Bottom-line: 중앙은행의 경제성장률 예측 변화보다 실업률 예측 변화가 중요한데, 내년도 실업률 예측치 변화(+0.4%p) 규모는 항상 경기침체를 동반하는 수준이기 때문임.
By forecasting a 0.4 ppt rise in the unemployment rate next year, (from 4.1% to 4.5%), the Fed implicitly suggests a significantly high risk of a recession, even though its GDP forecast doesn’t explicitly suggest as much. Since 1970, a rise in joblessness of this magnitude has always been accompanied by a recession.
By forecasting a 0.4 ppt rise in the unemployment rate next year, (from 4.1% to 4.5%), the Fed implicitly suggests a significantly high risk of a recession, even though its GDP forecast doesn’t explicitly suggest as much. Since 1970, a rise in joblessness of this magnitude has always been accompanied by a recession.
Powell: 인플레이션 통제가 최우선 목표임을 강조함.
Powell emphasizes that the inflation fight is still job 1.
Powell emphasizes that the inflation fight is still job 1.
Powell: 대다수 위원들이 올해 더 많은 통화 긴축을 지지했다고 함.
Powell says nearly all the FOMC members expect further tightening this year.
Powell says nearly all the FOMC members expect further tightening this year.
Powell: 2% 수준의 인플레이션까지 가는 길은 아직 멀리 있음.
Powell says the process of getting inflation back to the 2% target “has a long way to go.”
Powell says the process of getting inflation back to the 2% target “has a long way to go.”
Powell: 올해 실업률 전망과 달리 내년도 실업률 전망은 높아진 것을 집으며, 노동시장 약화가 중앙은행의 금리인상에 의해 발생할 것으로 봄.
Powell points out the FOMC is projecting the unemployment rate to rise to 4.5% in 2024. So while unemployment rate forecasts were cut for this year, the FOMC still sees the labor market weakening in response to Fed hikes -- just a lot of this happening next year.
Powell points out the FOMC is projecting the unemployment rate to rise to 4.5% in 2024. So while unemployment rate forecasts were cut for this year, the FOMC still sees the labor market weakening in response to Fed hikes -- just a lot of this happening next year.
Powell: 15개월 전으로 돌아가보면, 금리를 얼마나 빨리 올려야 하냐의 문제에 있었음. 이번 회의의 동결 경우 마찬가지인데, 적정한 수준의 금리인상의 속도 조절 과정에 있는 것이며, 7월 통화정책회의 또한 데이터에 의존하게 될 것(I Do Expect That July Meeting Will Be ‘Live’ Meeting.)임.
* 그렇다면, 7월 통화정책회의가 25bp 인상을 단언하고 있지 않다는 의미임.
Keep in mind, if the July meeting is a “live” decision, that suggests a quarter-point hike isn’t baked in, then.
* 그렇다면, 7월 통화정책회의가 25bp 인상을 단언하고 있지 않다는 의미임.
Keep in mind, if the July meeting is a “live” decision, that suggests a quarter-point hike isn’t baked in, then.
Market Reaction: Stocks are getting closer to breakeven on the day. S&P 500 is down less than 0.1% now.
Powell: 점 도표에서 보여진 강경한 태도와 달리, 파월은 몇 가지 사항에 대해 정해진 바가 없다고 함으로써 주식시장에 탄력을 불어넣음.
The Powell rally is starting. The S&P has recovered most of the lost ground. Powell seems to downplay the dot plot by saying no decision has been made for the next few meetings.
The Powell rally is starting. The S&P has recovered most of the lost ground. Powell seems to downplay the dot plot by saying no decision has been made for the next few meetings.
Powell: 7월 통화정책회의 전에 우리가 볼 수 있는 경제지표가 얼마 없다는 점을 질문 받았는데, 이에 파월은 우리가 이미 본 지표들을 종합해 결론에 도달할 것이라 밝힘.
Powell is asked about the July meeting, as there isn’t a ton of economic data to come out before then. So what will the committee be using to inform their judgement? Powell says you’re adding the data to the other data the Fed has already seen -- i.e. you can draw conclusions from multi-month data.
