1. Report Industry Investment Rating No information about the industry investment rating is provided in the report. 2. Core Views - Layout of the bottom - position is as important as flexible offense. A basket of "high - dividend × low - volatility" dividend assets can provide a natural "shock absorber" for the portfolio, and the combination can withstand extreme market conditions by suppressing volatility with stable cash flows and low β and then capturing market mismatches with the remaining positions [3]. - To amplify returns in the dividend pool, a dual - screening approach is more reliable than relying solely on the "high - dividend" indicator. Adding a second filter such as low - volatility, earnings quality, or institutional holdings can eliminate potential risks and further increase the returns of general dividend assets [3]. - On top of the dividend bottom - position, there are systematic excess opportunities from the left - to - right shift of the industrial cycle. Priority should be given to companies with stable cash flows despite pressured profits. Industries such as cement, silicone, and phosphate chemicals are currently in the preferred range, while the photovoltaic chain is still in a state of "double losses in profit and cash flow". The overall allocation strategy involves initially establishing an observation position, increasing the position after confirming the leading indicators of the profit inflection point, and exiting when profits weaken again or the gross margin is inverted [3]. 3. Summary by Relevant Catalogs 3.1 Bottom - Position Allocation Necessity: "Pure Left" and "Pure Right" Are Not Desirable - In a market with an increasing industry rotation center, it is crucial to build a long - term core position first. A 15 - year quarterly rotation experiment on 31 Shenwan primary industries shows that both extreme left - side bottom - fishing and extreme right - side chasing result in single - digit annualized returns and significant drawdowns. In contrast, a dividend portfolio characterized by "high - dividend × low - volatility" can provide double - digit annualized returns and keep drawdowns within an acceptable range. Therefore, increasing the exposure of "high - dividend + low - β" in the bottom - position can provide a safety cushion for the portfolio [7]. - Dividend assets are the optimal core bottom - position in terms of return - to - drawdown. Historical stress tests show that the dividend index has shallower drawdowns, a stable 3 - year rolling Sharpe ratio, and does not require market timing in the long - term perspective. It also has higher probabilities of achieving positive returns in different holding periods compared to most broad - based and style indices [10][12][21]. 3.2 Dividend Yield Single - Factor Trap - Selecting stocks based solely on the "high - dividend" factor often leads to choosing high - volatility stocks with limited return increases and large drawdowns. Adding a second filter such as low - volatility or earnings quality can improve the overall cost - effectiveness. Statistical regression shows that the dividend yield alone has a weak explanatory power for future returns [29]. - Several case studies illustrate different types of "false high - dividend" traps. For example, some companies rely on one - time gains to support high dividends, some have high dividends due to falling stock prices rather than improved profitability, and some have high dividends at the peak of the business cycle or due to high leverage. To avoid these traps, specific financial and operational criteria need to be set [37][40][44]. 3.3 High - Dividend Smart - Beta's Distortion Risk - Modified dividend indices such as "Dividend Quality" and "Dividend Potential" have larger fluctuations and deeper drawdowns than the CSI Dividend Index. Their style drift and uncontrolled risk exposure lead to higher volatility, especially in bear markets. The main reasons are their high - concentration weighting, high - valuation requirements, and frequent chasing of market highs [60][64]. - The CSI Dividend Index selects 100 stocks based on a three - year dividend yield with a diversified weighting, while the Dividend Quality and Dividend Potential indices select 50 stocks by adding factors such as ROE and EPS growth, with a more concentrated and high - chasing weighting. As a result, they are more likely to suffer from double - kills of earnings and valuation when the market weakens [64]. 