains to be seen,” the strategists wrote.
Bitcoin’s movements in relation to other assets may indicate that investors see it becoming a haven again, after a stretch where it’s traded basically as a risk asset, according to Bank of America Corp. The largest cryptocurrency has a 40-day correlation with gold of about 0.50, up from around zero in mid-August. While the correlations are higher with the S&P 500, at 0.69, and Nasdaq 100 at 0.72, they’ve flattened out and are below record levels from a few months ago. BofA digital strategists Alkesh Shah and Andrew Moss see that as a sign that things could be changing. “A decelerating positive correlation with SPX/QQQ and a rapidly rising correlation with XAU indicate that investors may view Bitcoin as a relative safe haven as macro uncertainty continues and a market bottom remains to be seen,” the strategists wrote.
Docent: 얼마전 중앙은행에서 2020년의 보고서 수정본을 발간하면서 물가안정과 자연실업률 상태에 놓이는 중립금리(r*) 외에 금융시장이 안정될 수 있는 상태의 중립금리(r**)를 제시했음. 이 기사는 파이낸셜 타임즈 내용이며, 꽤나 명쾌한 추론을 하고 있기에 도슨트가 되어 소개코자 함. 물가안정과 자연실업률을 향하는 중립금리(r*)는 현재 우리가 목도하는 것처럼 너무나 멀리 있음. 높은 인플레이션을 통제하기 위한 금리인상 속에 미국 중앙은행은 고통과 비용이 따를 것이라 단언하며, 영국 중앙은행 또한 금리인상을 망설이지 않을 것이라 발언했고, 유럽 중앙은행 또한 우리가 지금 해야 할 일을 계속 할 것이라 함. 이 모든 것은 거시경제 안정(완전고용과 물가안정)을 위한 것임. 하지만 때때로 이 금리를 향해 가다보면 은행이 벽에 부딪힐 때가 있을 것임. 자본시장의 토대가 되는 금융기관들조차 흔들리는 금융 안정성 문제가 부각 될 수 있다는 것임. 하지만 뱅크 오브 아메리카가 5%, 래리 서머스가 6%의 실업률을 제안한 것처럼 중립금리(r*)에서는 이를 어찌할 방도가 없음. 그러므로 서로 다른 작동 원리를 가지는 금리가 필요하게 됨. 그것이 바로 금융 안정성을 위한 중립금리(r**)임. 과거 앨런 그린스펀의 풋 옵션(금리인하)은 이러한 금융시장 안정성(LTCM)과 연관이 있었다는 것도 지목하고 있음. 금융시장은 금리인하를 원하고 있음. 또 다른 중립금리(r**)를 제시함에 따라 시장 참여자들은 완전고용이나 물가안정과 관련 된 중립금리(r*)는 잊어버릴 수도 있을 것임. 브라보! 이 문서는 금융 불안정성의 역할이 무엇인지 정확히 설명했음.
Four economists from the New York Fed have recently released a revised version of a 2020 paper ennoscriptd The Financial (In)Stability Real Interest Rate, R**. And what, pray tell, is r-star-star? Again, easy. If r-star is the natural real rate of interest associated with macroeconomic stability (caveat emptor), then r-star-star is the rate associated with financial stability. Cool. You can watch the paper being presented at a recent Fed event here. It’s engrossing. Spoiler alert though. There’s a major catch. Both conceptually and observationally r** differs from the “natural real interest rate” and from the observed real interest rate reflecting a tension in terms of macroeconomic stabilization versus financial stability objectives. Great. Financial stability ≠ macroeconomic stability. R-star ≠ r-star-star. Moreover, the two part ways just when it matters most — a financial crisis (basically, whenever banking hits the wall). We’re already seeing this tension play out. To choke inflation, American business leaders expect the Fed to spank labour. Bank of America expects a 5.5 per cent unemployment rate. Frankly, as Larry Summers has suggested, over 6 per cent wouldn’t be weird. So, the price mechanism and households (occasionally) need different interest rates. Full employment and price stability are (occasionally) at odds. Financial instability, meanwhile, will happily challenge both. Basically, there are conditions under which the dual mandate (alias: internal equilibrium) must take a back seat to capital markets (alias: global equilibrium). As per the paper: . . . “Greenspan’s put” . . . has been a feature of all financial stress episodes in the US [since the 1970s], with the only exception being the later part of the Great Financial Crisis . . . [in] general we note that financial stress episodes are associated with periods in which the real interest rate is above our measure of r**. Translation: financial markets want their policy cut. Otherwise, they’re gonna pay you a little visit. And when they do, you can forget whatever fed funds rate you think is appropriate for full employment and/or price stability. Bravo to the NY Fed. This paper has, in all fairness, explained exactly what it is that financial instability does.