Powell is asked about the July meeting, as there isn’t a ton of economic data to come out before then. So what will the committee be using to inform their judgement? Powell says you’re adding the data to the other data the Fed has already seen -- i.e. you can draw conclusions from multi-month data.
Powell: 충분히 제한적인 수준의 정책금리는 어디냐는 질문에, 과거와 달리 현재는 너무 낮지도 너무 높지도 않은 균형적인 수준의 정책금리에 근접한 것 같다고 함. 다만, 물가에 대한 위험은 여전하다고 밝힘.
Asked what is “sufficiently restrictive” for the Fed’s key rate, Powell says “we’ve moved much closer to that destination” with the actions taken so far. The risks of overdoing it and underdoing it are now “closer” to being in balance. But risks to inflation are still to the upside, he says.
Asked what is “sufficiently restrictive” for the Fed’s key rate, Powell says “we’ve moved much closer to that destination” with the actions taken so far. The risks of overdoing it and underdoing it are now “closer” to being in balance. But risks to inflation are still to the upside, he says.
이번 통화정책회의에서 금리인상을 잠시 중지한 것은 지난 여름 기간에 긴축의 대부분이 시행(much of the tightening took place last summer)되었기 때문에 그 영향을 지켜보겠다는 뜻( think that some of that may come into effect” going forward)임.
근데, 그 시차가 어떻게 되는지에 대해서는 'Don't know'.
근데, 그 시차가 어떻게 되는지에 대해서는 'Don't know'.
Powell: 일부 경제지표는 방향성을 가지고 있다는 점을 감안할 때, 중앙은행이 원하는 곳으로 가고 있음에도 추가 금리인상을 지지하는 이유에 대한 질문을 받음. 그는 인플레이션의 초기는 유동성이 풍부한 상태에서 상품 수요가 견인한 것이지만, 작금의 노동시장이나 임금과는 큰 관련이 없다는 점을 강조함. 이는 시장 분석가들도 이제는 인플레이션을 낮추기 위해 노동시장 과열이 해소되어야 한다는 것과 궤를 같이 함.
Up next, a question on given that some data trends are in place, why signal additional rate hikes, if things are going in the direction Fed would like to see? Powell says inflation at the beginning of this cycle it was about strong demand for goods at a time when people were sitting at home and had plenty of money in the bank. It wasn’t really related to the labor market or wages, he says. As things go on, though, “many” analysts see the need for the labor market to ease up in order to bring down inflation.
Up next, a question on given that some data trends are in place, why signal additional rate hikes, if things are going in the direction Fed would like to see? Powell says inflation at the beginning of this cycle it was about strong demand for goods at a time when people were sitting at home and had plenty of money in the bank. It wasn’t really related to the labor market or wages, he says. As things go on, though, “many” analysts see the need for the labor market to ease up in order to bring down inflation.
Bottom-line: 이번 유럽 중앙은행의 통화정책회의는 25bp 금리인상으로 결정됐으며, 7월에도 한 차례를 금리인상을 할 것으로 보임. 금리인상 중단에 대해서는 생각치 않으며, 인플레이션은 너무 오래도록 너무 높게 유지 될 위협을 보고 있음.
Lagarde says July rate hike ‘very likely’ after ECB raises forecasts. Says ECB hasn’t started thinking about pausing hikes. ECB says inflation still ‘projected to remain too high for too long’. ECB also confirms end of APP reinvestments in July.
Lagarde says July rate hike ‘very likely’ after ECB raises forecasts. Says ECB hasn’t started thinking about pausing hikes. ECB says inflation still ‘projected to remain too high for too long’. ECB also confirms end of APP reinvestments in July.
