Bottom-line: 중앙은행 파월 의장이 가장 눈여겨보는 핵심 물가 지표는 3월 월간 0.4% 상승에서 4월 월간 0.1% 상승으로 물가 상승폭이 둔화 됨.
Application specialist Owen Minde shows us a breakdown of month-over-month that Supercore CPI figure (i.e., core services excluding rent of primary residence and owners equivalent rent of residence). The April number is +0.1%, down from +0.4% in March.
Application specialist Owen Minde shows us a breakdown of month-over-month that Supercore CPI figure (i.e., core services excluding rent of primary residence and owners equivalent rent of residence). The April number is +0.1%, down from +0.4% in March.
Bottom-line: 중앙은행이 가장 선호하는 핵심물가지표의 전년 대비 상승률도 3월 5.8% 증가에서 4월 5.1% 증가로 둔화됨. 이는 항공을 포함한 운송 부문 기여도 하락 때문임.
Supercore year-on-year comes down significantly from 5.8% to 5.1 in April, application specialist Owen Minde notes, largely due to airline base effects bringing down the ‘Transportation’ contribution from 3% to 2.5%.
Supercore year-on-year comes down significantly from 5.8% to 5.1 in April, application specialist Owen Minde notes, largely due to airline base effects bringing down the ‘Transportation’ contribution from 3% to 2.5%.
Bottom-line: 중국 정부가 외국인 투자를 유치하려는 목표를 압박하기도 하지만, 실제 투자 유치를 통해 돌파구를 마련해야 하는 중국 기업들도 많은 상태, 때문에 중국 기업들은 올해 외국인 투자를 유치하기 위한 다양한 활동을 하고 있음. 불행히도 투자자들은 예측 불가능한 영역의 중국 정책 변화와 경제 성장에 대한 의구심으로 투자를 조심하고 있음.
China’s unpredictable policy making is deterring foreign investment that the country’s cash-strapped cities are desperate to entice. Local officials are cold calling foreign entrepreneurs and bringing roadshows overseas as they seek to bolster coffers depleted by years of pandemic spending and a cratering property market. They also face pressure from the central government to boost investment in what the commerce ministry has dubbed the “Year of Investing in China". Their efforts are being met with a lukewarm reception from business communities outside China. While memorandums of understanding have been signed and some deals announced, many potential investors remain cautious about the country’s economic growth and wary of unexpected policy shifts.
China’s unpredictable policy making is deterring foreign investment that the country’s cash-strapped cities are desperate to entice. Local officials are cold calling foreign entrepreneurs and bringing roadshows overseas as they seek to bolster coffers depleted by years of pandemic spending and a cratering property market. They also face pressure from the central government to boost investment in what the commerce ministry has dubbed the “Year of Investing in China". Their efforts are being met with a lukewarm reception from business communities outside China. While memorandums of understanding have been signed and some deals announced, many potential investors remain cautious about the country’s economic growth and wary of unexpected policy shifts.
Bottom-line: 타이거 글로벌 자산운용에서 투자 중인 비상장 자산들의 수익 실현이 어려워짐에 따라, 2차 시장에서 매각을 검토 중인 것으로 알려짐. 연 초 기준 510억 달러 상당의 자산이 신생 기업에 투자되어 있는 것으로 알려졌는데, 이와 같은 자산들을 매각하기 위해 최근 자문 인력을 고용함. 이같은 문제는 동종의 업계 운용사들이 동일하게 겪고 있으며, 그 어떤 시기보다 어려운 도전에 직면해 있다고 할 수 있음. 이들은 신생 기업들에 많은 돈을 빠르게 투입하며 기업 가치를 크게 높여놨지만, 기술주 중심의 타격 속에 큰 피해를 입은 상태임. 해당 운용사도 작년 투자한 신생 기업들의 가치를 33% 상각했으며, 상장되는 기업들 수도 줄어듬에 따라 2차 시장을 통한 출구 전략을 고려하고 있음. 이는 자금을 재분배하거나 빠른 시일 내 회복이 어려울 것으로 보이는 회사를 매각하기 위한 방법으로 판단되고 있음.
Tiger Global Management is seeking to offload hundreds of millions of dollars worth of private companies into the secondary market, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The vast majority of assets at Chase Coleman’s firm, which managed $51 billion at the beginning of the year, is in startups. The investment firm has hired an adviser to explore options to sell a portion of that, the Financial Times reported Sunday. Like many of its peers, Tiger Global is grappling with one of the most challenging periods that venture investors have faced in years. They poured money at a rapid pace into splashy startups, bidding up their valuations, only to get burned in last year’s tech swoon. Tiger Global marked down its venture investments by about 33% last year, resulting in a $23 billion decline in value. Now, as fewer companies are going public, investors are turning to the secondary market to find an exit. They may seek liquidity for several reasons: to provide distributions to clients, fund add-on investments to existing portfolio companies or to ditch companies they don’t believe will bounce back fast enough. Tiger Global has invested in hundreds of venture-backed companies, including ByteDance, Snyk, Discord and Chime.
