摩根士丹利：亚洲是否将实现再平衡？

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry Core Insights - Asia's current account surpluses are expected to narrow due to a slowdown in global trade and increased purchases from the US, but this does not indicate a true rebalancing of the economy [4][6][39] - Asia's international investment position has reached US$45 trillion, with potential for increased hedging but limited portfolio rebalancing due to a lack of alternatives [4][8][50] Summary by Sections Current Account Balances - Asia's current account surplus is projected to narrow to US$0.9 trillion (3.1% of GDP) in 2025 from US$1.0 trillion (3.6% of GDP) in 2024 [37] - The narrowing is attributed to a slowdown in exports and increased purchases from the US, similar to trends observed in 2018-19 [6][38] - Despite the narrowing, the report emphasizes that this should not be viewed as a sustained rebalancing, as Asia's growth model remains focused on manufacturing exports and high savings rates [7][39] Investment Position - Asia's gross international investment position (IIP) has increased to US$45 trillion, with a net IIP of US$12 trillion as of 2024 [50][51] - Asia's holdings of US portfolio investments have risen by US$2.8 trillion to US$8.6 trillion, increasing the US's share of Asia's portfolio assets from 37% in 2018 to 41% currently [67][74] - The report notes that Asia's investment ratios are high, and policymakers are likely to maintain these levels to counteract demographic challenges [41][39] Economic Model and Savings - The report highlights that Asia's growth model is heavily reliant on manufacturing exports, with investment to GDP ratios typically above 30% during industrialization phases [26][32] - High savings rates in Asia, particularly in China (43%) and other current account surplus economies (32%), are driven by both mandatory savings systems and a lack of social security support [32][34] - The report suggests that without significant policy shifts, a sustained increase in consumption to GDP ratios is unlikely [39][41]