Bottom-line: 중국 내 많은 투자자들이 재량에 의해 주식을 선별하는 매니저들로부터 실망을 한 뒤 계량에 근거에 기계적으로 투자하는 펀드로 몰리고 있고, 다수 운용사들이 이 수요에 대응해 해당 전략의 비중을 높이고 있음. 7억 달러 이상의 운용자산을 가진 110개 펀드를 기반할 때, 5월 12일까지 6개월 간 재량 펀드의 수익률 +7.4% 대비 알고리즘 펀드는 +10%의 수익률을 기록했다고 함. 독보적 인기를 가진 스타 매니저에 대한 언급은 사라지고 재량적 펀드 운용에 회의적이게 됐지만, 수익자들은 그 기간동안 계량에 근거하는 투자에 믿음을 가지게 됐음. 또한 이런 알고리즘 투자는 그 안에서도 다양한 전략을 동시에 사용함으로써 성과를 냈으며, 향후 펀드 매니저들은 이런 다중전략으로 우열을 가리게 될 것이라 분석함. 매수 위주(Long-only), 시장중립, 이벤트 드리븐, 추세추종매매를 포함하는 다중전략은 매 년 성과를 내며 계량적 투자의 성배와도 같은 대우를 받고 있음.
Hedge funds that deploy a basket of computer algorithms for trading are gaining popularity in China after many investors got burned by human stock pickers. Firms including Shanghai Black Wing Asset Management Co. and Shanghai Minghong Investment Management Co. are among those ramping up multi-strategy quant offerings to tap growing investor demand. A key sector underpinning quants’ out-performance has been equities, where managers generated a 10% return in six months to May 12, beating active funds’ 7.4% advance, according to Shenzhen PaiPaiWang Investment & Management Co. data of 110 stock-focused hedge funds managing at least 5 billion yuan ($700 million). “Discussions about star managers have faded” over the past two years, Howbuy said in an April 27 report. “Investors are starting to develop a belief in quants, while becoming skeptical toward active management“. The out-performance of quants since last year has “put multi-strategy in the spotlight,” said Yi Weidong, general manager of custody at China Merchants Securities Co., the largest custodian for hedge funds. “Multi-strategy will become the next battlefield for fund managers“. “Multi-strategy is like the holy grail of quant investing,” Black Wing Chief Strategist Wang Jun said. Competitor Shanghai Minghong is seizing the opportunity to raise money for its Multi-strategy No. 1 fund, which returned an annual 18.1% before fees since inception in 2015. The company declined to specify a fund-raising target. The product, which combines long-only, market-neutral, event-driven and commodities strategies, has delivered gains every year.
Hedge funds that deploy a basket of computer algorithms for trading are gaining popularity in China after many investors got burned by human stock pickers. Firms including Shanghai Black Wing Asset Management Co. and Shanghai Minghong Investment Management Co. are among those ramping up multi-strategy quant offerings to tap growing investor demand. A key sector underpinning quants’ out-performance has been equities, where managers generated a 10% return in six months to May 12, beating active funds’ 7.4% advance, according to Shenzhen PaiPaiWang Investment & Management Co. data of 110 stock-focused hedge funds managing at least 5 billion yuan ($700 million). “Discussions about star managers have faded” over the past two years, Howbuy said in an April 27 report. “Investors are starting to develop a belief in quants, while becoming skeptical toward active management“. The out-performance of quants since last year has “put multi-strategy in the spotlight,” said Yi Weidong, general manager of custody at China Merchants Securities Co., the largest custodian for hedge funds. “Multi-strategy will become the next battlefield for fund managers“. “Multi-strategy is like the holy grail of quant investing,” Black Wing Chief Strategist Wang Jun said. Competitor Shanghai Minghong is seizing the opportunity to raise money for its Multi-strategy No. 1 fund, which returned an annual 18.1% before fees since inception in 2015. The company declined to specify a fund-raising target. The product, which combines long-only, market-neutral, event-driven and commodities strategies, has delivered gains every year.
