Core Viewpoint - The investment strategy summit held by Harvest Fund on January 23, 2026, highlighted opportunities arising from the "anti-involution" and "expanding domestic demand" policies, focusing on asset allocation and investment timing [1][6]. Group 1: Investment Opportunities - The "anti-involution" trend presents observable opportunities, primarily driven by production cuts and price increases, benefiting industries such as steel, photovoltaics, aquaculture, and chemicals over the past six months to a year [3][8]. - Three deep investment clues emerge from the "anti-involution" trend: 1. Transition from non-market to market competition, where companies will shift from price competition to technological competition, increasing R&D investments to enhance product quality [4][9]. 2. The national income doubling plan may favor companies that focus on value-added growth, particularly in labor-intensive sectors like food delivery and internet platforms, despite short-term pressures from labor cost inflation [4][9]. 3. The "anti-involution" will suppress ineffective investments, leading the market to prioritize company quality, cash flow generation, and dividend levels, which are suitable for long-term investment strategies [4][9]. Group 2: Market Dynamics and Strategies - In a market with ample liquidity, the correlation between January and February's rising stocks and the annual main trends is often inconsistent, making it challenging to derive fundamental logic from short-term price increases [5][9]. - Some stocks that have already risen may represent "pre-selection" for new main directions for the year, indicating sustainable new logic [5][9]. - Investors who missed the initial market surge should focus on tracking new rising stocks and identifying quality candidates for future accumulation, as exemplified by the chemical sector, which has not shown significant fundamental improvement yet [5][9].

Group 1 - Japan became the world's leading manufacturing power with significant trade surpluses with the US, leading to trade tensions and economic transformations from export-driven to domestic demand and overseas investment [1] - Japan's historical economic transitions provide valuable lessons for China, which faces similar challenges such as export bottlenecks, aging population, and industrial upgrading pressures [1] Group 2 - The "Income Doubling Plan" initiated by Japan in 1960 aimed at aggressive income distribution reform, resulting in an average annual wage growth of 10.6% over ten years and a GDP growth rate of 9.8% before the 1973 oil crisis [3] - This plan led to a significant increase in urbanization from 58% to 76%, creating the world's largest middle-class consumer group, but also revealed structural issues like labor market rigidity and rising income inequality [3][4] Group 3 - Following the Plaza Accord, Japan's export profits were severely impacted, prompting the government to implement the "Black字环流计划" to encourage overseas investment through tax deductions, low-interest loans, and investment insurance [6] - By 2022, Japan's overseas net assets reached approximately 411 trillion yen (about $2.8 trillion), equivalent to 75% of its domestic GDP, creating a unique "shadow Japan" [6] Group 4 - Despite generating around 20 trillion yen in annual investment income from overseas assets, Japan's domestic economy faced "industrial hollowing" and deflation, with manufacturing's GDP share declining from 22% in 1995 to 18% in 2022 [8] - The over-reliance on overseas production led to stagnation in key industries, with South Korea's Samsung increasing its DRAM market share from 3% in 1990 to 43% in 2022 [9] Group 5 - China currently faces a historical opportunity similar to Japan's, with a manufacturing value-added share of 30% globally and foreign exchange reserves exceeding $3 trillion, but labor costs nearing OECD averages [11] - To learn from Japan's experience, China should focus on balancing industrial upgrades with overseas expansion, ensuring domestic innovation ecosystems are nurtured alongside asset accumulation [11][12] Group 6 - Recommendations for China include maintaining over 51% domestic R&D intensity in strategic sectors, designing mechanisms for capital output and profit repatriation, and innovating social security systems to address aging populations [12][13] - The integration of digital currency for cross-border settlements and leveraging industrial internet can help China establish a development model distinct from Japan's [13]

以下文章来源于锦缎 ，作者耀华 锦缎 . 上市公司研究平台，专注价值发现、创造与传播 将投中网设为"星标⭐"，第一时间收获最新推送 日本恰似一面棱镜，折射出提振内需的可靠范本。 作者丨 耀华 来源丨 锦锻 全球经济博弈的硝烟中，关税争端与贸易壁垒的喧嚣背后，一个更深刻的命题正浮出水面 —— 如何锻造经济的 " 内生韧性 " ？ 当外循环的不确定性如达摩克利斯之剑高悬，激活内需不仅是熨平风险的缓冲带，更是重构增长引擎的密钥。 从工业革命时期英国纺织业的国内消费扩张，到大萧条时代罗斯福新政的公共工程计划，历史的刻度反复印证着一个铁律——无论是繁荣周期的顺势而 上，还是低迷时刻的逆水行舟，提振内需始终是穿越经济迷雾的罗盘。 邻国日本，这个曾以 " 贸易立国 " 崛起、又在泡沫破裂后负重前行的东亚经济体，恰似一面棱镜，折射出提振内需的可靠范本：其经济产业结构、发 展周期与我国存在相似性，且同样历经贸易摩擦与外部压力冲击。 今天我们就以日本为参考，来总结和复盘下提升内需的思路、手段、政策都有哪些，哪些优势值得我们借鉴，又有哪些教训我们需要规避。 国民收入倍增计划 日本提振内需的计划不仅仅限于广场协议之后，上世纪 60 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of enhancing domestic demand as a key strategy for economic resilience amidst external uncertainties, drawing lessons from Japan's historical experiences in boosting domestic consumption [4]. Group 1: Japan's Domestic Demand Enhancement Plans - The "National Income Doubling Plan" initiated by Prime Minister Ikeda in 1960 aimed to increase production investment and enhance public capital through various means [7][8]. - Between 1961 and 1970, Japan's national income grew at an average annual rate of 11.5%, with per capita consumption expenditure growing at a compound annual growth rate of 9.4% [9][10]. - The plan faced challenges such as inflation, but it highlighted the importance of linking income distribution to domestic demand [10]. Group 2: Real Estate Boom and Its Consequences - The real estate boom in the 1970s initially stimulated domestic demand, with land prices peaking at a year-on-year increase of 30.9% in 1973 [12]. - However, the high real estate prices eventually reduced consumer willingness to spend, leading to a decline in domestic demand contribution from 9.9% to 3.3% [13]. Group 3: The Maekawa Report and Policy Shifts - The Maekawa Report, developed in the late 1970s, aimed to adjust the economic structure towards enhancing domestic demand after the Plaza Accord [15]. - It emphasized reducing working hours to increase consumer time demand, alongside urban redevelopment and housing policies [16]. Group 4: Abenomics and Its Impact - Abenomics, introduced in the early 2010s, focused on aggressive monetary easing, flexible fiscal policies, and structural reforms, with mixed results in boosting domestic demand [25][26]. - The negative interest rate policy and quantitative easing (QQE) aimed to stimulate lending and capital investment but did not effectively translate into increased consumer spending [28][29]. - Abenomics faced criticism for failing to address the underlying issues of low financial asset ownership among Japanese households, which limited the effectiveness of capital market stimulation [28][30]. Group 5: Lessons Learned and Future Directions - Japan's experience suggests that enhancing domestic demand requires a multifaceted approach, including public investment, capital market stimulation, and direct consumer support [32][33]. - The article concludes that successful domestic demand enhancement strategies must consider consumer confidence and income distribution reforms, as well as targeted subsidies [39][40].