Group 1: Market Overview - The domestic PMI for May is below the threshold, indicating economic pressure despite slight improvements in orders[1] - The U.S. labor market shows signs of weakness, with a total of 95,000 jobs revised down for March and April combined[1] - The unemployment rate in the U.S. has remained at a high of 4.2% for three consecutive months, with initial jobless claims reaching 247,000, the highest since October 2024[1] Group 2: Investment Strategy - The report suggests a shift from small-cap growth to large-cap value defensive strategies due to rising volatility in the market[1] - During the market bottom to profit bottom phase, growth dividends are expected to perform best, with median annualized returns of 34.5% and 41.1% respectively[2] - A constructed dividend rotation strategy has achieved a net value of 4.34 with an annualized return of 17.0% from 2016 to April 2025, outperforming the CSI Dividend Total Return Index[3] Group 3: Sector Focus - The report emphasizes the importance of focusing on growth-type dividends during the current market conditions, as they are expected to provide better returns[2] - Key sectors for investment include innovative pharmaceuticals, infrastructure, and service consumption, which are seen as growth-type dividend assets[4] - The report highlights structural opportunities in gold and technology sectors, particularly in AI and semiconductor industries, as potential areas for investment[4] Group 4: Risk Factors - Risks include the potential for a "hard landing" in the U.S. economy and a sharper-than-expected slowdown in domestic exports[5] - The ongoing uncertainty surrounding U.S. tariffs and inflation could further impact market stability and investor sentiment[1]

核心观点 转债供给再审视。早在年初市场对浦发、以及高平价杭银/南银转债退出的预期较为充分，然而年内银行板块累计涨 幅接近 10%、更多银行转债的转股预期得以提升，当前齐鲁/常银/重银/上银平价都已达到 115 以上，如果以上银行转 债年内也完成转股，则年内单银行转债的转股&到期、就会导致转债规模减少超 1200 亿，也意味着转债有效供给的等 量减少；除银行转债以外，其余转债年内到期规模 134 亿；年初至今强赎退市转债已经超过 600 亿，预计下半年仍然 有不少强赎退出规模；待发层面当前证监会核准+发审委通过+交易所受理三个环节总共 420 亿元、即使下半年全部发 行规模也有限，且银行标的仅有个别。综合到期&退出以及潜在发行规模，下半年转债规模将持续收缩趋势，预计到 年底转债规模将减少至 6000 亿上下。转债供给（尤其是银行类转债）的减少会对需求造成何种影响？首先是 ETF 类 产品的再平衡需求，会挤出增量资金至其他标的；其次其他公募基金/保险/年金等的溢出配置，这部分虽无法精确测 算、但也有部分转移配置。总体而言，在转债规模持续收缩的背景下、需求还是会有一定溢出效应，尤其是在当前低 利率水平的背景下、资产 ...

1. Report Industry Investment Rating - No relevant content provided 2. Core View of the Report - In April 2025, the inventory cycle of the entire industrial sector shifted to "active destocking" [2][15][16] - The upstream, mid - stream, and downstream industries all entered the "active destocking" phase in April 2025 [2][17][18] 3. Summary by Relevant Catalogs 3.1 Inventory Cycle Overview - In April 2025, the year - on - year growth rate of finished product inventory of industrial enterprises decreased by 0.3 percentage points to 3.9% [7][8][9] 3.2 Inventory Cycle Overview (by Industry) - **Upstream Industry**: It accounts for only 2% of the total inventory and returned to "active destocking" in April 2025 after three months [17] - **Mid - stream Industry**: It accounts for 54% of the total inventory, and most of it was in the "active destocking" phase in April 2025 [18] - **Downstream Industry**: It accounts for 43% of the total inventory and was in the "active destocking" phase in April 2025 [19] - **Specific Industries**: In April 2025, electronics was in "passive restocking", electrical machinery was in "active restocking", chemical was in "passive restocking", paper - making, automotive, non - ferrous metals, instrument and meter, and general equipment were in "active destocking" [7]

