Group 1: Real Estate Cycles - Since 2015, China's real estate market has experienced a boom driven by rapid urbanization and synchronized fiscal and monetary policy, with residential average prices and new housing sales down 14.4% and 49.0% from peak levels respectively[3] - The U.S. real estate cycle from 2000 to 2011 saw home prices and new home sales peak at increases of 70.5% and 48.3% respectively, followed by declines of 26.1% and 76.0% during the adjustment phase[3] - Japan's real estate market peaked in Q1 1991 with a cumulative price increase of 47.7% over five years, followed by a decline of 43.3% by Q2 2007[4] Group 2: Debt Cycles and Consumption - The analysis indicates that a higher price-to-income ratio correlates with a longer duration of debt expansion slowdown, negatively impacting consumer spending, especially on discretionary items[2] - In the U.S., the macro leverage ratio peaked at 98.6% in 2007, a 27.9 percentage point increase from 2000, followed by a decline to 77% by 2015, reflecting a significant debt contraction[5] - Japan's consumer spending growth rate dropped significantly during its real estate downturn, with retail growth averaging around -0.5% from 1993 to 2007 due to persistent debt burdens and falling asset values[5] Group 3: International Comparisons - The report highlights a counterintuitive trend where countries with lower price-to-income ratios exhibit higher household leverage ratios, attributed to excessive financial liberalization and personal bankruptcy systems[5] - China's current household leverage ratio stands at 60.0%, showing stability compared to the peaks seen in the U.S. and Japan, suggesting a more resilient debt structure amid real estate adjustments[5] - The report suggests that China's real estate adjustment period may not see a significant decline in household leverage due to the absence of personal bankruptcy laws and a robust urbanization demand base[5]

今天银行股微跌0.3%左右，但 邮储银行 一度下跌超3.5%，尾盘拉到跌2.5%附近，但还是排今天的倒数第二；年初至今的跌幅，也是所有银行股 里第三大的。 邮储的情况是比较有代表性的，因为这可能是全中国唯一一家，个人业务占比远超对公的大中型银行——截至24年末，其个贷不良占比超75%，对公不良 占比25%不到。 这更能反映出， 银行业24年的个人不良，应该说这轮是集体爆出来了。 在3月14日的推送（ 链接 ）里，我就提到过，当时市场对两点的炒作过热， 其一是对降准降息的预期，其二是对消费刺激政策 ，尤其是对消费信贷政策 的解读，下图，当时提到，监管消费信贷的政策，首先是"纾困"，解决居民部门资产负债表恶化的问题，其次才是所谓的刺激。 从这回银行披露出来的年报来看， 问题比想象的可能还严重一点。 市场还是在交易年报的数据，昨晚邮储公布了24年的年报，扣非后净利润增速是-0.68%，历史首次负增长，拨备覆盖率大降60%，跌破300% （我个人的标准是，300%是拨备覆盖率的及格线，400%以上是良好，500%以上是牛逼）。 不过，我看了一下，个人觉得年报里最让人诧异的，还是 个人不良贷款 的问题。 邮储总的不良率 ...