Investment Rating - The industry investment rating is "Positive" (maintained) [1] Core Viewpoints - The report emphasizes the ongoing impact of tariff shocks and suggests focusing on high-quality retail channels and differentiated consumer brands that cater to domestic demand [4][22] - The report highlights the transformation of traditional retail, with Yonghui Supermarket leading the way in adapting to a consumer-centric retail era [4][22] - The rise of domestic brands and the recovery of consumer demand are seen as inevitable trends, with recommendations to focus on quality retail channels and differentiated brands [4][22] Summary by Sections Retail Market Review - The retail industry index rose by 2.88% during the week of April 7 to April 11, outperforming the Shanghai Composite Index, which fell by 3.11% [6][13] - The supermarket sector showed the largest increase, with a weekly rise of 13.54% [14][17] - Notable individual stock performances included Guofang Group (+61.1%), Eurasia Group (+26.3%), and Nanning Department Store (+22.4%) [19][20] Industry Dynamics - Yonghui Supermarket has opened a "green channel" for domestic manufacturers affected by export restrictions, receiving over 100 cooperation requests from various sectors [4][22] - The report discusses the approval of a new collagen product by Jinbo Bio, which is expected to strengthen its leading position in the medical beauty sector [4][23] Investment Recommendations - Investment focus areas include: - Traditional retail: Highlighting companies like Yonghui Supermarket and Aiyingshi that are adapting to consumer trends [7][27] - Gold and jewelry: Recommendations for brands like Laopu Gold and Chaohongji that possess differentiated product capabilities [7][28] - Cosmetics: Emphasizing domestic brands such as Maogeping and Shangmei that are expanding into high-potential segments [7][28] - Medical aesthetics: Focusing on companies like Aimeike and Kedi that are positioned to benefit from the recovery in medical beauty consumption [7][28] Company-Specific Insights - Laopu Gold reported a revenue of 8.506 billion yuan (+167.5%) and a net profit of 1.473 billion yuan (+253.9%) for FY2024, indicating strong growth potential [29] - Yonghui Supermarket's revenue for the first three quarters of 2024 was 54.549 billion yuan (-12.1%), with a net loss of 78 million yuan, but it is undergoing significant transformation [32] - Jinbo Bio's new collagen product is expected to provide both immediate filling effects and stimulate collagen regeneration, enhancing its competitive edge in the market [23][24]

每周思考总第624期 《 关税冲击变化的只是力度，不变的是方向！ 》 本系列周度择时观点回溯表现（2023.1.1 至今），其中2024年全年累计收益53.69%。2025年至4 月13日累计收益7.79%。 1 本周建议 | 预测标的 | 仓位建议 | | --- | --- | | 主板 | 中仓位 | | 中小市值板块 | 中仓位 | | 风格判断 | 均衡 | 观点简述： 上周市场深跌后反弹，沪深300指数涨幅-2.87%，上证综指周涨幅-3.11%，中证500指数周涨 幅-4.52%。包括中美在内的全球股市都在美国关税政策落地、加码、暂停等消息下被反复情绪牵引。 基本面上，美国部分加征关税已读撤回。 海外方面，美国总统特朗普4月9日突然宣布对部分国 家的对等关税暂缓90天执行，资本市场短期情绪迅速变化并导致全球股市此前超跌后快速反弹，但至 今未有公开新闻展示具体75国名单，美国属于典型的重磅利空被市场吸收后又快速暂停，类似微信发 了一个噩耗后马上撤回消息，留给全球投资者的是高度紧张与惊恐，但 4月5日开始的10%全球一致 性关税确实已开始稳定实施并不受本次额外对等关税撤回影响 ；国内方面，中方继续保 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article argues that the market may overestimate the impact of tariffs on exports, suggesting that the elasticity of tariff shocks is non-linear and may decrease as tariff rates increase, leading to a more muted impact on exports than previously assumed [2][9]. Group 1: Misconceptions about Tariff Impact - The elasticity of tariff shocks exhibits a "non-linear decreasing" characteristic, meaning that as tariff rates rise, the marginal impact on exports may decline. For instance, the elasticity of the tariff shock for the current 145% tariff has dropped from 1.8 to 0.3 [2][12][15]. - Tariffs have a "reflexive" nature, where U.S. importers can apply for exemptions, which were not negotiated by China but initiated by U.S. importers. During the first round of tariffs, the exemption rate reached as high as 60% for certain goods, indicating the significant impact of trade friction on the U.S. economy [2][21][22]. - The U.S. has recently issued a new round of tariff exemption lists, with a total import scale of $22.03 billion from China, suggesting that the sustainability of high tariffs is questionable [2][30]. Group 2: Trade Partners' Counterbalancing Power - Canada and Mexico have not been subjected to reciprocal tariffs, becoming key "trade transit" channels that can mitigate the export pressure on China to the U.S. by up to 23% [3][41]. - Emerging markets are seen as partners rather than adversaries, with a significant portion of exports to these countries driven by their internal demand rather than just supply chain collaboration [3][43][49]. - The deep integration of supply chains means that imposing tariffs on China could hinder the industrialization processes of emerging countries, as they rely heavily on Chinese intermediate and capital goods [3][53]. Group 3: Confusion between Exports, GDP, and Employment - The article highlights the confusion between the concepts of export value and GDP, emphasizing that a decline in exports does not necessarily equate to a decline in GDP due to the buffering effect of imports [6][58]. - The shift towards general trade, which reduces reliance on imports, has led to a significant increase in trade surpluses, particularly in sectors like mobile phones, indicating a structural change in trade dynamics [6][63][65]. - The impact of export declines on domestic employment is overstated, as the elasticity of employment response to export changes is less than one, meaning that domestic job creation can occur through import substitution [6][73][80].