Investment Rating - The report maintains a "Buy" rating for the industry [2] Core Insights - The Middle East and Brazil exhibit significant population dividends, with the food delivery market size continuing to grow [2][3] - The penetration rate and ARPU (Average Revenue Per User) are driving steady growth in the food delivery market in these regions [2][3] - Keeta's entry into the Middle East and Brazil is supported by favorable policies and a strong local market presence [2][3][4] Summary by Sections 1. Market Growth in the Middle East and Brazil - The food delivery market in Saudi Arabia is projected to reach 10.78 billion USD in 2024, growing by 17.8% year-on-year, with user numbers reaching 21.2 million, a 15.2% increase [2][31] - The GCC's food delivery market is expected to exceed 16.5 billion USD in 2024, with a year-on-year growth of 14.3% [2][31] - Brazil's online food delivery market is anticipated to reach 18.6 billion USD in 2024, with a growth rate of 16.9% [2][39] 2. Competitive Landscape in the Middle East and Brazil - In the Middle East, Jahez and HungerStation dominate the Saudi market, holding approximately 70% market share [3][46] - Keeta, a subsidiary of Meituan, entered the Saudi market in 2024 and aims to capture market share through aggressive subsidies and a low commission model [3][4] - In Brazil, iFood leads the market with an 80% share, while Aaiqfome focuses on smaller cities to avoid direct competition [4][56] 3. Keeta's Strategy and Potential for Replication - Keeta's success in Hong Kong is attributed to its localized strategies and technological innovations, which may be replicable in overseas markets [5][6] - The company has implemented a "one billion rewards" subsidy plan to attract price-sensitive users and has optimized its delivery efficiency [5][6] 4. Profitability Potential in Overseas Markets - The report estimates that the overseas profit potential for Keeta in the Middle East and Brazil could exceed 10 billion USD [6][7] - Current profit margins for local platforms in the Middle East suggest a favorable environment for Keeta's expansion [6][7] 5. Policy Support for Market Expansion - Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 emphasizes economic diversification and digital transformation, providing a conducive environment for foreign investment in food delivery services [2][44] - The government is actively promoting digital services through tax incentives and infrastructure investments, which benefit companies like Keeta [2][44]

Quantitative Models and Construction Methods 1. Model Name: Interest Rate Style Portfolio - **Model Construction Idea**: The portfolio is constructed by allocating 80% to interest rate bonds and 20% to credit bonds, with the interest rate bond portion using 10-year government bonds and the credit bond portion including 20% ultra-long bonds[13][19] - **Model Construction Process**: - **Bullet Strategy**: Allocates 1-year AAA interbank certificates of deposit (CDs), 3-year AA+ municipal bonds, and 3-year AAA- perpetual bonds[13] - **Duration Strategy**: Allocates 4-year AA+ municipal bonds and 4-year AAA- perpetual bonds[13] - **Ultra-long Strategy**: Allocates 10-year AA+ municipal bonds and 10-year AAA- subordinated bonds[13] - **Mixed Barbell Strategy**: Allocates 1-year AA+ municipal bonds and 10-year AA+ municipal bonds in a 1:1 ratio[13] - **Model Evaluation**: The interest rate style portfolios generally outperform their credit style counterparts in absolute returns, with cumulative returns around 1% year-to-date[10] 2. Model Name: Credit Style Portfolio - **Model Construction Idea**: The portfolio is constructed by allocating 20% to government bonds and 80% to credit bonds, with a focus on various credit strategies such as bullet, duration, and ultra-long strategies[13][19] - **Model Construction Process**: - **Bullet Strategy**: Allocates 1-year AAA interbank CDs and 3-year AA+ municipal bonds[13] - **Duration Strategy**: Allocates 4-year AA+ municipal bonds and 4-year AAA- perpetual bonds[13] - **Ultra-long Strategy**: Allocates 10-year AA+ municipal bonds and 10-year AAA- subordinated bonds[13] - **Mixed Barbell Strategy**: Allocates 1-year AA+ municipal bonds and 10-year AAA- subordinated bonds in a 1:1 ratio[13] - **Model Evaluation**: Credit style portfolios, such as the municipal bond short-end