立即打开
美股跌跌不休,投资者这次不能指望美联储救市了

美股跌跌不休,投资者这次不能指望美联储救市了

Will Daniel 2022-05-16
美国股市出现了自1939年以来最糟糕的开局,标准普尔500指数下跌超过16%。

你可能已经注意到最近的美国股市出现了一些动荡。

在5月初,市场情绪花了好几天才稳定下来,但从5月6日至5月9日,投资者意识到美联储(Federal Reserve)正在不遗余力对抗通胀,他们又彻底慌了。

结果是,美国股市出现了自1939年以来最糟糕的开局,标准普尔500指数(S&P 500)下跌超过16%。

发生了什么变化?

简而言之,今年5月初宣告了美联储“自由货币”时代的终结。自新冠肺炎疫情爆发以来,美联储以接近零利率和量化宽松形式的超宽松货币政策支持市场。在这些宽松的货币政策下,美国股市大涨。只要美国央行通过紧急放贷措施向经济注入流动性,就为追逐各种风险资产的投资者铺设了安全网。

但从今年3月开始,当美联储自2018年以来首次提高其基准利率以对抗通胀时,一切都发生了变化。此举标志着自由货币时代的终结,随后美联储在5月4日再次加息半个百分点。

市场目前正在经历华尔街观察人士所说的“政权更迭”,要了解美国股市可能因此而下跌到多低,就需要了解市场在未来缺乏美联储支持的情况下是如何定价的。

系统性变化

追溯到2008年的金融危机(Great Financial Crisis),美联储一直将借贷成本保持在较低水平,允许消费者投资房产、汽车和教育,而无需支付高额利息。当通货膨胀和工资增长较低时,这是合理的,因为需要尽可能地鼓励消费者消费。

但现在,随着失业率接近新冠肺炎疫情爆发前的低点,通货膨胀率激增,甚至超过了历史最高水平,美国央行已经改变策略,提高利率,并表示打算削减其资产负债表,其削减力度为每月数十亿美元。

系统性变化使市场实际上处于自生自灭的状态,并导致包括股票和加密货币在内的风险资产随着投资者努力应对新规范而崩溃。这也让许多人怀疑所谓的美联储看跌期权时代是否已经终结。

几十年来,美联储制定政策的方式就像看跌期权合约,在市场出现严重动荡时,通过降息和量化宽松“印钞”的方式介入,以避免灾难。

美联储官员认为,市场大幅下跌可能会引发债务连锁反应,破坏银行和整个金融系统的稳定,因此他们必须在艰难时期采取行动来恢复市场秩序。

这一政策让投资者明白,如果股票下跌,美联储就会出手相救。但在一个更加鹰派的新政权下,许多人想知道情况是否仍然如此。

如果美国股市继续下跌,美联储是否会降息并恢复量化宽松政策以刺激经济增长?还是会让市场自生自灭?

美联储看跌期权

美联储在经济低迷时期帮助股市的想法始于美联储的前主席艾伦·格林斯潘。现在的术语“美联储看跌期权”曾经被称为“格林斯潘看跌期权”,这个术语是在1987年美国股市崩盘后创造的,当时格林斯潘降低利率以帮助企业复苏,开创了美联储在经济不确定时期介入的先例。

与1979年至1987年担任美联储主席的保罗·沃尔克时代相比,这是政策上的重大转变。沃尔克被公认为通过使用鹰派货币政策控制了20世纪70年代和80年代的通货膨胀。

然而,他的政策也是导致1980年至1982年经济衰退的部分原因,并且由于美国前总统罗纳德·里根政府的减税政策和创纪录的军事开支,借贷成本飙升,导致了巨额的联邦预算赤字。

另一方面,格林斯潘开创了一个更加鸽派的货币政策时代,在股票下跌时多次降低利率,包括在2001年互联网泡沫破灭后降低利率。

自格林斯潘以来,每一位美联储主席都效仿他,将降息作为改善投资者情绪并在美国股市下跌时促进投资的一种方式。在2006年至2014年期间任职的美联储主席本·伯南克在2008年房地产泡沫破灭后采取了更激进的措施,他以大幅降息和实施美国有史以来第一轮量化宽松政策来帮助美国度过经济风暴而闻名。

