你有没有发现，美联储这两年说话越来越直接了，今天鲍曼一开口，话锋简直冲着特朗普去的。什么出售抵押贷款支持证券，什么紧急工具不能变成常态， 还提关税对通胀的影响，听起来像是在念政策稿，其实每句话都带着火药味。 我第一反应是，鲍曼这是在替美联储划清界限。抵押贷款支持证券，简单说就是当年次贷危机留下的一堆烂摊子，美联储一路买到手里，撑住了市场。结果 现在美国经济看似稳住，通胀却还在高位，他们干脆说要卖掉了。 这个动作让我想到2008年后的量化宽松，美联储也是先拼命买债救市，再慢慢退出。区别是这次他们一句"紧急工具不能常用"说得特别决绝，等于告诉市 场：别再幻想央行一直兜底。 更有意思的是，美联储这次放话和股市节奏也呼应。过去一周标普500连续下跌，投资者本来期待央行放点鸽，结果鲍曼偏偏强调要卖资产。 我查了下数据，美国通胀从2021年到2022年一度飙到9%以上，今年虽然回落，但8月的核心通胀还在3.2%左右，远高于目标2%。 关税在里面到底起了什么作用？2018年特朗普对中国商品加征关税后，美国商务部的数据就显示，进口商把成本转嫁给消费者，消费品价格明显上升。结果 美联储当年说"通胀会回到2%可现实是一波波涨价潮 ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent interest rate cut by the Federal Reserve is seen as a potential precursor to market volatility, as historical data suggests that significant bear markets often occur during Fed easing cycles [2][3]. Group 1: Historical Rate Cut Cycles - The article reviews seven rate cut cycles from the 1990s to the present, highlighting the economic conditions and market reactions during each period [3]. - The first cycle from July 1990 to October 1992 saw the Fed cut rates from 8% to 3% amid a recession, leading to a recovery in GDP growth by 1992 [4][7]. - The 1995-1996 cycle involved a preemptive cut after aggressive rate hikes, resulting in a 30% increase in major stock indices [16][17]. - The 1998 cycle was characterized by a response to global financial crises, with the Fed cutting rates from 5.5% to 4.75%, which supported a rising stock market [21]. - The 2001-2003 cycle was marked by a prolonged bear market, with the Fed reducing rates from 6.5% to 1%, leading to significant declines in stock indices [29][30]. - The 2007-2008 cycle was initiated in response to the subprime mortgage crisis, resulting in a severe market downturn despite initial positive reactions to rate cuts [34]. - The 2019-2020 cycle included a series of cuts in response to economic uncertainties, with the pandemic leading to aggressive rate reductions to near-zero levels [40]. Group 2: Current Economic Outlook - The recent Fed rate cut is viewed as a preventive measure rather than a response to a crisis, indicating a positive short-term liquidity outlook [42]. - The Fed's optimistic long-term economic outlook suggests that it is not yet time to price in a macroeconomic recession [42]. - The article emphasizes the importance of closely monitoring macroeconomic variables to effectively navigate the current rate cut cycle and its implications for the stock market [42].

Group 1: U.S. Rate Cut Cycles - The report reviews the impact of the last four U.S. Federal Reserve rate cut cycles on the Chinese economy and A-share indices since 2005[1] - The 2007-2008 cycle saw a total cut of 500 basis points (bps), with the Fed rate dropping from 5.25% to 0.25%[8] - In the 2019 cycle, the Fed cut rates by 75 bps from 2.50% to 1.75% amid trade tensions and economic slowdown[8] - The 2020 cycle involved a total cut of 150 bps, bringing rates down to 0%-0.25% due to the COVID-19 pandemic[8] - The upcoming 2024 cycle is projected to involve a 100 bps cut, starting from a range of 5.25%-5.50%[8] Group 2: Market Performance During Rate Cuts - During the 2007-2009 cycle, major A-share indices experienced significant declines, with the Shanghai Composite Index dropping by approximately 40%[24] - In contrast, during the 2019 rate cut, the ChiNext Index rose by 11.30%, indicating a recovery in market sentiment[30] - The 2020 cycle saw the ChiNext Index increase by 27.24%, outperforming other indices due to strong growth in high-demand sectors[36] - The 2024 cycle is expected to provide liquidity support, with the ChiNext Index projected to rise by 20.84% during the cut period[42] Group 3: Economic Context and Policy Responses - Rate cuts are typically initiated in response to economic slowdowns or recession signals, with the severity of the recession influencing market reactions[3] - The Chinese government responded to the 2008 financial crisis with a 4 trillion yuan stimulus plan, which included significant infrastructure investments[21] - In 2019, the People's Bank of China implemented a series of targeted monetary policy adjustments, including lowering the Loan Prime Rate (LPR) to support economic stability[27] - The 2024 rate cut is expected to be accompanied by domestic policy measures aimed at stabilizing growth and supporting the stock market[42]