sinking strategy, achieved cumulative returns of 1.04%, ranking among the top performers[10] --- Model Backtesting Results 1. Interest Rate Style Portfolio - **Weekly Returns**: Ultra-long strategies (e.g., secondary ultra-long and industrial ultra-long) achieved weekly returns of 0.19%[2][16] - **Cumulative Returns**: Year-to-date cumulative returns for various strategies are approximately 1%[10] 2. Credit Style Portfolio - **Weekly Returns**: Secondary ultra-long and industrial ultra-long strategies achieved weekly returns of 0.23% and 0.21%, respectively[2][16] - **Cumulative Returns**: Municipal bond short-end sinking, duration, and bullet strategies achieved cumulative returns of 1.04%, 0.96%, and 0.89%, respectively[10] --- Quantitative Factors and Construction Methods 1. Factor Name: Coupon Contribution - **Factor Construction Idea**: Measures the contribution of coupon income to portfolio returns, focusing on stability and low volatility[3][28] - **Factor Construction Process**: - Calculate the initial yield-to-maturity (YTM) of bonds in the portfolio - Multiply the YTM by the holding period to estimate coupon income[13] - **Factor Evaluation**: Coupon contributions for most strategies are concentrated between 20% and 40%, with municipal bond short-end sinking and barbell strategies maintaining stable coupon yields around 0.039%[3][28] 2. Factor Name: Excess Return - **Factor Construction Idea**: Measures the return of a strategy relative to a benchmark, focusing on strategies that outperform consistently[4][33] - **Factor Construction Process**: - Benchmark portfolios are constructed with specific allocations (e.g., 20% government bonds, 64% 3-year AA+ municipal bonds, and 16% 10-year AA+ industrial bonds)[36][38] - Calculate the difference between the strategy's return and the benchmark return over a specified period[36][38] - **Factor Evaluation**: Municipal bond duration and barbell strategies achieved cumulative excess returns of 11.3bp and 10.8bp, respectively, over the past four weeks[4][33] --- Factor Backtesting Results 1. Coupon Contribution - **Municipal Bond Strategies**: Coupon yields for short-end sinking and barbell strategies remained stable at approximately 0.039%[3][28] - **Other Strategies**: Most strategies had annualized coupon yields below 2%[3][28] 2. Excess Return - **Short-term Strategies**: Interbank CD bullet strategies achieved excess returns of 1.9bp, the highest since April[36][38] - **Medium-to-Long-term Strategies**: Municipal bond duration and barbell strategies achieved cumulative excess returns of 11.3bp and 10.8bp, respectively[4][33] - **Ultra-long Strategies**: Industrial ultra-long and secondary ultra-long strategies outperformed benchmarks by approximately 15bp[4][36]

Investment Rating - The report indicates a positive investment outlook for the chemical industry, with a focus on price increases for specific products such as 康宽 and 硝化棉 [1] Core Insights - The chemical market has shown an upward trend, with the SW Chemical Index rising by 2.61%, outperforming the CSI 300 Index by 1.73% [1] - Key price increases have been noted in various chemical products, including 康宽, which has reached 300,000 CNY/ton, and SAF, which has seen significant price jumps [1] - The report highlights the successful commercial operation of BASF's Black Mass plant in Germany, which has an annual processing capacity of 15,000 tons of waste lithium-ion batteries [1] - The report also mentions the recent price settlement for potassium fertilizer contracts in India at 349 USD/ton, which may serve as a reference for future contracts in China [1] - The AI industry is experiencing explosive growth, with significant implications for nuclear power demand, as evidenced by Meta's 20-year nuclear power purchase agreement [2][3] Summary by Sections Market Review - Brent crude oil futures averaged 65.39 USD/barrel, up 1.03 USD (1.6%) from the previous week, while WTI futures averaged 63.35 