3.4 Potential Ways to Enhance Dividend Low - Volatility - **Dividend + Pricing Power Approach**: Traditional high - dividend indices have several drawbacks, including style drift, inclusion of high - risk high - dividend stocks, and right - side trading characteristics. A comprehensive scoring system based on pricing power, price - to - earnings ratio, and stability can be used to select the top 20 stocks for a portfolio. A ten - year back - test shows that this combination has better performance in terms of cumulative return, annualized return, and drawdown control compared to the CSI Dividend Index [83][84]. - **Considering Institutional Participation Rate**: Incorporating institutional holdings into high - dividend screening reveals that stocks with high institutional participation (≥20%) from stable - cash - flow industries have better risk - return profiles, including higher cumulative returns, greater upside potential, and controlled drawdowns. In contrast, stocks with low institutional participation (<20%) from cyclical industries perform less well. Therefore, combining high - dividends with institutional recognition can build a safer and more sustainable dividend portfolio [89]. 3.5 Bottom - Position Is Not Just Dividends: Quality Low - Volatility and Cash Cows - The "quality + low - volatility" dual - screened bottom - position established in June 2020 can achieve a balance between offense and defense. By filtering out high - leverage and low - resilience companies and compressing risk thresholds, it has achieved a five - year rolling net value increase of about 1.6 times, with stable single - digit annualized returns and significantly reduced volatility and drawdowns compared to ordinary low - volatility strategies [94]. - The long - term returns of dividend assets mainly come from stable dividends and profits rather than valuation increases. From 2014 - 2025, the annualized total returns of Dividend Low - Volatility and CSI Dividend after reinvestment were 13.9% and 13.2% respectively, with dividend contributions exceeding 9 percentage points and accounting for over 70% of the total returns [98]. - The cash - cow enhancement framework uses six dimensions to examine potential risks in high - dividend portfolios and provides corresponding enhancement measures. These measures include equal - weighting industries and quality sorting to address concentration risks, using free - cash - flow and growth thresholds to eliminate "high - dividend traps", and implementing valuation gates and hedging strategies to manage valuation risks [108]. 3.6 Industrial Cycle Reversal: From Left to Right - At the inflection point of the industrial cycle, multi - dimensional indicators such as fundamentals, inventory, price, valuation, and funds often show concurrent inflection points. The consistency in the industry dimension, from raw material prices to mid - stream production and downstream demand, can improve the reliability of inflection - point signals. For example, the anti - involution market rhythm is often in line with this "consistency chain" [111][112]. - At the company level, by dividing samples into leading, mid - stream, and tail companies, monitoring the second - order derivatives of 10 key indicators can help identify the acceleration of marginal improvements in demand, pricing, or cash flows. When at least three indicators in any two of the three sample layers show positive second - order derivatives, it can be regarded as a company - level consistency inflection point [114]. - The industrial cycle reversal framework uses a "three - light" approach to determine investment opportunities. When the three conditions of valuation repair, profit - cash flow resonance improvement, and completion of inventory reduction and demand expansion are met simultaneously, it indicates a three - dimensional resonance of supply - demand, profit, and sentiment, and investors can make aggressive investments. Otherwise, they should continue to hold the dividend bottom - position [115].

Core Viewpoint - Anheuser-Busch InBev reported mixed second-quarter results with a revenue growth of 3.0% to $15.004 billion and normalized EBITDA gains of 6.5%, but missed expectations on beer volumes, leading to a 9.1% decline in stock price in pre-market trading, the worst session since the COVID-19 pandemic [1][4]. Financial Performance - Revenue increased by 3.0% to $15.004 billion and normalized EBITDA rose by 6.5% with margin expansion of 116 basis points to 35.3% [1][6]. - Despite the volume challenges, the company demonstrated pricing power by growing revenues while selling less beer [6]. Volume Performance - Beer volumes declined by 1.9% year-over-year, significantly worse than the 0.3% decline forecasted by analysts [5]. - The decline in volumes was primarily driven by significant drops in China (7.4%) and Brazil (6.5%), with the company acknowledging underperformance in China and attributing Brazil's decline to tough comparisons and adverse weather conditions [6]. Market Outlook - The average target price for BUD stock is $82.67 for the next 12 months, with optimistic predictions reaching as high as $91.00 and bearish outlooks at $72.00 [7]. - All six analysts covering the stock maintain Strong Buy ratings, with no Hold or Sell recommendations [9].