此后,当美国股市严重低迷时,投资者一直向美联储寻求支持,但随着通胀促使美联储采取更鹰派的新做法,那个时代可能已经结束。

股市新常态

德意志银行(Deutsche Bank)的主题研究和信贷策略主管吉姆·里德表示,如果美联储看跌期权的时代真的结束了,那么当前的商业周期可能就会与之前的商业周期大不相同,尤其是在股票方面。

里德在5月9日的一份报告中写道:“未来,许多主题将与我们之前所习惯的不同。其中一个主题是美国股市的持续上涨。在过去十年中,显而易见的是股市在创纪录的长时间内没有被修正,人们没有与美联储对抗的心态,也没有逢低买入的说法。”

里德指出,5月初是标准普尔500指数自2011年6月以来首次连续五周下跌,结束了自1928年首次开始追踪相关数据以来最长的连续五周下跌。

里德写道:“在1928年至2011年的83年间,我们有61次连续五周或更长时间的下跌,因此平均每一年零三个多月就下跌一次。因此,过去十年在很大程度上是例外,而不是常态。”

著名的投资者和分析师马丁·茨威格因为预测1987年的市场崩盘而闻名。他在几十年前创造了“不要与美联储对抗”这句话。多年来,投资者将这句话视为箴言,该箴言表明了在美联储政策落后于市场时保持投资的重要性,美联储会兜底,从而避免经济衰退。现在,“不要与美联储对抗”可能有了新含义。

正如茨威格在他的《决胜华尔街》(Winning on Wall Street)一书中所写:

“事实上,货币环境——主要是利率趋势和美联储政策——是决定股票市场主要方向的主导因素。一般来说,利率呈上升趋势的话股票看跌;利率呈下降趋势的话股票看涨。”

只要美联储将利率保持在历史低位,并每月通过量化宽松政策向经济注入数十亿美元,那么继续投资风险资产是有意义的。正如茨威格所描述的,利率下降降低了股票与其他投资的竞争,包括国库券、货币市场基金和定期存单。茨威格写道:“因此,随着利率下降,投资者倾向于抬高价格,部分原因是预期收益会更好。”

现在,随着美联储加息和结束量化宽松政策,迎来了一个全新的时代,一个可能对风险资产不那么友好的时代。

但投资者仍然无法对抗美联储。只是,美国央行不再把他们推向高涨的科技股和加密货币。相反,它使其他可能风险较小的资产看起来更有利。通常在利率上升的环境中表现良好的资产,例如短期政府债券、价值股和分红股,在这个新时代可能会有更出色的表现。所以,不要与美联储对抗。(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

你可能已经注意到最近的美国股市出现了一些动荡。

在5月初,市场情绪花了好几天才稳定下来,但从5月6日至5月9日,投资者意识到美联储(Federal Reserve)正在不遗余力对抗通胀,他们又彻底慌了。

结果是,美国股市出现了自1939年以来最糟糕的开局,标准普尔500指数(S&P 500)下跌超过16%。

发生了什么变化?

简而言之,今年5月初宣告了美联储“自由货币”时代的终结。自新冠肺炎疫情爆发以来,美联储以接近零利率和量化宽松形式的超宽松货币政策支持市场。在这些宽松的货币政策下,美国股市大涨。只要美国央行通过紧急放贷措施向经济注入流动性,就为追逐各种风险资产的投资者铺设了安全网。

但从今年3月开始,当美联储自2018年以来首次提高其基准利率以对抗通胀时,一切都发生了变化。此举标志着自由货币时代的终结,随后美联储在5月4日再次加息半个百分点。