USD/barrel, up 2.16 USD (3.53%) [10] - The basic chemical sector outperformed the index, with the agricultural chemicals sector showing the highest weekly increase of 7.69% [10][11] Recent Views from the Chemical Team - The tire industry is stabilizing with a slight decrease in raw material prices, while domestic and international demand continues to recover [23] - The sweetener market, particularly for 三氯蔗糖, is expected to improve due to tightening supply despite weak demand [25] - The dye market remains stable, with no significant changes in pricing, while the carbonates market is facing downward pressure due to weak demand [31][32] Key Chemical Product Price Changes - The report provides detailed price movements for various chemical products, indicating a mixed performance across different segments [22][29] - The report notes that the titanium dioxide market is under pressure, with prices continuing to decline due to weak fundamentals [27] Industry Events - OPEC+ has agreed to increase oil production by 411,000 barrels per day for July, which may impact oil prices and the chemical sector [2] - The outcome of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on Trump's tariff policies could have significant implications for global trade and the chemical industry [2]

Investment Rating - The report suggests a positive outlook for the machinery equipment sector, with specific recommendations for companies such as SANY Heavy Industry, XCMG, Zoomlion, LiuGong, and Yingliu Technology [13]. Core Insights - The SW Machinery Equipment Index increased by 0.93% over the past week, ranking 19th among 31 primary industry categories, while the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 Index rose by 0.88% [3][16]. - Year-to-date, the SW Machinery Equipment Index has risen by 7.29%, ranking 6th among the 31 primary industry categories, contrasting with a 1.55% decline in the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 Index [17]. - The report highlights the potential for humanoid robots to achieve commercial viability, with significant advancements in technology and training [27]. - The construction machinery sector is experiencing short-term fluctuations in operating rates, but the long-term recovery logic driven by domestic demand remains intact [28]. - The gas turbine industry is seeing an upward trend in demand, with domestic companies like Yingliu Technology benefiting from increased orders [28]. Summary by Sections 1. Stock Portfolio - Recommended stocks include Hengli Hydraulic, SANY Heavy Industry, XCMG, Zoomlion, LiuGong, and Yingliu Technology [13]. 2. Market Review - The SW Machinery Equipment Index rose by 0.93% last week, while the year-to-date performance shows a 7.29% increase [3][17]. 3. Core Insights Update - The report notes that the machinery sector is witnessing a recovery, with specific segments like laser equipment and robotics showing strong performance [26]. 4. Key Data Tracking 4.1 General Machinery - The manufacturing PMI for May was 49.5, indicating a slight improvement but still in a contraction zone [29]. 4.2 Construction Machinery - Excavator sales in April reached 22,100 units, a year-on-year increase of 17.6% [36]. 4.3 Railway Equipment - Railway fixed asset investment and passenger volume are both showing positive growth, indicating a recovery in demand [45]. 4.4 Shipbuilding - The global new ship price index reached 187.43 in April, reflecting a year-on-year increase of 0.32% [47]. 4.5 Oilfield Equipment - Brent crude oil prices are fluctuating around $65 per barrel, with ongoing geopolitical factors influencing the market [49]. 4.6 Industrial Gases - Liquid nitrogen prices are on the rise, indicating a potential recovery in gas prices [55]. 5. Industry Important Developments - The report mentions significant contracts and technological advancements in the general machinery sector, highlighting the internationalization of companies like Xiangdian [57][58].