Four economists from the New York Fed have recently released a revised version of a 2020 paper ennoscriptd The Financial (In)Stability Real Interest Rate, R**. And what, pray tell, is r-star-star? Again, easy. If r-star is the natural real rate of interest associated with macroeconomic stability (caveat emptor), then r-star-star is the rate associated with financial stability. Cool. You can watch the paper being presented at a recent Fed event here. It’s engrossing. Spoiler alert though. There’s a major catch. Both conceptually and observationally r** differs from the “natural real interest rate” and from the observed real interest rate reflecting a tension in terms of macroeconomic stabilization versus financial stability objectives. Great. Financial stability ≠ macroeconomic stability. R-star ≠ r-star-star. Moreover, the two part ways just when it matters most — a financial crisis (basically, whenever banking hits the wall). We’re already seeing this tension play out. To choke inflation, American business leaders expect the Fed to spank labour. Bank of America expects a 5.5 per cent unemployment rate. Frankly, as Larry Summers has suggested, over 6 per cent wouldn’t be weird. So, the price mechanism and households (occasionally) need different interest rates. Full employment and price stability are (occasionally) at odds. Financial instability, meanwhile, will happily challenge both. Basically, there are conditions under which the dual mandate (alias: internal equilibrium) must take a back seat to capital markets (alias: global equilibrium). As per the paper: . . . “Greenspan’s put” . . . has been a feature of all financial stress episodes in the US [since the 1970s], with the only exception being the later part of the Great Financial Crisis . . . [in] general we note that financial stress episodes are associated with periods in which the real interest rate is above our measure of r**. Translation: financial markets want their policy cut. Otherwise, they’re gonna pay you a little visit. And when they do, you can forget whatever fed funds rate you think is appropriate for full employment and/or price stability. Bravo to the NY Fed. This paper has, in all fairness, explained exactly what it is that financial instability does.
Bottom-line: 시진핑이 뚜렷한 후계자를 지정하지 않은채 권력을 연임한 뒤, 14억 중국인들을 위해 경제를 더욱 개방하고 세계와 연결고리를 유지하겠다고 했으며, 경제성장률 데이터까지 예상을 상회했지만 위안화나 증시는 약세를 지속하고 있음. 전문가들은 이번에 집권하면서 시진핑을 보필할 인력들이 그 동안 일관되게 권력에 무조건적으로 동의하며 시진핑의 편에 서 있었다는 점을 위험으로 들고 있음. 그들은 어떠한 경우에도 시진핑의 결정에 도전하지 않을 것이며, 그 누구도 틀렸다고 말하지 않을 것이기 때문임.
Minutes after pulling off a power play that stunned even seasoned China experts, a smiling Xi Jinping gave an optimistic outlook for the years ahead. Noting how the Communist Party brought China fast economic growth and social stability over the past 40 years, Xi vowed to further open the world’s second-biggest economy and stay connected with the rest of the globe. The party would align its priorities with the nation’s 1.4 billion people, he said, and continue working hard to give them “a better life.”. “Its strong fundamentals will not change,” Xi said on Sunday to conclude a twice-a-decade reshuffle of top party leaders, referring to China’s economy. “And it will remain on the positive trajectory over the long run.”. By stacking China’s most powerful bodies with his allies, Xi has ensured he’ll be around to see those pledges through -- possibly for at least another decade after he appointed no obvious potential successors. Yet rather than cheering the stability offered by the 69-year-old leader, who is currently 10 years younger than US President Joe Biden, many China watchers are worried that nobody will tell Xi when he’s wrong. “These are all officials who got to the highest level of power by agreeing with Xi Jinping on everything and by siding with him consistently,” said Victor Shih, associate professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego. “They will not start to challenge his decisions regardless of the merits of these decisions.”. China’s yuan and the country’s stocks tumbled in Hong Kong to the lowest level since the depths of the 2008 global financial crisis even as economic growth data beat estimates. The onshore yuan depreciated as much as 0.4% on Monday, while the Hang Seng China Enterprises Index, a gauge of Chinese stocks listed in Hong Kong, plunged more than 5%.