市场目前正在经历华尔街观察人士所说的“政权更迭”,要了解美国股市可能因此而下跌到多低,就需要了解市场在未来缺乏美联储支持的情况下是如何定价的。

系统性变化

追溯到2008年的金融危机(Great Financial Crisis),美联储一直将借贷成本保持在较低水平,允许消费者投资房产、汽车和教育,而无需支付高额利息。当通货膨胀和工资增长较低时,这是合理的,因为需要尽可能地鼓励消费者消费。

但现在,随着失业率接近新冠肺炎疫情爆发前的低点,通货膨胀率激增,甚至超过了历史最高水平,美国央行已经改变策略,提高利率,并表示打算削减其资产负债表,其削减力度为每月数十亿美元。

系统性变化使市场实际上处于自生自灭的状态,并导致包括股票和加密货币在内的风险资产随着投资者努力应对新规范而崩溃。这也让许多人怀疑所谓的美联储看跌期权时代是否已经终结。

几十年来,美联储制定政策的方式就像看跌期权合约,在市场出现严重动荡时,通过降息和量化宽松“印钞”的方式介入,以避免灾难。

美联储官员认为,市场大幅下跌可能会引发债务连锁反应,破坏银行和整个金融系统的稳定,因此他们必须在艰难时期采取行动来恢复市场秩序。

这一政策让投资者明白,如果股票下跌,美联储就会出手相救。但在一个更加鹰派的新政权下,许多人想知道情况是否仍然如此。

如果美国股市继续下跌,美联储是否会降息并恢复量化宽松政策以刺激经济增长?还是会让市场自生自灭?

美联储看跌期权

美联储在经济低迷时期帮助股市的想法始于美联储的前主席艾伦·格林斯潘。现在的术语“美联储看跌期权”曾经被称为“格林斯潘看跌期权”,这个术语是在1987年美国股市崩盘后创造的,当时格林斯潘降低利率以帮助企业复苏,开创了美联储在经济不确定时期介入的先例。

与1979年至1987年担任美联储主席的保罗·沃尔克时代相比,这是政策上的重大转变。沃尔克被公认为通过使用鹰派货币政策控制了20世纪70年代和80年代的通货膨胀。

然而,他的政策也是导致1980年至1982年经济衰退的部分原因,并且由于美国前总统罗纳德·里根政府的减税政策和创纪录的军事开支,借贷成本飙升,导致了巨额的联邦预算赤字。

另一方面,格林斯潘开创了一个更加鸽派的货币政策时代,在股票下跌时多次降低利率,包括在2001年互联网泡沫破灭后降低利率。

自格林斯潘以来,每一位美联储主席都效仿他,将降息作为改善投资者情绪并在美国股市下跌时促进投资的一种方式。在2006年至2014年期间任职的美联储主席本·伯南克在2008年房地产泡沫破灭后采取了更激进的措施,他以大幅降息和实施美国有史以来第一轮量化宽松政策来帮助美国度过经济风暴而闻名。

此后,当美国股市严重低迷时,投资者一直向美联储寻求支持,但随着通胀促使美联储采取更鹰派的新做法,那个时代可能已经结束。

股市新常态

德意志银行(Deutsche Bank)的主题研究和信贷策略主管吉姆·里德表示,如果美联储看跌期权的时代真的结束了,那么当前的商业周期可能就会与之前的商业周期大不相同,尤其是在股票方面。

里德在5月9日的一份报告中写道:“未来,许多主题将与我们之前所习惯的不同。其中一个主题是美国股市的持续上涨。在过去十年中,显而易见的是股市在创纪录的长时间内没有被修正,人们没有与美联储对抗的心态,也没有逢低买入的说法。”

里德指出,5月初是标准普尔500指数自2011年6月以来首次连续五周下跌,结束了自1928年首次开始追踪相关数据以来最长的连续五周下跌。

里德写道:“在1928年至2011年的83年间,我们有61次连续五周或更长时间的下跌,因此平均每一年零三个多月就下跌一次。因此,过去十年在很大程度上是例外,而不是常态。”

