风格漂移应该跟随吗？

Group 1 - The report highlights a significant market style shift, indicating that the notion of "cutting high to low" is inaccurate, and "avoiding high positions" is more appropriate. This is evidenced by the performance of various industries during the specified periods [1][14]. - The report identifies two underlying logics for industries performing well under the "avoiding high positions" context: one is related to policy games, particularly in the large consumption sector, driven by local policies such as the childcare subsidy in Hohhot [2][19]. - The report suggests that while the large consumption sector may face challenges in broad-based gains, there is potential for continued strength in the childcare subsidy theme, which could see further local policy catalysts [2][20]. Group 2 - The report notes that some industries, such as engineering machinery and ordinary steel, have shown independent market trends, indicating that identifying sectors with improving fundamentals is crucial for potential gains [3][21]. - The report emphasizes that the ability to achieve independent market trends is limited, and it is advisable to wait for clear upward price trends in non-hot sectors before participating [3][21]. - The report also mentions that the current market style shift is driven by policy games and low-position hedging, which differs from the independent market trends previously observed [21]. Group 3 - The report indicates that the large consumption sector has led the A-share market to a new high, with significant contributions from policies aimed at boosting consumption and childcare subsidies [6][30]. - The report highlights that the A-share index has shown a general upward trend, with essential consumer and discretionary sectors outperforming, while technology stocks have faced regulatory scrutiny and declining trading sentiment [7][39]. - The report provides insights into the performance of various sectors, with beauty care, food and beverage, and coal showing notable gains, driven by policy catalysts and low-position hedging logic [39].