Tiger Global Management is seeking to offload hundreds of millions of dollars worth of private companies into the secondary market, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The vast majority of assets at Chase Coleman’s firm, which managed $51 billion at the beginning of the year, is in startups. The investment firm has hired an adviser to explore options to sell a portion of that, the Financial Times reported Sunday. Like many of its peers, Tiger Global is grappling with one of the most challenging periods that venture investors have faced in years. They poured money at a rapid pace into splashy startups, bidding up their valuations, only to get burned in last year’s tech swoon. Tiger Global marked down its venture investments by about 33% last year, resulting in a $23 billion decline in value. Now, as fewer companies are going public, investors are turning to the secondary market to find an exit. They may seek liquidity for several reasons: to provide distributions to clients, fund add-on investments to existing portfolio companies or to ditch companies they don’t believe will bounce back fast enough. Tiger Global has invested in hundreds of venture-backed companies, including ByteDance, Snyk, Discord and Chime.
Bottom-line: 홈디포는 부진한 실적 발표와 함께 올해 매출 성장에 대한 전망을 당초 전년과 유사하다 했던 것과 달리 전년 대비 -5% 감소로 정정함. 과거 주택 가격 상승과 각종 보조금 지급, 바이러스 대확산으로 인해 주거지에 머무르는 시간 증가가 복합적으로 만든 폭발적인 인테리어 수요가 성장을 견인했다면, 근래는 물가 및 금리 상승 속에 소비자 수요가 크게 둔화되고 있기 때문이라 설명했음.
Home Depot Inc. cut its outlook for the year after first-quarter sales dropped more than expected, a sign that economic uncertainty is leading to a pullback in home improvement spending. Comparable sales are now forecast to decline as much as 5% this year, following a bad start to the year affected by lumber deflation and poor weather, the company said Tuesday. Home Depot, which previously predicted sales would remain flat this year, said demand is softening more than it had expected. The first-quarter results show the company’s performance is starting to lag after several years of soaring home-improvement spending that was sparked by a booming housing market and stimulus payments that let consumers invest in their homes during pandemic restrictions. That binge has now begun to slow amid rising inflation and interest rates.
Home Depot Inc. cut its outlook for the year after first-quarter sales dropped more than expected, a sign that economic uncertainty is leading to a pullback in home improvement spending. Comparable sales are now forecast to decline as much as 5% this year, following a bad start to the year affected by lumber deflation and poor weather, the company said Tuesday. Home Depot, which previously predicted sales would remain flat this year, said demand is softening more than it had expected. The first-quarter results show the company’s performance is starting to lag after several years of soaring home-improvement spending that was sparked by a booming housing market and stimulus payments that let consumers invest in their homes during pandemic restrictions. That binge has now begun to slow amid rising inflation and interest rates.
Bottom-line: 소매판매 지표는 여러 측면에서 경기침체라는 저승사자가 문 앞에 서성이고 있지 않단걸 알려줬지만, 마찬가지 금리인하 또한 눈 앞에 있지 않단 사실을 알려줌. 그러므로 누가 이 지표를 기뻐할까 의문을 가지는 것임.
Well, I guess some more of the recessionary concerns have been assuaged. While headline retail sales were lower than expected at +0.4% (vs a forecast rise of 0.8%), the important core aggregates such as control-group sales handily bested expectations, rising 0.7%. Meanwhile, the revisions were revised again, though the aggregate impact looks relatively modest. The three-month annualized gain in control-group sales is 4.7% -- so much for negative growth!-- which hardly suggests that consumers have hit a brick wall and that the economic Grim Reaper is at the door. Is it enough to entice the Fed to hike again? No, but it certainly suggests that rate cuts are far, far from an imminent prospect, which is not welcome news to anyone trading like they are.
Well, I guess some more of the recessionary concerns have been assuaged. While headline retail sales were lower than expected at +0.4% (vs a forecast rise of 0.8%), the important core aggregates such as control-group sales handily bested expectations, rising 0.7%. Meanwhile, the revisions were revised again, though the aggregate impact looks relatively modest. The three-month annualized gain in control-group sales is 4.7% -- so much for negative growth!-- which hardly suggests that consumers have hit a brick wall and that the economic Grim Reaper is at the door. Is it enough to entice the Fed to hike again? No, but it certainly suggests that rate cuts are far, far from an imminent prospect, which is not welcome news to anyone trading like they are.