Investment Rating - The report suggests a focus on the home appliance sector, indicating a strong certainty in domestic demand growth and potential for export growth in emerging markets [7][40]. Core Insights - The adjustment of national subsidy policies aims to optimize resource allocation and enhance fund efficiency, guiding the industry towards high-quality development [3][14]. - The subsidy model is shifting from a "universal" approach to "precise control," with a pilot "quota allocation" model in Jiangsu expected to become a national standard [3][16]. - The current funding disbursement mechanism may transition from a pre-allocation based on reimbursement ratios to a "total pre-allocation" system, improving cash flow for enterprises [3][16]. - Online supervision is being strengthened to reduce arbitrage opportunities, with regions like Guangdong and Shanghai tightening cross-regional subsidies [3][16]. - The price system is expected to stabilize, with leading brands likely to initiate structural price increases as subsidy limits are imposed, leading to a more rational competitive environment [3][17]. Market and Sector Tracking - The Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 Index increased by 0.88%, while the Shenwan Home Appliance Index decreased by 1.4% [4][18]. - Key stock performers included Springlight Technology (+28.64%), Beilingsong (+21.17%), and Hesheng New Materials (+15.81%), while Midea Group (-4.25%), Hisense Visual (-3.98%), and Boss Electric (-3.74%) saw declines [4][18]. - Raw material prices showed a mixed trend, with copper prices up by 1.45% and aluminum prices down by 0.80% during the week [21][23]. Real Estate Data Tracking - In April 2025, the cumulative area of new residential construction was 131,639.8 thousand square meters, down 22.6% year-on-year [5][32]. - The cumulative area of residential construction was 4,319,367.5 thousand square meters, down 10.1% year-on-year [5][32]. Investment Recommendations - The report recommends focusing on three main lines: 1) Capitalizing on domestic demand and subsidy policies, particularly in the white goods sector [7][40]. 2) Investing in the black goods sector, which continues to show structural upgrade logic [7][40]. 3) Targeting the cleaning appliance segment, which remains promising in terms of growth [7][40].

Investment Rating - The report indicates a neutral investment rating for the agricultural sector, with expectations of limited price fluctuations in the near term [80]. Core Insights - The agricultural sector index outperformed the Shanghai Composite Index, with a weekly increase of 0.91% [13][14]. - The report highlights the ongoing adjustments in the pig farming industry, with a focus on the profitability of leading companies amidst fluctuating prices [22]. - The poultry sector is experiencing price stability despite seasonal demand fluctuations, with potential impacts from overseas avian influenza affecting supply [35]. - The dairy industry is seeing a recovery in milk prices due to reduced supply, while beef prices are expected to rise as the industry undergoes capacity adjustments [39]. - The planting sector is stabilizing, with potential improvements expected if there are significant reductions in grain production due to external uncertainties [47]. Summary by Sections 1. Market Review - The agricultural index closed at 2682.22 points, reflecting a weekly increase of 0.91%, outperforming the Shanghai Composite Index [13][14]. - The top-performing sectors included telecommunications and non-ferrous metals, while agriculture ranked 20th [14]. 2. Key Data Tracking 2.1 Pig Farming - The average weight of pigs sold was 129.17 kg, with a slight decrease in price to 14.05 CNY/kg, down 2.90% week-on-week [20][21]. - Leading companies are expected to maintain profitability above 200 CNY per pig in the first half of the year, despite anticipated price pressures in the second half [22]. 2.2 Poultry Farming - The average price for white feather chickens was 7.32 CNY/kg, showing a decrease of 0.68% week-on-week, while overall prices remain stable [32][35]. - The report anticipates a recovery in consumer demand as macroeconomic policies adjust, potentially boosting poultry product consumption [35]. 2.3 Dairy Industry - The price of raw milk has stabilized at 2.6 CNY/kg, with expectations for further recovery as supply decreases [39]. - The beef market is showing signs of a new cycle, with rising prices for calves and live cattle [39]. 2.4 Planting Industry - Grain prices are experiencing fluctuations due to tariff policies, with corn prices at 2294.29 CNY/ton and soybeans at 3925.26 CNY/ton [46]. - The planting sector is stabilizing, with potential improvements if significant reductions in grain production occur [47]. 2.5 Feed & Aquaculture - Feed prices have stabilized, with pig feed at 3.37 CNY/kg and poultry feed at 3.40 CNY/kg [65]. - Aquaculture prices remain steady, with notable increases in shrimp prices [65].

