摘要 二、大类资产&海外事件&数据：欧央行2月例会按兵不动，金油共振上涨 金油共振上涨，港股延续下跌。 当周，标普500下跌0.1%；10Y美债收益率下行4bp；美元指数上涨0.5% 至97.6，离岸人民币升至6.93；布油价格下跌3.7%至68.1美元/桶，COMEX金价格上涨1.6%至4958.5美元/ 盎司，COMEX银价格下跌9.4%至76.77美元/盎司。 欧央行2月例会按兵不动，美国12月职位空缺弱于市场预期。 欧央行2月议息会议维持利率不变，欧央行 行长拉加德表示关注欧元走势，可能影响通胀；美国12月JOLT职位空缺654.2万人，市场预期725万人， 金融保险、零售贸易、专业商业服务业空缺率回落幅度最为显著。 风险提示 地缘政治冲突升级；美国经济放缓超预期；美联储超预期转"鹰" 报告正文 二、大类资产&海外事件&数据：欧央行2月例会按兵不动，金油共振上涨 （一）大类资产：金油共振上涨，港股延续下跌 当周，发达市场股指多数上涨、新兴市场股指多数上涨。发达市场股指方面，道琼斯工业平均、法国 CAC40、日经225分别上涨2.5%、1.8%、1.7%；新兴市场股指方面，开罗CASE30、泰国SET指 ...

Core Viewpoint - The upcoming Japanese House of Representatives election on February 8 will significantly impact Japan's political landscape and debt risk, with a continued focus on expansionary fiscal policy but a more cautious approach to avoid a "Truss moment" [2][8]. Group 1: Election Dynamics - The election features three main factions: the ruling coalition of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and the Japan Innovation Party, the Center-Left Reform Alliance, and other opposition parties [2][3]. - The LDP, led by Prime Minister Kishi, is predicted to maintain a majority, with a 99% probability of Kishi continuing as Prime Minister and an 81% chance of the LDP securing over 250 seats [2][3][13]. - Three potential outcomes exist: a significant LDP win reducing the need for fiscal stimulus, a marginal increase in LDP seats leading to moderate debt risk, or a decline in LDP seats raising policy uncertainty and fiscal cliff risks [3][19][20]. Group 2: Post-Election Macro Policy - Post-election, Japan's macro policy will remain expansionary, but if the LDP gains a larger advantage, the pace of policy implementation may be more cautious [4][24]. - A key commitment is to lower the food tax rate, with a proposal to suspend it for two years, although this may be moderated post-election to alleviate market concerns [4][26]. - The LDP plans to enhance critical mineral reserve systems and establish a Japanese version of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to scrutinize foreign investments [4][32]. Group 3: Debt Risk Assessment - Japan's sovereign debt risk is relatively low, with a projected debt-to-GDP ratio of 230% by 2025 and interest payments constituting 1.49% of GDP in 2024 [5][37]. - A potential suspension of the food tax could create a 5 trillion yen deficit annually, impacting new bond issuance [5][37]. - Japan's status as a net creditor, with a net international investment position of 84% of GDP, and a low foreign ownership of government bonds (14%) contribute to its lower debt risk perception [5][43][44].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the end of the QE era, highlighting the transition from quantitative easing (QE) to quantitative tightening (QT) and the implications for monetary policy and the Federal Reserve's balance sheet management [2][3]. Summary by Sections 1. Transition from QE to QT - The Federal Reserve has undergone four rounds of QE and two rounds of QT from 2008 to 2026, with total assets expected to remain above $6 trillion by the end of 2025 [2]. - In December 2025, the FOMC meeting indicated a restart of reserve management purchases (RMO) to maintain sufficient reserves, emphasizing the fundamental differences between RMP and QE [2]. 2. Framework of the Balance Sheet - The Fed's policy framework shifted from a "scarce reserves" model to a "ample reserves" model post-2008 financial crisis, where policy rates serve as the primary indicator of monetary policy stance rather than the balance sheet [2]. - Under the "ample reserves" framework, policy rates and the balance sheet operate under separate decision-making systems [2]. 3. Conditions for Future QE - The article posits that a return to QE or yield curve control (YCC) may be necessary if the Fed lowers interest rates, suggesting that 2026 could mark the final phase of the current liquidity easing cycle [3]. - It argues that the Fed's balance sheet is not strictly a one-way street of expansion, indicating that the QE era may be over until the next crisis arises [3]. 4. Observations from Local "Two Sessions" - The average GDP growth target for twenty provinces and cities is set at 5.1% for 2026, with various adjustments noted compared to 2025 targets [19]. - The article provides a detailed table of GDP growth targets, CPI targets, and other economic indicators for different provinces, reflecting a trend of slight downward adjustments in growth expectations [19].