著名的投资者和分析师马丁·茨威格因为预测1987年的市场崩盘而闻名。他在几十年前创造了“不要与美联储对抗”这句话。多年来,投资者将这句话视为箴言,该箴言表明了在美联储政策落后于市场时保持投资的重要性,美联储会兜底,从而避免经济衰退。现在,“不要与美联储对抗”可能有了新含义。

正如茨威格在他的《决胜华尔街》(Winning on Wall Street)一书中所写:

“事实上,货币环境——主要是利率趋势和美联储政策——是决定股票市场主要方向的主导因素。一般来说,利率呈上升趋势的话股票看跌;利率呈下降趋势的话股票看涨。”

只要美联储将利率保持在历史低位,并每月通过量化宽松政策向经济注入数十亿美元,那么继续投资风险资产是有意义的。正如茨威格所描述的,利率下降降低了股票与其他投资的竞争,包括国库券、货币市场基金和定期存单。茨威格写道:“因此,随着利率下降,投资者倾向于抬高价格,部分原因是预期收益会更好。”

现在,随着美联储加息和结束量化宽松政策,迎来了一个全新的时代,一个可能对风险资产不那么友好的时代。

但投资者仍然无法对抗美联储。只是,美国央行不再把他们推向高涨的科技股和加密货币。相反,它使其他可能风险较小的资产看起来更有利。通常在利率上升的环境中表现良好的资产,例如短期政府债券、价值股和分红股,在这个新时代可能会有更出色的表现。所以,不要与美联储对抗。(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

You might have noticed some turbulence in the stock market recently.

It took a while to sink in early May, but investors had a full freak-out from May 6 through May 9 when they realized just how serious the Federal Reserve is about fighting inflation.

As a result, stocks have posted their worst start to the year since 1939, with the S&P 500 falling over 16%.

What changed?

In short, early May was the end of the “free money” era of central banking. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Fed had supported markets with ultra-accommodative monetary policy in the form of near-zero interest rates and quantitative easing (QE). Stocks thrived under these loose monetary policies. As long as the central bank was injecting liquidity into the economy as an emergency lending measure, the safety net was laid out for investors chasing all kinds of risk assets.

But starting in March, when the Fed raised its benchmark interest rate for the first time since 2018 to tackle inflation, that all changed. The move, which was followed by another half-point rate hike on May 4, signaled the end of the free money era.

Markets are now experiencing what Wall Street watchers call a “regime change,” and understanding how far stocks might fall as a result requires understanding how markets price in a lack of Fed support moving forward.

The regimes they are a-changin’

Stretching back to the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, the Fed has kept the cost of borrowing low, allowing consumers to invest in homes, cars, and their education without the burden of high-interest payments. This made sense when inflation and wage growth were low, as consumer spending needed encouragement from wherever possible.

Now, though, with unemployment rates near pre-pandemic lows and inflation surging beyond even historically high wages, the central bank has shifted tactics, raising interest rates and signaling its intention to trim its balance sheet to the tune of billions of dollars each month.

The regime change has left markets effectively on their own and led risk assets, including stocks and cryptocurrencies, to crater as investors grapple with the new norm. It’s also left many wondering whether the era of the so-called Fed put is over.

For decades, the way the Fed enacted policy was like a put option contract, stepping in to prevent disaster when markets experienced serious turbulence by cutting interest rates and “printing money” through QE.

Fed officials argue that significant market drops could set off a debt cascade, destabilizing banks and the financial system as a whole, so they must act when times are tough to restore market order.

This policy led investors to understand that the Fed would come to the rescue if stocks fell. But under a new, more hawkish regime, many are wondering if that’s still the case.

If stocks continue to drop, will the Fed slash rates and reinstate QE to spur growth? Or will the markets be left to fend for themselves?

The Fed put

The idea that the Fed will come to stocks’ aid in a downturn began under Fed Chair Alan Greenspan. What is now the “Fed put” was once the “Greenspan put,” a term coined after the 1987 stock market crash, when Greenspan lowered interest rates to help companies recover, setting a precedent that the Fed would step in during uncertain times.