Core Viewpoints - The Consumer Price Index (CPI) for March showed a year-on-year decrease of 0.1%, an improvement from the previous value of -0.7%, while the Producer Price Index (PPI) decreased by 2.5% year-on-year, slightly worse than the expected 2.2% [8][59] - The increase in household appliance CPI to a ten-year high reflects improved consumer demand, despite weak PPI performance due to falling prices of major commodities like oil and coal [2][60] - The overall low CPI is primarily influenced by weak food CPI, which is attributed to sufficient food supply [3][19] CPI and PPI Analysis - March PPI decreased by 0.4% month-on-month, with significant contributions from falling oil prices (down 6%) and coal prices (down 7.9%), which together dragged PPI down by approximately 0.5% [2][9] - Core commodity PPI fell by 0.6 percentage points to -1.6%, while core commodity CPI slightly increased by 0.2 percentage points to 0.1%, indicating a shift in price sampling towards "trade-in" products [2][60] - Food CPI showed a slight recovery to -1.4% year-on-year, but the first quarter's food CPI was still down 1.4% compared to Q4 of the previous year, reflecting a strong supply of fresh vegetables and fruits [3][19] Service Sector Insights - The service CPI increased by only 0.3% month-on-month in March, which is lower than the typical seasonal increase of 1.4% seen in previous years, indicating a decline in post-holiday consumer activity [3][27] - Core service CPI decreased by 0.6%, significantly underperforming compared to the previous year's figure of -0.1%, with travel-related prices dropping due to reduced travel demand [3][61] Future Outlook - The potential increase in tariffs may exert downward pressure on PPI, while the recovery of domestic demand is expected to support CPI, leading to a forecast of CPI performing better than PPI throughout the year [4][33] - The anticipated average year-on-year PPI is projected at -1.5%, while CPI is expected to average at 0.1% [4][33]