the state and B 27 f i .. a 11 and program and 文 | 赵伟 来源 | 上海证券报 提要： 理解今年经济需把握"夯实基础、全面发力、战略主动"三重导向。 "2026年是'十五五'开局之年，理解这一年的经济与政策，首先要看规划建议的一些重要表述。"赵伟表示，其中"夯实基础"和"全面发力"八个字，尤其值得关 注。 赵伟表示，"夯实基础"指的是对"十四五"以来所构建的产业体系、市场基础和制度框架的巩固与深化。而"全面发力"意味着在发展与改革相关领域，政策推进 与落实的速度将会加快。 此外，赵伟表示还要高度重视"战略主动"这一导向。国家在政策层面的主动性将显著增强，主要体现在两个方面：一是统筹国内经济工作与国际经贸斗争的主 动性将显著提高；二是开放相关领域的主动性也将明显提升。 展望2026年，赵伟认为，内需将从"信心筑底"逐步迈向"非典型复苏"。这一过程具有三个特征：物价水平逐步从螺旋式下行回归正常区间；宏观指标呈现显著 的结构性分化；复苏本身将是一个伴随结构转型的渐进过程。 在投资端有三个关键方向：首先 是与未来新兴产业相关的持续投入，有望带来新的增长点； 其次 是" ...

