全方位对比及债市影响剖析：“反内卷”政策能否复制供给侧改革？

1. Report Industry Investment Rating - No industry investment rating information is provided in the report. 2. Core Viewpoints - The "anti - involution" policy is compared with the supply - side reform in 2016 - 2017. Both aim to address supply - demand mismatches through capacity reduction, but there are differences in background, industries covered, policy measures, implementation cycles, and outcomes [14]. - The "anti - involution" policy is expected to have a longer implementation cycle and a more profound impact. It focuses on long - term mechanism building and is likely to achieve more sustainable and healthy results [50]. - Regarding the impact on the bond market, the "anti - involution" policy is unlikely to change the long - term bullish trend of the bond market. In the short term, there is adjustment pressure on bond interest rates due to a slight rebound in commodity prices, but a demand - driven bearish trend is unlikely. In the long run, if the policy can increase corporate profits and drive up factor prices, it may lead to an upward inflection point in bond interest rates [51][63]. 3. Summary by Directory 3.1 "Anti - involution" Policy Context Review - In 2024, the Central Political Bureau Meeting first proposed "preventing 'involution - style' vicious competition." On July 1, 2025, the Sixth Meeting of the Central Financial and Economic Commission incorporated "anti - involution" into the national economic governance framework, accelerating policy implementation. Subsequently, various industries issued implementation opinions, such as the China Cement Association, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology for the photovoltaic industry, and 33 construction central enterprises [10][11]. 3.2 "Anti - involution" and Supply - side Reform Comprehensive Comparison 3.2.1 Background Motivation - Supply - side reform in 2015 was due to the transition from high - speed to medium - high - speed economic growth, with severe over - capacity in traditional industries like coal and steel, and diminishing marginal effects of demand - side stimulus [15]. - The "anti - involution" policy since 2022 is because PPI has been in the negative range again, and over - capacity is more concentrated in emerging industries such as photovoltaic, lithium - battery, and new - energy vehicles. "Involution" is a structural and institutional over - capacity, threatening the long - term health of industries [17][21]. 3.2.2 Key Industries - The "anti - involution" policy covers a wide range of industries, including traditional industries related to real - estate and infrastructure, emerging industries, and downstream consumer - related industries. The policy focuses on the "new three items" (new energy, semiconductors, high - end equipment) [24]. - The supply - side reform in 2016 - 2017 focused on upstream raw - material industries, mainly addressing over - capacity in traditional industries led by state - owned enterprises. In contrast, the "anti - involution" policy is more extensive, emphasizing emerging industries in the middle and lower reaches, with more private enterprises involved [28]. 3.2.3 Policy Measures - The supply - side reform in 2016 - 2017 used "three removals, one reduction, and one supplement" as the main policy tools, featuring administrative means, quantified targets for key industries, supplementary measures, and demand - expansion policies such as shantytown renovation monetization [34]. - The "anti - involution" policy currently mainly uses market - based means such as industry self - discipline, with milder administrative intervention and an emphasis on institutional building. Its ultimate goal is to build a new development pattern and promote high - quality development, and it is unlikely to be accompanied by large - scale demand - expansion policies [39][40]. 3.2.4 Policy Implementation Cycle and Outcomes - The supply - side reform had a short implementation cycle of about 2 years, with significant and rapid results. It led to a substantial increase in capacity utilization, commodity prices, and industrial profits, and had a "first positive, then negative" impact on interest - rate bonds [42][43]. - The "anti - involution" policy may have a longer implementation cycle. It focuses on long - term mechanism building and is expected to achieve more sustainable and healthy results through market - based and legal means [50]. 3.3 "Anti - involution" Impact on the Bond Market Outlook - The impact of the "anti - involution" policy on interest - rate bonds is mainly transmitted through factors such as expectations, commodity prices, monetary policy, and the demand side. Currently, the demand side is weak, and monetary policy remains loose [51]. - It is predicted that the year - on - year PPI will gradually recover to around - 1.5% within the year but will not turn positive immediately. In the short term, there is adjustment pressure on bond interest rates due to a slight rebound in commodity prices, but a trend - driven bear market is unlikely. In the long run, if the policy can increase corporate profits and drive up factor prices, it may lead to an upward inflection point in bond interest rates [63].