Investment Rating - The report maintains a 60% probability of a US/global recession, with a 40% chance of avoiding it, contingent on potential tariff adjustments by the Trump administration [2][3]. Core Insights - The recent tariff adjustments, particularly the 10% universal tariffs and the 125% tariffs on China, represent a significant economic shock, estimated to impose an $860 billion tax burden, approximately 2.5% of GDP [2]. - The report indicates that the US imports about $450 billion from China, which constitutes 13% of total imports and 1.5% of GDP, highlighting the potential ripple effects on supply chains if trade with China is disrupted [2]. - The ongoing trade policy chaos and substantial losses in equity markets contribute to a challenging economic outlook, with the US likely facing recessionary pressures [2][3]. - The report anticipates that the Federal Reserve may delay its first interest rate cut to September, with a terminal rate projected at 3% by the second quarter of 2026 [2]. - The report emphasizes the uncertainty surrounding the reactions of major trading partners, including China, the EU, Canada, and Mexico, to the new tariffs, which will significantly influence the evolution of the trade war [2][3]. Summary by Sections Tariff Impact Analysis - The report outlines that the effective US average tariff rate has increased to approximately 27%, which could reduce US GDP by 2.8 percentage points and global GDP by 1.4 percentage points [15][28]. - The direct impact of the tariff hike accounts for only 30% of the global growth hit, with trade policy uncertainty being the dominant factor [15][28]. Country-Specific Impacts - Vietnam is projected to experience the most severe GDP contraction at 13%, followed by Taiwan and Thailand at -4.3% each, due to their high export dependence on the US market [22][23]. - Mexico and Canada, while exposed, were spared further tariff hikes, resulting in comparatively lower direct trade impacts, although business sentiment has already been significantly affected [23]. Global Growth Forecasts - The report has downgraded global growth forecasts for 2025 to 1.3% from an earlier estimate of 2.1%, reflecting the adverse effects of the tariff shock [13][28]. - The analysis indicates that emerging markets in Asia are particularly vulnerable to growth risks stemming from US tariff measures, with significant downward revisions expected [22][28].

Price Data Overview - In March, CPI decreased by 0.4% month-on-month (previous value: -0.2%) and by 0.1% year-on-year (previous value: -0.7%), indicating a narrowing decline[2] - PPI also fell by 0.4% month-on-month (previous value: -0.1%) and by 2.5% year-on-year (previous value: -2.2%), showing an expanded decline[2] Key Influencing Factors - The decline in CPI was primarily driven by three factors: a 3.5% decrease in domestic gasoline prices due to falling international oil prices, which contributed approximately 0.12 percentage points to the CPI decline[2] - Food prices fell by 1.4% month-on-month, impacting CPI by about 0.24 percentage points, with significant drops in fresh vegetables (5.1%), pork (4.4%), and eggs (3.1%)[2] - Weak terminal consumption and industrial demand continued to exert downward pressure, with service prices slightly below historical levels[2] Future Price Trends - Moving forward, tariff impacts are expected to become a significant factor in price evolution, with supply and demand dynamics shifting[2] - The interplay between excess supply and weakening domestic demand will influence price stability, while tariff shocks may lead to lower prices through increased domestic supply[2] Policy Implications - Incremental policies to counter tariff impacts will be crucial, particularly in promoting consumption and stabilizing the real estate market[2] - The effectiveness of these policies will be key in determining future price trends[2] Risks and Challenges - Potential risks include a weakening real estate market, declining exports, and the possibility that incremental policies may not meet expectations[4] - The go-capacity policy may face tougher decisions, as the short-term pain from capacity reduction could be challenging for the domestic economy to absorb[2]

Group 1: Impact of Tariffs - The new tariffs proposed by Trump could generate additional revenue of $600-700 billion per year, requiring the average effective tariff rate (AETR) to rise from 2.2% to 21%[7] - If the tariffs are fully borne by households, the average loss per American household could be $5,400, approximately 5% of median household income[9] - If the tariffs are shared equally between households and corporations, household income could decline by 2.5% and corporate after-tax profits could drop by 15%[9] Group 2: Economic Objectives and Comparisons - The economic objectives of the new tariffs include increasing federal revenue and promoting the return of manufacturing, differing from the 2018 focus on trade balance[10] - By Q4 2024, manufacturing's share of non-residential fixed asset investment is expected to rise to 5.7%, up from 2.7% five years ago[10] Group 3: Economic Growth and Market Reactions - The Federal Reserve has lowered its GDP growth forecast for 2025 from 2.1% to 1.7% due to tariff impacts, while only slightly adjusting the unemployment rate[12] - As of April 7, 2025, S&P 500 EPS forecasts have been revised down by 4.1% for Q1 and 2.5% for Q2, indicating a cautious market outlook[16] Group 4: Federal Reserve and Monetary Policy - The Fed's monetary policy aims to maintain a 2% inflation rate, with actual wages and long-term inflation expectations being critical factors in policy decisions[21] - As of April 7, 2025, the 5-year inflation swap rate is at 2.3%, indicating stable long-term inflation expectations[23] Group 5: Asset Allocation and Market Trends - High tariffs are expected to create both demand and supply shocks, influencing asset allocation strategies, with potential shifts favoring commodities over financial assets in a stagflation scenario[26] - The 10-year U.S. Treasury term premium is currently at 43 basis points, significantly lower than historical averages, indicating reduced demand for U.S. debt amid tariff-induced inflation risks[29]