Group 1 - The U.S. Treasury market has shown remarkable resilience despite various pressures, including rising debt and aggressive tariff policies, unlike other countries' bond markets which have suffered due to fiscal concerns [1] - Year-to-date, the yield on 10-year U.S. Treasuries has decreased by over 0.3 percentage points, making it the only major bond market with a decline in 10-year yields [1][3] - The volatility of the U.S. bond market has been decreasing since April, with key volatility indicators nearing their lowest levels in three years [1] Group 2 - Recent data indicates a slowdown in job growth, which has contributed to a decline in 10-year Treasury yields, falling below 4.17% for the first time since early May [3] - Concerns regarding the independence of the Federal Reserve are reflected in rising inflation swap rates, which have reached a two-year high [5] - Despite concerns about the Fed's independence, U.S. bond investors have not shown significant alarm, allowing the Trump administration to breathe easier regarding the 10-year yield target [5] Group 3 - The U.S. Treasury Secretary hinted at limiting long-term bond issuance if buyer demand weakens, while data does not support claims of foreign capital fleeing U.S. assets, indicating strong demand for U.S. Treasuries [7] - The perception of the U.S. as a safe haven persists, with 5% being seen as a ceiling for 30-year Treasury yields, despite various challenges [8] - Market participants remain skeptical about the potential political influence on the Fed, with expectations that any new appointments will not drastically alter monetary policy [9] Group 4 - There is speculation that the White House may push the Fed to resume bond purchases, particularly long-term bonds, as a means to lower borrowing costs [10] - The current balance in the U.S. bond market is fragile, and without fiscal discipline from politicians, investors may express dissatisfaction through market actions [10] - The emergence of "bond vigilantes" in Europe and Japan could soon be mirrored in the U.S. if fiscal issues are not addressed [10]

Group 1 - Norinchukin Bank has adopted an "extremely cautious" stance towards purchasing Japanese government bonds due to significant losses from investments in US Treasuries [1][3] - The bank reported a loss of 1.8 trillion yen (approximately 12.6 billion USD) for the fiscal year ending in March, compared to a profit of 63.6 billion yen in the previous year [3] - The bank's unrealized bond losses were 1.24 trillion yen as of March 31, down from 2.2 trillion yen a year earlier [1][3] Group 2 - The new CEO Taro Kitabayashi is focused on rebuilding the bank's 40.3 trillion yen securities portfolio after the resignation of the former CEO due to the previous year's losses [3] - The bank is exploring other asset classes to include non-interest-sensitive assets in its investment portfolio, with investments in bonds, credit, and alternative assets [6] - The bank's holdings of mortgage-backed securities increased from 8.2 trillion yen to 8.3 trillion yen, accounting for 20% of its investment portfolio as of March 31 [6]

Core Points - The U.S. federal government lost its last highest credit rating from Moody's, while several states, including Florida, North Carolina, and Texas, are likely to maintain their top ratings [1][2] - The downgrade reflects concerns over the growing debt and deficit, which may harm the U.S.'s status as a preferred destination for global capital and increase government borrowing costs [1][3] - The municipal bond market may experience volatility due to the downgrade, particularly in areas linked to the federal government [2][3] Group 1 - Moody's downgrade of the U.S. government rating to Aa1 indicates a failure to address significant annual fiscal deficits and rising interest costs [1] - Over 12 states hold a pristine 3A rating from Moody's, which is higher than the federal government's rating [1][2] - Historical data suggests that U.S. states have shown resilience even when the federal rating was downgraded [2][3] Group 2 - The rise in U.S. Treasury yields may impact municipal bonds and corporate debt, as borrowing costs for companies are often benchmarked against government bond yields [2][3] - The municipal bond market may see specific areas affected, similar to the impact observed after previous rating downgrades [2][4] - Analysts indicate that the direct impact of the downgrade may be less significant than the effects of interest rate fluctuations [4]