Core Insights - The financing balance in the Shanghai market has surpassed 1 trillion yuan, marking a nearly ten-year high, which superficially indicates strong market confidence [2] - However, this high level of financing also suggests speculative funds are involved, raising concerns about the suitability for retail investors [2] Group 1: Anxiety in Retail Investors - Despite the record high in financing balance, retail investors continue to experience anxiety regarding their investment decisions, often second-guessing their actions whether to sell, switch, take profits, or cut losses [3] - This pervasive anxiety is advantageous for institutional investors, as it allows them to capitalize on retail investors' indecision and potentially exploit them [3] Group 2: Pricing Power Dynamics - The performance of stocks like "Shengtun Mining" and "Qifeng New Materials" illustrates the disparity in market reactions to earnings forecasts, highlighting the importance of pricing power rather than just positive news [4][6] - Institutional investors leverage retail investors' fixation on concepts and good news to manipulate stock price movements [6] Group 3: Quantitative Insights - Long-term trading behavior data and models reveal distinct characteristics of trading activities, particularly the "institutional inventory" data that reflects institutional investor activity [7] - Active "institutional inventory" data correlates with rising stock prices, while inactivity suggests potential declines [11] Group 4: Understanding Financing Balance - The significance of the record financing balance lies in the direction of the funds; if they flow into quality stocks favored by institutions, the market may improve, but if they are driven by retail sentiment, risks may accumulate [12] - In an era of information overload, the ability to discern market fundamentals is crucial, and quantitative data can help reveal the market's true nature [12]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing food delivery subsidy war is significantly impacting the pricing power of restaurant businesses, leading to a struggle for survival in a highly competitive environment [1][4]. Group 1: Impact on Traditional Dining - Restaurant owners are facing challenges as low-priced delivery options are eroding the customer base for dine-in services, with some customers opting for cheaper delivery meals even when dining nearby [3]. - High average order values in certain food categories, like hot pot, make it difficult for these businesses to compete with lower-priced items offered through delivery platforms [3][4]. - The pressure to participate in delivery platform promotions creates a vicious cycle where restaurants must sacrifice profitability to gain visibility [3]. Group 2: Profitability Concerns - The profit margins for restaurants are declining due to heavy subsidies, with some businesses reporting that they receive as little as 1.69 yuan from a 19 yuan drink after accounting for various costs [4]. - Some restaurant owners are resorting to using cheaper ingredients to maintain profitability, which raises concerns about food quality [4]. - Despite the challenges, some businesses see potential benefits in consumer education and increased brand visibility through delivery platforms [4]. Group 3: Alternative Strategies - Some restaurant owners are opting out of the delivery platform wars and instead focusing on direct customer relationships through private channels like WeChat [6][8]. - By reducing reliance on third-party platforms, businesses can regain pricing power and control over customer interactions, leading to a more sustainable business model [8][12]. - The shift towards direct sales and building a private customer base is seen as a viable path for restaurants to navigate the current market challenges [8][13]. Group 4: Industry Dynamics - The competition among delivery platforms is reshaping consumer behavior and may lead to a long-term shift in shopping habits from physical stores to online platforms [11]. - The ongoing subsidy wars are prompting calls from industry associations for more sustainable practices and a reduction in aggressive competition among delivery platforms [12]. - The balance between leveraging platform benefits and maintaining independent operations is a critical challenge for many small and medium-sized enterprises in the industry [13].