Docent: 합리적인 이유로 설명되지 않는 일이 지속된다면, 그것은 우리가 중요한 무언가를 놓치고 있단 좋은 신호라 할 수 있음. 종국적으로 현상을 이해하게 되는 핵심은 매우 간단하지만, 그 과정에 이르기가 또한 매우 어렵다는 것도 사실임. 이런 현상 중 하나가 바로 막대한 양의 채권 선물 공매도 포지션이라 할 수 있는데, 작년과 같은 경우 금리가 지속적으로 상승했기 때문에 만기가 긴 채권에 대한 공매도 포지션이 합리적이었지만, 올해의 환경에서는 도저히 설명하기 어려운 상태임. 그렇다면, 우리는 인과관계에 대해 다시 한 번 살펴봐야 하지 않을까? 보통 우리는 채권 선물의 투기적 포지션과 공모 펀드의 포지션을 따로 분리할 뿐 아니라 서로 반대 영역에 있다고 생각하는데, 2006년 이후 10년 국채 선물에 대한 두 집단 간 상관관계는 -0.89로 거의 반비례하는 모습을 보임. 이는 어쩌면, 헤지펀드의 대규모 채권 공매도가 아니라, 실제 공모 채권 펀드 매니저들의 대규모 순매수일 수도 있다는 뜻임. 헤지펀드와 공모펀드를 이분법적으로 나누는 회계적 방법론을 벗어나보면, 최근의 급증하는 채권 선물 미결제 약정에 대해 이해할 수 있게 됨.
Whenever you see a persistent anomaly that appears to defy rational explanation, that’s usually a good sign that you’re missing something important. Sometimes the rationale ends up being quite simple, but on other occasions there a lot of layers to unpeel before uncovering the truth. The enormous short in Treasury bond futures across the curve is one such phenomenon that’s a little difficult to take at face value. The usual go-to explanation doesn’t hold much water, either. In truth, the big short looks like a combination of carry maximization on the part of asset managers and some arbitrary categorization choices by the CFTC. It’s a question I’ve been asked from time to time this year, including as recently as yesterday: What’s behind the big bond-futures short position? Over the last year, the combined speculative short position (defined as non-commercial net shorts in the legacy CFTC Commitment of Traders report) across the bond futures complex has exploded, and now sits at a record of nearly 3.6 million 10-year futures equivalents. This proliferation made sense last year when bonds were tanking and short duration was an obvious trade. So if basis trading isn’t that attractive and the position makes little sense from a macro thematic or P/L management perspective, what’s going on here? I suspect that the chain of causality is being misidentified. The driving force is not the desire to be short bond futures on the part of speculators, but rather the desire to be long on the part of asset managers and commercial users. Certainly the trading of futures has exploded recently, as we can see from the aggregate open interest of the entire bond futures complex. It is virtually an accounting identity that “leveraged funds” are the inverse of “asset managers” in the positioning data; since 2006, the correlation of the two cohorts’ positions in 10-year futures is -0.89. It’s somewhat lower if we look at the weekly change in positions (-0.67), but still quite significant. In this case, I suspect that “the big short” is essentially a residual of the real driver of bond futures positioning. In truth, the real driver at hand is not the hedge fund short ... it’s the massive bond-manager long.
Whenever you see a persistent anomaly that appears to defy rational explanation, that’s usually a good sign that you’re missing something important. Sometimes the rationale ends up being quite simple, but on other occasions there a lot of layers to unpeel before uncovering the truth. The enormous short in Treasury bond futures across the curve is one such phenomenon that’s a little difficult to take at face value. The usual go-to explanation doesn’t hold much water, either. In truth, the big short looks like a combination of carry maximization on the part of asset managers and some arbitrary categorization choices by the CFTC. It’s a question I’ve been asked from time to time this year, including as recently as yesterday: What’s behind the big bond-futures short position? Over the last year, the combined speculative short position (defined as non-commercial net shorts in the legacy CFTC Commitment of Traders report) across the bond futures complex has exploded, and now sits at a record of nearly 3.6 million 10-year futures equivalents. This proliferation made sense last year when bonds were tanking and short duration was an obvious trade. So if basis trading isn’t that attractive and the position makes little sense from a macro thematic or P/L management perspective, what’s going on here? I suspect that the chain of causality is being misidentified. The driving force is not the desire to be short bond futures on the part of speculators, but rather the desire to be long on the part of asset managers and commercial users. Certainly the trading of futures has exploded recently, as we can see from the aggregate open interest of the entire bond futures complex. It is virtually an accounting identity that “leveraged funds” are the inverse of “asset managers” in the positioning data; since 2006, the correlation of the two cohorts’ positions in 10-year futures is -0.89. It’s somewhat lower if we look at the weekly change in positions (-0.67), but still quite significant. In this case, I suspect that “the big short” is essentially a residual of the real driver of bond futures positioning. In truth, the real driver at hand is not the hedge fund short ... it’s the massive bond-manager long.