Minutes after pulling off a power play that stunned even seasoned China experts, a smiling Xi Jinping gave an optimistic outlook for the years ahead. Noting how the Communist Party brought China fast economic growth and social stability over the past 40 years, Xi vowed to further open the world’s second-biggest economy and stay connected with the rest of the globe. The party would align its priorities with the nation’s 1.4 billion people, he said, and continue working hard to give them “a better life.”. “Its strong fundamentals will not change,” Xi said on Sunday to conclude a twice-a-decade reshuffle of top party leaders, referring to China’s economy. “And it will remain on the positive trajectory over the long run.”. By stacking China’s most powerful bodies with his allies, Xi has ensured he’ll be around to see those pledges through -- possibly for at least another decade after he appointed no obvious potential successors. Yet rather than cheering the stability offered by the 69-year-old leader, who is currently 10 years younger than US President Joe Biden, many China watchers are worried that nobody will tell Xi when he’s wrong. “These are all officials who got to the highest level of power by agreeing with Xi Jinping on everything and by siding with him consistently,” said Victor Shih, associate professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego. “They will not start to challenge his decisions regardless of the merits of these decisions.”. China’s yuan and the country’s stocks tumbled in Hong Kong to the lowest level since the depths of the 2008 global financial crisis even as economic growth data beat estimates. The onshore yuan depreciated as much as 0.4% on Monday, while the Hang Seng China Enterprises Index, a gauge of Chinese stocks listed in Hong Kong, plunged more than 5%.
Bloomberg
Bloomberg Link
Bloomberg Links: cross-platform sharing of Bloomberg Terminal and Mobile content
Bottom-line: 알리바바 및 텐센트를 포함하는 대형 기술주 위주의 지수가 시진핑의 독점적 권력이 확정되며 떠나는 투자자들로 인해 큰 폭의 매도세를 보임. 이 지수의 최고점 대비 낙폭은 -74%로 20년 전 미국의 기술주 거품에 따른 나스닥 지수 낙폭인 -78%에 근접. 하지만 분석가들은 바닥을 논하기엔 아직 이르다 함. 이는 시진핑 권력 하에서 그간 기업 뿐만 아니라 민간 기업이 어려운 환경의 사업을 영위했기 때문임.
After another day of epic selling, the rout in Chinese technology stocks is rivaling the selloff during the bursting of the US dot-com bubble two decades ago, with analysts saying it’s too soon to call a bottom. The Hang Seng Tech Index, which tracks shares of internet giants including Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. and Tencent Holdings Ltd., slumped almost 10% Monday as investors fled the market in response to President Xi Jinping’s tightening control in China. That took the gauge’s plunge from its February 2021 peak to 74%, nearing the Nasdaq Composite Index’s more than yearlong slump of 78% through October 2002. The selloff suggests investors have little hopes of a revival in private enterprise under China’s new leadership, which is stacked with Xi’s allies. The past decade under his reign saw a crackdown to curb the outsized influence of tech giants. “A lot of bad news have been baked in and the market correction is clearly overshooting, but we’re still looking for an inflection point which is unclear for now,” said Xiadong Bao, fund manager at Edmond de Rothschild Asset Management in Paris.
After another day of epic selling, the rout in Chinese technology stocks is rivaling the selloff during the bursting of the US dot-com bubble two decades ago, with analysts saying it’s too soon to call a bottom. The Hang Seng Tech Index, which tracks shares of internet giants including Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. and Tencent Holdings Ltd., slumped almost 10% Monday as investors fled the market in response to President Xi Jinping’s tightening control in China. That took the gauge’s plunge from its February 2021 peak to 74%, nearing the Nasdaq Composite Index’s more than yearlong slump of 78% through October 2002. The selloff suggests investors have little hopes of a revival in private enterprise under China’s new leadership, which is stacked with Xi’s allies. The past decade under his reign saw a crackdown to curb the outsized influence of tech giants. “A lot of bad news have been baked in and the market correction is clearly overshooting, but we’re still looking for an inflection point which is unclear for now,” said Xiadong Bao, fund manager at Edmond de Rothschild Asset Management in Paris.