家人们，活久见啊。 从没想到过有一天能见到 104% 的关税…… 我只是一个普通人，只想好好混吃等死，为什么老是要逼我见证历史…… 刚刚官方消息，中国这边已经已经跟上了， 真正的对等关税！太对等了，大家都 104%，都别活了！ 感觉大家坐在牌桌两端： 中国：Call！ 川普：……（SOS，我本来只是想偷鸡！） 现在就看到最后谁受不了先 Fold 了。 先别说天塌不塌了，我的股票账户最近连遭重锤，曲线已经塌陷了。这是一柄双刃剑，我看了看推特，感觉海外的股民也很痛。 | | ਟ | T | Stilly | | 25 | | 3 | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | TSLA | LLY | | WMT | | AVGO | | | | | -37.78% | -3.96% | | -4.67% | | -39.37% | | | AAPL | AMZN | Bi | 1 | | CB | | | | | -21.87% | -20.58% | JPM | XOM | | MA | NFLX | ORCI | | | | ...

特朗普的第一个任期，于2018年4月初根据301调查结果对中国发出了加征进口关税的威胁。此后，中美 关税摩擦交错升级，美国于2018年7月6日、8月23日、9月24日和2019年9月1日分四批对累计约3700亿美 元中国进口商品加征了10%~25%的关税。 特朗普1.0关税在2018年引发了"抢出口效应"。据中方统计，当年，中国出口（美元口径，下同）增长 9.9%，增速较上年加快2.0个百分点。其中，对美国出口增长10.8%，较出口平均增速高出0.9个百分 点。同期，由于中国进口增长15.8%，快于出口增速，进出口顺差减少16.4%，其中对美贸易顺差增长 16.7%。 文/ 中银证券全球首席经济学家 管涛 从2019年的经验看，关税冲击不一定表现为中国整体贸易顺差下降，而 是在顺差可能扩大的情况下，通过出口和进口两个渠道影响或反映中国经 济运行。我们需早做准备，并变压力为动力，加快经济转型和政策调整。 现在外部环境更趋复杂严峻，将倒逼中国加快推进相关改革与调整：一是 加快构建新发展格局；二是转变外贸发展方式；三是强化宏观政策的民生 导向，将外部打压遏制的压力转变成集中精力做好自己事情的动力。 美国政府换届一个 ...

Core Viewpoint - Foreign investors' stance on the US stock market is wavering, with Morgan Stanley indicating that the market may face deeper adjustments if foreign capital begins to question the "American exceptionalism" narrative and withdraws from the US market [1][2]. Group 1: Market Dynamics - The "fast money" has exited the market, with hedge fund net exposure dropping to 37%, currently rising to 39%, which is in the 2nd percentile since 2010 [2]. - Macro systemic leverage has decreased to the 14th percentile, following a sell-off of $375 billion in stocks [2]. - Retail investors have not capitulated yet, and long-term investment clients of QDS have not shown panic selling [2]. Group 2: Foreign Investment Concerns - Foreign investors have steadily increased their holdings in US stocks over the past 30 years, currently owning 18% of US equities [2]. - If this group begins to question the "American exceptionalism" and reduces their investments in US stocks, it could lead to more downside risks in the market [2]. Group 3: Tactical Outlook - QDS anticipates that stocks may be more likely to rise than fall in the coming week, but the market is expected to retest lows in the coming months due to the impact of tariff shocks and slow-moving investor sell-offs [5]. - Recent signs of capitulation include hedge fund net exposure falling below 40% and the VIX index exceeding 50, but a complete correlated sell-off has not yet occurred [6]. Group 4: Key Issues Influencing Market Direction - Four major issues are highlighted as critical for market direction: - Fundamentals: The impact of tariffs will take months to fully manifest, with historical data showing that a 20% drop in the S&P 500 typically indicates a recession [7]. - Federal Reserve: The Fed's response to economic slowdown may lag behind the situation, as indicated by Powell's comments suggesting they are not in a hurry [7]. - Foreign Flows: Actual funds, especially from outside the US, could have the most significant downside impact on the market [8]. - Financial Leverage: While much leverage has been removed from the system, not all has been, and the market is shorting Gamma values [8].