Group 1 - Deutsche Bank's report highlights four major risk factors: tariff impacts, employment data, U.S. Treasury yields, and multiple events overlapping [2] - The report's warnings are seen as repetitive and not new, as similar concerns were raised last year [2] - The concept of "black swan" events is questioned, suggesting that market movements are often predictable based on institutional behavior rather than expert predictions [11] Group 2 - Data analysis reveals that institutional funds had already reduced their participation in the liquor sector prior to the market downturn, indicating a lack of confidence [5][7] - The essence of the stock market is viewed as a struggle for pricing power, with institutional actions leaving clear data traces [8] - Observing institutional trading behavior is emphasized as a more reliable strategy than following expert opinions [10] Group 3 - The report suggests that rather than fearing "black swan" events, investors should focus on monitoring institutional fund movements for true market signals [11] - The importance of data tools that penetrate market noise and provide clear insights is highlighted, contrasting with the often fluctuating views of experts [12] - The market is always changing, but human behavior and institutional logic remain constant, suggesting that finding suitable observation tools can provide an advantage in the pricing power game [13]

Core Viewpoint - The news highlights the challenges faced by the hotel industry, particularly in Zhengzhou, where a five-star hotel resorted to street vending due to declining business. Meanwhile, Ctrip, a leading OTA, is facing allegations from hotel merchants regarding its pricing practices, indicating a broader issue of profitability and competition in the OTA sector [2][15]. Group 1: Ctrip's Performance - Ctrip Group is projected to achieve a net profit of 17.2 billion yuan in 2024, a significant increase of 72% year-on-year, marking its best performance in five years [3]. - In Q1 2025, Ctrip's net profit was 4.314 billion yuan, maintaining a net profit margin of 34% [3]. - All four major business segments of Ctrip saw revenue growth in Q1 2025: accommodation bookings increased by 23% to 5.5 billion yuan, transportation ticketing rose by 8% to 5.4 billion yuan, vacation services grew by 7% to 947 million yuan, and business travel management climbed by 12% to 573 million yuan [3]. Group 2: Industry Context - The overall OTA industry shows high net profit margins, with Tongcheng Travel reporting a net profit of 679 million yuan in Q1 2025, a year-on-year increase of 69.52% and a net margin of 18% [4]. - Ctrip holds a market share of 56% in GMV, significantly outperforming competitors like Meituan and Tongcheng, despite facing strong competition from them [5][8]. Group 3: Competitive Advantages - Ctrip's early entry into the market allowed it to capture high-end users, establishing a strong brand association with OTA services [8][9]. - The company has exclusive agreements with mid-to-high-end hotels, ensuring a stable supply of hotel rooms and enhancing its bargaining power [11]. - Ctrip's operational model includes a large workforce dedicated to customer service, which adds to its competitive edge in the OTA space [12]. Group 4: Market Dynamics and Challenges - Recent complaints from hotel merchants about Ctrip's pricing practices indicate potential instability in the OTA ecosystem, where one party's excessive profits could lead to unsustainable business practices [15][16]. - The entry of competitors like JD.com into the OTA market may disrupt the current dynamics, prompting existing players to reconsider their pricing and profit-sharing strategies [19][20]. - The need for a balanced ecosystem where all parties benefit is emphasized, suggesting that Ctrip may need to adjust its profit margins to maintain long-term sustainability [17][20].

Group 1 - The article highlights the recent focus on "anti-involution" policies, which have become a trading hotspot in stock and commodity markets, with at least 23 brokerages publishing 36 research reports on the topic since July 1 [1][2] - The central government's emphasis on promoting a unified national market and addressing low-price disorderly competition is expected to improve supply-demand dynamics in various industries [2] - The current "anti-involution" initiative is seen as a key policy focus for 2024, with the concept of "pricing power" being crucial for manufacturing companies to combat "involution" [2] Group 2 - The "anti-involution" market trend is expected to be short-term, with limited space and duration, as it is catalyzed by the central government's focus on addressing low-price competition [4][5] - Analysts suggest that the "anti-involution" trend may develop in three phases: initial policy-driven expectations, followed by price increases in resource products, and finally, sustained high prices [4] - For the financial market, short-term self-discipline in production can help narrow supply-demand gaps, but long-term sustainability requires reversing oversupply and improving prices and profitability [5] Group 3 - Industries likely to benefit from the "anti-involution" policies include the photovoltaic industry chain, traditional industries facing overcapacity, and emerging non-manufacturing sectors like e-commerce [7] - Specific sectors identified as potential beneficiaries