Core Viewpoint - In 2026, overseas fiscal policies are expected to align with geopolitical factors, leading to a pro-cyclical expansion path. Fiscal policy is both a driver of economic resilience and a source of debt risk. The current debt situation is overextending future growth capabilities, and how to address this debt will determine the boundaries of monetary independence [1]. Group 1: Fiscal Policy Shift - In 2025, fiscal policies in the US, Europe, and Japan are transitioning from counter-cyclical to cross-cyclical, with a significant expansion of fiscal goals to include supply-side restructuring and defense spending. This shift indicates a more rigid approach to debt expansion [2][3]. - The constraints on fiscal expansion are weakening, as political and geopolitical pressures reduce the motivation for parties to impose debt limits. The risk of debt default is low for developed sovereign currency countries, transforming debt risk into liquidity risk, reflected in rising inflation expectations and interest rates [2][3]. Group 2: Fiscal Expansion in 2026 - In 2026, fiscal policies in the US, Europe, and Japan will see significant increases in defense spending, with Japan's deficit expected to rise by 0.8 percentage points to 3.2%, the US by 0.8 percentage points to 6.8%, and Germany by 0.9 percentage points to 4.0% [3][4]. - The focus of fiscal expansion will shift towards supply-side investments, particularly in defense, AI industry subsidies, and infrastructure investments, with defense spending in Germany expected to increase by 25% and in the US by 10% [3][4]. Group 3: Dual Nature of Fiscal Policy - The fiscal expansion will support economic growth in the US, Germany, and Japan, with the US expected to see a growth rate of 2.3% in 2026, driven by fiscal contributions of 0.5-0.6 percentage points [5][6]. - However, the accumulation of debt risks is also a concern, as the economic recovery is occurring alongside rising debt levels, leading to potential market disruptions [5][6]. Group 4: Implications for Monetary Policy - The methods for addressing fiscal issues will ultimately determine the boundaries of the Federal Reserve's independence. Traditional methods of debt reduction, such as fiscal consolidation and financial repression, face challenges in the current environment [6][7]. - The ongoing fiscal expansion may lead to a situation where monetary policy is increasingly influenced by fiscal decisions, eroding the independence of central banks [6][7].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the implications of Kevin Warsh's nomination as the next Federal Reserve Chair and his proposed policy of "rate cuts + balance sheet normalization," highlighting the complexities and contradictions of this approach in the context of the current monetary policy landscape [1]. Group 1: Evolution of the Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet - Since the 2008 global financial crisis, the Federal Reserve has undergone four rounds of quantitative easing (QE) and two rounds of quantitative tightening (QT), with total assets reaching $6.6 trillion by November 2025, which is over seven times the level in early 2008 [2][10]. - The December 2025 FOMC meeting marked the beginning of a "normalization of expansion" phase, with initial monthly purchases set at $40 billion, potentially slowing to $20-25 billion by May [2][10]. Group 2: RMP vs. QE - RMP (Reserve Management Purchases) is fundamentally different from QE in terms of quantity, quality, and market implications. RMP aims to maintain sufficient reserves without affecting the stance of monetary policy, while QE is a non-standard tool aimed at lowering long-term interest rates [3][41]. - RMP operates under a framework of "ample reserves," where the control of interest rates is decoupled from the quantity of reserves, contrasting with the previous "scarce reserves" framework [4][68]. Group 3: End of the QE Era - The article posits that the QE era may have ended, with future monetary policy likely to focus on maintaining sufficient reserves rather than expanding the balance sheet significantly. The ability to shrink the balance sheet depends on reserve demand and the duration of held securities [6][10]. - In a non-war or non-zero interest rate environment, it is unlikely that the Fed will use QE or yield curve control (YCC) to lower Treasury yields, as the most effective method to achieve this is to lower rates to zero [6][10]. Group 4: Market Implications - The article suggests that RMP's impact on capital markets should be rationally ignored, as it primarily serves to reduce the likelihood of liquidity shocks affecting stock prices rather than driving bullish sentiment [7][10]. - The Federal Reserve's balance sheet expansion is now seen as a new normal, with cash and reserve provision methods including RMP and reinvestment of agency securities [33][10].

文 | 赵伟、贾东旭、侯倩楠 联系人 | 侯倩楠 摘要 1月下旬以来，地方"两会"进入密集召开期。各地2026年GDP增速设定情况如何，各地2026年政府工作报 告定量与定性分析呈现何种特征？本文分析，可供参考。 (一)地方"两会"召开情况？二十省市相继召开"两会"，GDP增速目标加权平均5.1% 截至1月底，地方"两会"已进入密集召开期，北京、山东、河南、广东等二十地区已相继进入"两会"议 程。 根据各地2025年GDP加权，二十省市披露2026年GDP目标增速，加权平均值为5.1%，较2025年GDP 目标增速可比口径的5.3%下降0.2个百分点。海南、河北、北京等9地区2026年GDP目标增速（或目标区 间下限）与2025年持平。 整体目标保持"5%"中枢，设定更为务实积极。 二十个地区中，北京、河北、山东等8个地区将2026年 GDP目标增速均设定为5%左右及以上；浙江、广东、江西GDP目标增速围绕5%设定0.5个百分点的上下 区间。海南与新疆GDP目标增速居于前列，其中，海南GDP目标增速设定为6%左右，新疆GDP目标增速 设定为5.5%-6%。 经济大省勇挑大梁，表述中暗含"争取更好结果"的决心。 ...