Bottom-line: Debate Signs.
A public Fed debate. James Bullard and Neel Kashkari pushed for additional hikes, with the former expecting "two more moves this year." Others were more cautious: Mary Daly declined to endorse a June pause, emphasized that monetary policy operates with a lag, and said tighter credit conditions could be worth "a couple" of hikes. Raphael Bostic backed holding next month, while Thomas Barkin said he won't pre-judge what the FOMC does.
A public Fed debate. James Bullard and Neel Kashkari pushed for additional hikes, with the former expecting "two more moves this year." Others were more cautious: Mary Daly declined to endorse a June pause, emphasized that monetary policy operates with a lag, and said tighter credit conditions could be worth "a couple" of hikes. Raphael Bostic backed holding next month, while Thomas Barkin said he won't pre-judge what the FOMC does.
Bottom-line: AI BOOM!
Nvidia surged more than 25% in late trading after it forecast sales of $11 billion for the July quarter, far above the $7.18 billion consensus. The blowout results are a sign the world's most valuable chipmaker will prosper as AI takes hold, driving demand for new gear. The earnings buoyed Nasdaq futures, with TSMC, AMD and Marvell all getting a boost.
Nvidia surged more than 25% in late trading after it forecast sales of $11 billion for the July quarter, far above the $7.18 billion consensus. The blowout results are a sign the world's most valuable chipmaker will prosper as AI takes hold, driving demand for new gear. The earnings buoyed Nasdaq futures, with TSMC, AMD and Marvell all getting a boost.
Docent: 역사적으로 볼 때 기술주를 중심으로 한 주식시장 랠리가 비난을 피한 적이 없었고, 이번 또한 그런 상태에 있음. 투자를 함에 있어 위험을 관리하는 것도 중요하지만, 지각과 현실의 차이를 정확하게 인지하고 있는 것도 중요함. 때문에 장문의 글에서 흥미로운 부분을 발췌하여 요약하고자 함.
1) 인공지능 기술을 필두로 한 기술주 랠리가 지속되는 중에, 역사적으로 이처럼 소수의 주식에 의해 시장이 견인되어 오른 적이 매우 드물었기 때문에 이 현상을 싫어하는 이들이 한창 떠들고 있음.
Rarely does a tech-powered stock rally come along that isn’t pilloried for the fragility of its foundation. Now, with a snowballing craze for artificial intelligence pretty much propping up the market by itself, the haters are out in force. Never has so much been owed to so few when it comes to the recent upward arc of indexes like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100, upon which trillions of passively invested dollars ride.
Rarely does a tech-powered stock rally come along that isn’t pilloried for the fragility of its foundation. Now, with a snowballing craze for artificial intelligence pretty much propping up the market by itself, the haters are out in force. Never has so much been owed to so few when it comes to the recent upward arc of indexes like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100, upon which trillions of passively invested dollars ride.
2) 엔비디아의 1,900억 달러 규모 주가 상승이 나스닥 100 지수를 5주 연속 상승으로 견인함. 뿐만 아니라 엔비디아의 놀라운 전망 덕분에 7대 기술주의 시가총액을 일주일 간 4,540억 달러 추가시켰음. 물론, 이런 소수 집중의 주식들이 견인하는 상승에 대한 경고는 매 년 있어왔음.
Supercharged by a $190 billion rally in Nvidia Corp., the Nasdaq 100 climbed for a fifth straight week with a 3.6% gain, trouncing other indexes amid smoldering concerns about rising interest rates and a recession. Thanks to a blockbuster sales forecast from Nvidia., the seven largest tech stocks — also including Microsoft Corp, Alphabet Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Meta Platforms Inc. and Tesla Inc. — added a combined $454 billion in value over five days, pulling the S&P 500 to a second straight weekly gain. Warnings that this type of concentration will incinerate the wider stock market have been a recurring feature of commentary year after year.
Supercharged by a $190 billion rally in Nvidia Corp., the Nasdaq 100 climbed for a fifth straight week with a 3.6% gain, trouncing other indexes amid smoldering concerns about rising interest rates and a recession. Thanks to a blockbuster sales forecast from Nvidia., the seven largest tech stocks — also including Microsoft Corp, Alphabet Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Meta Platforms Inc. and Tesla Inc. — added a combined $454 billion in value over five days, pulling the S&P 500 to a second straight weekly gain. Warnings that this type of concentration will incinerate the wider stock market have been a recurring feature of commentary year after year.