Core Insights - The inflation differences between China and Japan reflect the distinct stages of economic development and national conditions, making it difficult to determine absolute superiority [1] - Japan's long-term price stability is influenced by factors such as aging population and sluggish economic growth, while China's moderate inflation indicates economic vitality and potential [1] Inflation Rates - Over the past decade, China's average inflation rate was approximately 2.3%, while Japan's was only 0.8%, leading to a 25% increase in Chinese prices compared to an 8% increase in Japan [2] - Over a 30-year period, Japan's price levels have remained nearly unchanged since the early 1990s, with instances of deflation [2] Demographic Factors - Japan has the highest aging population globally, with over 29% aged 65 and above, resulting in low consumption demand and high savings rates [2] - In contrast, China's labor force aged 16-59 constitutes 61.2% of the total population, driving strong consumption demand [2] Economic Growth - Rapid economic growth typically correlates with higher inflation due to increased investment, employment, and consumer demand [3] - Japan has experienced low growth rates averaging around 0.7% from 2014 to 2024, leading to weak overall demand and limited inflationary pressure [3] - China has maintained high growth rates, with a projected GDP growth of approximately 5% in 2024, contributing to inflationary pressures [3] Monetary Policy - Japan's central bank has implemented ultra-loose monetary policies, including zero and negative interest rates, but these have not effectively stimulated inflation due to demographic and growth factors [4] - Japan's M2 money supply grew by only about 35% from 2014 to 2024, indicating low monetary expansion [4] - Conversely, China's M2 money supply increased by approximately 115% during the same period, suggesting greater inflationary pressure [5] Industrial Structure - Japan's highly industrialized and efficient economy allows for productivity gains that can offset cost increases, with manufacturing productivity rising by about 2.1% annually from 2020 to 2025 [5] - China's industrialization is still in progress, leading to more noticeable price increases [5] Housing Market - China's housing market has seen significant price increases over the past two decades, affecting overall consumer prices through direct and indirect channels [6] - Japan's real estate market has remained subdued since the bubble burst, contributing to stable price levels [6] Consumer Behavior - Japanese consumers are highly price-sensitive, which limits companies' ability to raise prices easily [8] - In contrast, Chinese consumers have developed higher inflation expectations, leading to anticipatory consumption that can drive prices up [10] Globalization and Government Regulation - Japan benefits from a global economic structure that allows for low-cost imports and high-value exports, influencing its inflation dynamics [10] - China faces greater pressure from international market fluctuations, impacting its inflation levels [10] - Both countries have different approaches to price monitoring and regulation, with Japan having a more established system [10] Social Welfare Systems - Japan's comprehensive social welfare system helps stabilize prices, while China's system is still developing, leading to higher price pressures in healthcare and education [11]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the current state of long-term pure bond funds, highlighting their underperformance in 2025 due to low interest rates and the shift towards "fixed income plus" products that combine bonds with equities for better returns [10][12][35]. Summary by Sections Types of Bond Funds - Common types of bond funds include short-term pure bond funds, long-term pure bond funds, and "fixed income plus" funds [1][4][6]. - Short-term pure bond funds have minimal volatility, typically with a drawdown of less than 1% [1]. - Long-term pure bond funds, such as 7-10 year government bonds, exhibit greater volatility, potentially comparable to low-volatility stock funds [2][3]. - "Fixed income plus" funds combine bonds with a small portion of equities or convertible bonds, aiming for higher returns [4][5]. Performance Trends - In 2021, long-term pure bond funds had interest yields of over 3%-4%, but entered a declining interest rate cycle thereafter [7][8]. - A bull market for long-term pure bond funds lasted from 2021 to 2024, but by 2025, these funds faced significant declines due to low yields [9][10][12]. - As of late 2024, the yield on 10-year government bonds was around 1.6%-1.7%, making long-term pure bonds less attractive [12]. Factors Influencing Bond Fund Performance - Interest rate fluctuations are a primary factor affecting bond fund performance, with declining rates typically leading to rising bond prices [15][16]. - The long-term trajectory of interest rates is influenced by economic growth rates and inflation [20][21]. - In 2025, the performance of long-term pure bond funds was negatively impacted by rising interest rates and a strong stock market [13][20]. Shift to "Fixed Income Plus" Products - Due to low yields on traditional bond funds, investors are increasingly turning to "fixed income plus" products, which offer a mix of stable bond returns and higher-risk equities [35][36]. - "Fixed income plus" funds typically consist of a defensive bond component and a more aggressive equity component, aiming to enhance overall returns [36][37]. - The performance of "fixed income plus" products has been strong, with indices for these funds reaching new highs in 2025, contrasting with the decline in pure bond fund indices [38][39]. Characteristics of "Fixed Income Plus" Products - These products leverage the negative correlation between stocks and bonds, allowing for reduced volatility and improved long-term returns [39][40]. - The risk profile of "fixed income plus" products is significantly influenced by the proportion of equities they hold [43][44]. - They benefit from declining deposit rates, as traditional savings accounts offer lower returns, prompting investors to seek better alternatives [46][48]. Investment Considerations - Investors should assess the equity proportion in "fixed income plus" products based on their risk tolerance [51]. - The bond component should focus on mid to short-term bonds, which currently offer more stability [51]. - Selecting funds with automatic rebalancing strategies can help mitigate risks associated with market volatility [51][60]. Examples of "Fixed Income Plus" Products - The 365-day and monthly salary investment combinations are highlighted as effective "fixed income plus" options, with varying equity and bond ratios [52][55]. - These products have shown resilience and recovery in performance, with the 365-day combination achieving historical highs since its inception [55][58].