include coal mining, coke, common steel, energy metals, glass fiber, steelmaking raw materials, precious metals, and the hospitality industry [7]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the unreliability of expert predictions in the financial market, emphasizing the importance of data analysis over expert opinions [1][3][10]. Group 1: Expert Opinions - Experts often provide ambiguous analyses that can be interpreted in multiple ways, leading to confusion among retail investors [3]. - The article criticizes the tendency of experts to take credit for correct predictions while deflecting blame for incorrect ones through complex jargon [3]. Group 2: Market Dynamics - The essence of the stock market is the competition for pricing power, which is predominantly held by institutional investors, leaving retail investors as passive participants [4]. - Institutional investors often act contrary to their public statements, as illustrated by their secretive investments in restructuring stocks while claiming to avoid speculative plays [4]. Group 3: Data Analysis - Data is presented as a more reliable indicator of institutional behavior than expert opinions, with examples showing how institutions were quietly accumulating shares of "Rongke Technology" during a market downturn [6]. - The case of "Wenyi Technology" demonstrates that analyzing trading behavior data is crucial for understanding market movements beyond just price charts [8]. Group 4: Federal Reserve Report - The 9% probability of zero interest rates, while seemingly low, is significant in the context of the global economic landscape, warranting careful preparation [10]. - The article concludes that rather than relying on expert forecasts, investors should focus on studying trading data and developing their analytical tools [10].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversy surrounding Ctrip's unilateral price adjustments for hotel rooms without merchant consent, highlighting the broader issue of pricing power in the digital economy [2][4]. Group 1: Pricing Power and Market Dynamics - Ctrip utilizes an internal program called "Price Adjustment Assistant" to automatically lower hotel prices if they are found to be higher than competitors, which merchants argue disrupts their business operations [2]. - The issue of pricing power raises questions about whether it belongs to the merchants, platforms, or the market itself, with merchants asserting that they should control pricing as the providers of products and services [2][3]. - The relationship between platforms and merchants is complex, as platforms act as market organizers and control access to consumers, which can indirectly affect merchants' pricing capabilities [2][3]. Group 2: Platform Pricing Strategies - Platforms exhibit diverse pricing control strategies, including direct pricing for self-operated businesses, reference pricing that merchants feel pressured to follow, and minimum price requirements that can create unfair competition [3]. - In the case of Ctrip, the price adjustments made to avoid customer loss fall between reference pricing and minimum pricing, where merchants can refuse but often feel compelled to comply to maintain visibility [3]. Group 3: Impact on Quality and Market Competition - Merchants facing excessive price pressure may resort to cost-cutting measures, leading to a decline in product quality, which poses risks to consumers and distorts the market [4]. - Over-intervention by platforms in pricing can stifle innovation and competition, potentially leading to algorithmic collusion and implicit monopolies [4]. Group 4: Recommendations for Fair Practices - It is essential to delineate between reasonable price interventions and overreach by platforms, emphasizing the need for transparency in pricing mechanisms and compliance review processes [5]. - The ongoing struggle between platforms and merchants raises critical questions about fairness in the digital economy, necessitating careful consideration of pricing authority and boundaries [5].

Macro Strategy - The report discusses the shift in policy focus from "controlling high prices" to "controlling low prices" to boost core CPI, suggesting that service price subsidies could increase core CPI by approximately 0.3 percentage points, offsetting declines in housing service prices [1][10][11] - Core CPI has shown a significant rebound since September of the previous year, despite four months of negative growth driven mainly by food and energy prices [10][11] - The report emphasizes the limited upward potential for core goods and housing service prices, indicating that future policy should focus on enhancing prices of other services [10][11] Industry Insights - The report highlights the new phase of controllable nuclear fusion as a potential ultimate energy solution, driven by policy and capital support, with multiple devices under construction [5][16][17] - It identifies key suppliers in the nuclear fusion sector, including West Superconducting, Lianchuang Optoelectronics, and Aikesaibo, suggesting that the industry is moving from experimental to industrial stages with significant future potential [5][16][17] - The report also discusses the trend towards lightweight robots, emphasizing the increasing application of magnesium alloys and PEEK materials, which are expected to enhance performance and reduce weight in humanoid robots [18]