| 时间 | 事件 | 核心方面 | 主要内容 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | | 家政服务。支持符合条件的家政服务企业创新服务模式、探索智慧化场景、拓展居家养老服务。 | | | | | 鼓励地方发布家政服务规范协议 ... | | | 《加快培 | 重点领域 | 汽车后市场服务。推动汽车流通消费领域全链条创新发展，选择部分城市开展试点，支持在汽车 后市场重点领域先行先试，加快清理限制性措施，探索开展汽车改装分级分类管理，健全传统经 | | | 育服务消 | | 典车认定体系,加强房车露营基地建设,研究完善相关管理制度、技术标准 ... | | 2026/ | 费新增长 | | 演出服务。优化演出管理,科学合理设置安全容量限制,持续推进跨地区巡演。探索将具备条件 | | 1/29 | 点工作方 | | 目有意愿的演出团体、专业剧场调整为公益二类事业单位，建立健全激励机制 ... | | | 案》 | 潜力领域 | 体育赛事服务。优化改进大型群众性活动安全管理，分级分类合理核定赛场安全容量，用于划设 | | | | | 治安缓冲区的容量原则上不超过赛场可用座位数的 10%。 ...

事件： 1月30日，财政部公布2025年财政收支情况。 2025年，全国一般公共预算收入216045亿元，比上 年下降1.7%；全国一般公共预算支出287395亿元，比上年增长1%。 核心观点：财政收支分化加剧，后续政策重心或转向"财政金融协同" 12月广义财政收支呈现收入端深度调整、支出端维持韧性的收支显著分化特征。 12月广义财政收入同 比-18.5%，较11月下滑13.3个百分点，创下年内最低水平；广义财政支出同比-0.7%，较11月降幅收窄1个 百分点。从预算完成度看，收入完成度不及往年同期，但支出端在年末稳增长诉求下保持了相对强度， 显示出年底在收入承压背景下财政仍在加快支出、托底经济。 一般财政收入明显回落，拖累广义财政收入增速下滑。 2025年12月广义财政收入同比-18.5%，较11月同 比下降13.3个百分点；其中，政府性基金收入同比-11.7%，较11月降幅收窄4个百分点；一般财政收入同 比-25%。从预算完成度看，2025年12月广义财政收入预算完成11.7%，低于2024年同期的13.7%以及过去 五年平均的12.3%基本持平。 一般财政支出及政府性基金支出加快，推动广义财政支出降幅收 ...

Core Viewpoint - The significant decline in January PMI is primarily attributed to the early return of workers for the 2026 Spring Festival and weak domestic demand, with manufacturing PMI dropping to 49.3% from 50.1% and non-manufacturing PMI falling to 49.4% from 50.2% [2][8][61] Group 1: Manufacturing PMI Analysis - The manufacturing PMI fell below the neutral line, decreasing by 0.8 percentage points to 49.3%, influenced by statistical factors and the early return of workers [2][8][61] - The manufacturing production index declined by 1.1 percentage points to 50.6%, while the new orders index decreased by 1.6 percentage points to 49.2% [5][41] - The purchasing index for manufacturing dropped significantly by 2.4 percentage points to 48.7%, indicating a notable contraction in supply [3][15][62] Group 2: Sector-Specific Insights - Labor-intensive sectors such as consumer goods and high-energy industries experienced a more pronounced decline in PMI, with consumer goods PMI falling by 2.1 percentage points to 48.3% and high-energy PMI down by 1 percentage point to 47.9% [3][22][62] - In contrast, capital-intensive sectors like high-tech and equipment manufacturing saw smaller declines, with PMIs of 52% and 50.1%, respectively [3][22][62] Group 3: Non-Manufacturing PMI Insights - The non-manufacturing PMI showed asymmetric characteristics, with the construction PMI dropping to 48.8%, a decline of 4 percentage points, while the service sector PMI only slightly decreased by 0.2 percentage points to 49.5% [4][25][62] - The construction sector's decline is more significant than historical averages, indicating a substantial impact from the early return of workers [4][25][62] Group 4: Economic Outlook - The early Spring Festival may disrupt PMI readings for January and February, but the overall economic outlook remains positive, with expectations of recovery in the coming months [4][34][63] - Recent trends in service consumption and travel during the Spring Festival are expected to support service sector growth, highlighting the importance of monitoring consumer demand [4][34][63]