Quantitative Models and Construction Methods 1. Model Name: FuGuo ETF Rotation Strategy - **Model Construction Idea**: The strategy is based on the FuGuo ETF rotation factor, which evaluates ETFs' investment value from four dimensions: profitability, operational quality, valuation momentum, and analyst expectations. These dimensions are combined into a composite rotation factor through standardization and equal weighting[26][30]. - **Model Construction Process**: 1. **Profitability Factors**: - **Excluding Non-recurring Profit Growth (QoQ)**: Measures the quarterly change in net profit after excluding non-recurring items, aggregated using the median method[30][31]. - **Net Profit Growth (YoY)**: Measures the year-over-year change in net profit, aggregated using the median method[30][31]. 2. **Operational Quality Factors**: - **Operating Capital Turnover**: Ratio of operating capital to operating revenue, calculated semi-annually using the "leading stock" method[30][31]. - **Operating Capital Proportion**: Ratio of operating capital to total assets, calculated year-over-year using the "leading stock" method[30][31]. 3. **Valuation Momentum Factor**: - **Inverse Price-to-Earnings Ratio**: Measures the semi-annual change in the inverse P/E ratio, reflecting market sentiment[30][31]. 4. **Analyst Expectation Factor**: - **Analyst Forecast Change**: Tracks the 3-month change in analysts' consensus EPS forecasts, aggregated using the "leading stock" method[30][31]. 5. The above six factors are standardized and equally weighted to form the FuGuo ETF rotation factor[26][30]. - **Model Evaluation**: The FuGuo ETF rotation factor demonstrates strong predictive power for ETF performance, with stable IC values and effective multi-dimensional evaluation of ETF investment value[26][30]. --- Model Backtesting Results 1. FuGuo ETF Rotation Strategy - **Annualized Return**: 7.26%[19] - **Annualized Volatility**: 21.92%[19] - **Sharpe Ratio**: 0.33[19] - **Maximum Drawdown**: 42.20%[19] - **Turnover Rate (Monthly)**: 53.21%[19] - **Annualized Excess Return**: 5.49%[19] - **Tracking Error**: 9.27%[19] - **Information Ratio (IR)**: 0.59[19] - **Excess Maximum Drawdown**: 15.23%[19] - **May 2025 Return**: -2.03%[19] - **May 2025 Excess Return**: -3.46%[19] --- Quantitative Factors and Construction Methods 1. Factor Name: FuGuo ETF Rotation Factor - **Factor Construction Idea**: The factor evaluates ETFs' investment value by integrating profitability, operational quality, valuation momentum, and analyst expectations into a composite score[26][30]. - **Factor Construction Process**: 1. **Profitability Factors**: - **Excluding Non-recurring Profit Growth (QoQ)**: Measures the quarterly change in net profit after excluding non-recurring items, aggregated using the median method[30][31]. - **Net Profit Growth (YoY)**: Measures the year-over-year change in net profit, aggregated using the median method[30][31]. 2. **Operational Quality Factors**: - **Operating Capital Turnover**: Ratio of operating capital to operating revenue, calculated semi-annually using the "leading stock" method[30][31]. - **Operating Capital Proportion**: Ratio of operating capital to total assets, calculated year-over-year using the "leading stock" method[30][31]. 3. **Valuation Momentum Factor**: - **Inverse Price-to-Earnings Ratio**: Measures the semi-annual change in the inverse P/E ratio, reflecting market sentiment[30][31]. 4. **Analyst Expectation Factor**: - **Analyst Forecast Change**: Tracks the 3-month change in analysts' consensus EPS forecasts, aggregated using the "leading stock" method[30][31]. 5. The above six factors are standardized and equally weighted to form the FuGuo ETF rotation factor[26][30]. - **Factor Evaluation**: The factor demonstrates stable performance with an average IC of 6.80% and a risk-adjusted IC of 0.22, indicating its effectiveness in predicting ETF performance[12][14]. --- Factor Backtesting Results 1. FuGuo ETF Rotation Factor - **Average IC**: 6.80%[12] - **Standard Deviation of IC**: 31.51%[12] - **Minimum IC**: -59.85%[12] - **Maximum IC**: 78.19%[12] - **Risk-adjusted IC**: 0.22[12] - **T-statistic**: 2.24[12] - **May 2025 IC**: -30.91%[14] - **May 2025 Long-Short Portfolio Return**: -6.96%[14]