It was a monumental shift in policy from the era of Paul Volcker, who served as Fed chair from 1979 to 1987. Volcker is widely credited with having reined in the inflation of the 1970s and ’80s through the use of hawkish monetary policies.

However, his policies were also partly the cause of the 1980–82 recession, and they led to large Federal budget deficits as the cost of borrowing soared amid the Ronald Reagan administration’s tax cuts and record military spending.

Greenspan, on the other hand, ushered in an era of more dovish monetary policy, lowering interest rates on several occasions when stocks fell, including after the dotcom bubble burst in 2001.

And every Fed chair since Greenspan has followed suit, using interest rate cuts as a way to improve investor sentiment and catalyze investment when stocks fall. Fed Chair Ben Bernanke, who served between 2006 to 2014, went even further after the housing bubble burst in 2008, famously slashing interest rates and instituting the first round of QE ever seen in the U.S. to help the country weather the economic storm.

Ever since, when stocks experienced serious downturns, investors have looked to the Fed for support, but that era may now be over, as inflation pushes the central bank toward a new, more hawkish approach.

A new normal for stocks

If the Fed put does come to an end, the current business cycle will likely be very different from previous ones, especially for stocks, Deutsche Bank’s head of thematic research and credit strategy Jim Reid says.

“Many themes will be different going forward to what we’ve been accustomed to,” Reid wrote in a May 9 note. “One such theme is the relentless march of U.S. equities. The last decade was noticeable for record long periods without a correction, a don’t fight the Fed mentality, and a buy the dip narrative.”

Reid noted that earl May marked the first time the S&P 500 has fallen for five consecutive weeks since June 2011, ending the longest run without five consecutive down weeks since relevant data first began being tracked in 1928.

“In the 83 years between 1928 and 2011, we had 61 runs of five or more weekly declines in a row, so one every year and a third on average,” Reid wrote. “So the last decade has very much been the exception rather than the norm.”

Martin Zweig, a renowned investor and analyst who was well known for calling the 1987 market crash, coined the phrase “Don’t fight the Fed” decades ago. And for years, investors used the phrase as a mantra that signified the importance of staying invested while the Fed was behind markets, acting as a safety net from downturns. Now, “Don’t fight the Fed” may have a new meaning.

As Zweig wrote in his book Winning on Wall Street:

“Indeed, the monetary climate—primarily the trend in interest rates and Federal Reserve policy—is the dominant factor in determining the stock market’s major direction. Generally, a rising trend in rates is bearish for stocks; a falling trend is bullish.”

As long as the Fed left interest rates historically low and pumped billions of dollars into the economy each month through QE, it made sense to stay invested in risk assets. As Zweig describes, falling interest rates reduce stocks’ competition from other investments, including Treasury bills, money market funds, and certificates of deposit. “So, as interest rates drop, investors tend to bid prices higher, partly on the expectation of better earnings,” Zweig wrote.

Now, with the Fed raising rates and ending QE, it’s a whole new era, one that might not be as kind to risk assets.

But investors still can’t fight the Fed. It’s just that the central bank is no longer pushing them toward high-flying tech stocks and cryptocurrencies. Instead, it’s making other, perhaps less risky, assets look more favorable. Assets that typically perform during rising-rate environments, like short-term government bonds and value and dividend stocks, may outperform in this new era. Don’t fight it.

热读文章
热门视频
扫描二维码下载财富APP
<option id='wVP'><address></address></option><person id='VJwGag'><blockquote></blockquote></person><dir id='nCDM'><marquee></marquee></dir>
      <em id='NHnAGrm'><person></person></em>
        <address id='GoSFl'><fieldset></fieldset></address><marquee id='EdWwRr'><bgsound></bgsound></marquee>
          <pre id='ncCDXWlM'><q></q></pre><code id='ufrp'><caption></caption></code>
          <bdo></bdo>
          <code></code>
            <bdo></bdo>
                <ol id='EAculvfQ'><xmp></xmp></ol>