Bottom-line: 1969년 이후 신흥국 강세를 분석해보면, i) 선진국 대비 신흥국의 더 나은 경제성장률, ii) S&P 500 지수에 대한 낮지만 양의 수익률 기대, iii) 원자재 가격 상승, iv) 달러 약세, v) 낮은 상태의 상대 가치가 충족된 상태에서 발생했음. 현재 이 중 세 가지 조건(낮은 상대 가치, S&P 500 지수에 대한 낮은 기대 수익률, 원자재 가격 상승 추이)을 갖추고 있지만, 선진국 대비 더 나은 성장률 차이와 달러 약세에 대해서는 자신이 없음. 거시적 환경의 낙관을 제외하고, 미시적 환경에서 기업을 바라보면 선진국의 다국적 기업과 신흥국 기업 간 경쟁에서 더 나은 이익과 높은 이익률을 유지할 수 있을지 의문이며, 이것이 장기 경쟁력에 악영향을 미칠 것임. 올해 하반기 신흥국이 선진국 대비 더 우월한 성과를 잠시 낼 수 있는 환경을 기대하지만, 신흥국 지수를 구성하는 중국 제외 나머지 비중이 큰 국가(한국, 대만, 인도)의 경우 성과에 장기적 역풍이 될 것으로 봄. 선진국으로의 수출보다 선진국에서의 수입이 더 빠르게 증가하며, 선진국 기업들보다 해당 국가의 기업들 이익이 더 빠르게 성장하지도 않기 때문임.
The six major EM Super-cycles since 1969 suggest bull trends are marked by five common traits: (1) rising EM growth differentials, (2) Low, but positive S&P 500 returns, (3) rising commodity prices, (4) a weakening US Dollar, and (5) low starting relative valuations. Interest rate trends are less clear. Of these five traits, three are met currently (low valuations and expectations of low S&P 500 returns with rising commodity prices). But our forecasts also point to a lower growth differential for EM (on a float-cap weighted basis) in 2024 and an unclear path for USD depreciation in the short term. Macro Optimism, but Micro Concern. Much of our top-down research has presented bullish arguments for EM long-term, but a structural challenge to EM equities has been margin underperformance against DM. Trade data provides a top-down look at EM vs. DM competition through the lens of "trade share" (the share of EM imports that come from other EM economies vs. DMs). Recent trade data trends have been encouraging, but the longer-term trends of bottom-up revenue and profit margin data suggest EM companies face an uphill challenge in competing against DM multinationals. Similar to our views on the US Dollar, we see an environment conducive to a mini-cycle of EM outperformance perhaps later in 2023, but the current construction of MSCI EM present long-term headwinds. Outside of Mainland China, the three largest EM weights (Korea, Taiwan, and India) are markets where imports have grown faster from DMs than from other EMs and where DM corporate revenues have grown faster than domestic EM companies. Short-term cyclical improvement (in global industrials and tech) may benefit EM margins tactically and lead to headline MSCI EM outperformance, but this research furthers our view that EM benchmarks may benefit from restructuring (similar to our views regarding EM ex-China).
The six major EM Super-cycles since 1969 suggest bull trends are marked by five common traits: (1) rising EM growth differentials, (2) Low, but positive S&P 500 returns, (3) rising commodity prices, (4) a weakening US Dollar, and (5) low starting relative valuations. Interest rate trends are less clear. Of these five traits, three are met currently (low valuations and expectations of low S&P 500 returns with rising commodity prices). But our forecasts also point to a lower growth differential for EM (on a float-cap weighted basis) in 2024 and an unclear path for USD depreciation in the short term. Macro Optimism, but Micro Concern. Much of our top-down research has presented bullish arguments for EM long-term, but a structural challenge to EM equities has been margin underperformance against DM. Trade data provides a top-down look at EM vs. DM competition through the lens of "trade share" (the share of EM imports that come from other EM economies vs. DMs). Recent trade data trends have been encouraging, but the longer-term trends of bottom-up revenue and profit margin data suggest EM companies face an uphill challenge in competing against DM multinationals. Similar to our views on the US Dollar, we see an environment conducive to a mini-cycle of EM outperformance perhaps later in 2023, but the current construction of MSCI EM present long-term headwinds. Outside of Mainland China, the three largest EM weights (Korea, Taiwan, and India) are markets where imports have grown faster from DMs than from other EMs and where DM corporate revenues have grown faster than domestic EM companies. Short-term cyclical improvement (in global industrials and tech) may benefit EM margins tactically and lead to headline MSCI EM outperformance, but this research furthers our view that EM benchmarks may benefit from restructuring (similar to our views regarding EM ex-China).