华尔街日报：股市真的反弹了吗

QQQ?

华尔街日报：股市真的反弹了吗

2009年05月13日 14:43  新浪财经

　　导读：《华尔街日报》5月13日发表风险投资家安迪·凯斯勒(Andy Kessler)的文章称，美国股市并未真正反弹，不存在任何持续性的、基本面因素来支撑股市继续走高。

　　道琼斯工业股票平均价格指数已经从3月9日创下的低点6547点上涨了30%。这是否意味着新时代的来临呢？我们要准备再次开始赛跑了吗？

　　我并不能确定。只有傻瓜才会预测股市走势，本轮涨势在我看来就像一次“傻瓜反弹”，因为不存在任何持续性的、基本面因素来支撑股市继续走高。有三种解释能说明股市短期上扬：

　　——世界末日的善恶大决战尚未到来。已经很清楚，联邦政府的问题资产救助计划(Troubled Asset Relief Program)的可用资金并不足以提振银行的资产负债表。2月10日，财长蒂莫西·盖特纳(Timothy Geithner)公布了另一项银行救助计划，但市场并不买账，道指大跌382点。

　　花旗股价3月9日跌至1美元，银行业国有化看起来不可避免。但是，财政部同一天宣布将对美国最大19家银行进行“压力测试”，为自己赢得了时间。当白宫幕僚长拉姆·伊曼纽尔(Rahm Emanuel)4月19日明确表示国有化并不是政府目标时，持有金融类股终于安全了。

　　金融机构的损失是2万亿美元还是悲观主义者预期的3.6万亿美元已经无关紧要了。政府政策是“不能再让银行倒闭”。虽然美国政府最终可能持有花旗、美国银行及其他几家银行高达三分之一的股权，但没有银行将会被国有化。即使问题资产减计将会削弱银行将来的利润，但熊市情绪已经减退，市场出现反弹——现在花旗股价已涨至4美元。

　　——零收益率。美联储已经将短期利率调降至接近零的水平，从而搅乱了资产配置原则。资本总是寻求最高的风险调整回报。因此，在正常市场环境下，如果债券收益率上升，其吸引力将会远大于具有风险的股票，资本将从股市转向债市；反之亦然。

　　现在，银行储蓄账户利率仅为0.2%，甚至7天期商业票据货币市场基金的利率低于50个基点。因此，资本已经转移至股市。同时，未能赶上市场步伐的共同基金和对冲基金也正在奋力追赶，纷纷涌向股市。

　　——伯南克开动印钞机。3月18日，美联储宣布将购买最多3000亿美元长期政府债券以及7500亿美元抵押贷款支持证券。在美联储的所有举措中，上述“定量宽松”政策将以最快的速度向经济注入资金——基本上相当于开动印钞机。这些美元最终将进入股市。

　　股市上扬意味着银行将能够从私人部门手中筹集必须的资金。上周四，美国政府又公布了令市场安心的“压力测试”结果。摩根士丹利、富国银行、美国银行和花旗已经或计划发行新股募集资金。看起来是某些人策划了本轮股市反弹，以诱惑私人投资者为银行业提供融资。

　　这就是我确信目前的股市上涨只是“傻瓜反弹”的原因所在。股市仍需要清除巨大的障碍，现在仍存在许多许多问题。即使这些问题得以解决，我也不认为股市将进一步走高。我并非不赞同美联储的政策，但我不会基于这些政策而大量买进股票。当我看到生产力拉动财富增长时，我才会看涨股市。(兴亚)

mikeqc

WSJ: Was It A Sucker’s Rally?
by Andy Kessler

The Dow Jones Industrial Average has bounced an astounding 30% from its March 9 low of 6547. Is this the dawn of a new era? Are we off to the races again?

Only a fool predicts the stock market, so here I go.

I’m not so sure. Only a fool predicts the stock market, so here I go. This sure smells to me like a sucker’s rally. That’s because there aren’t sustainable, fundamental reasons for the market’s continued rise. Here are three explanations for the short-term upswing:

1) Armageddon is off the table. It has been clear for some time that the funds available from the federal government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) were not going to be enough to shore up bank balance sheets laced with toxic assets.

On Feb. 10, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner rolled out another, much hyped bank rescue plan. It was judged incomplete — and the market sold off 382 points in disgust.

Citigroup stock flirted with $1 on March 9. Nationalizations seemed inevitable as bears had their day.

Still, the Treasury bought time by announcing on the same day as Mr. Geithner’s underwhelming rescue plan that it would conduct "stress tests" of 19 large U.S. banks. It also implied, over time, that no bank would fail the test (which was more a negotiation than an audit). And when White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel clearly stated on April 19 that nationalization was "not the goal" of the administration, it became safe to own financial stocks again.

It doesn’t matter if financial institution losses are $2 trillion or the pessimists’ $3.6 trillion. "No more failures" is policy. While the U.S. government may end up owning maybe a third of the equity of Citi and Bank of America and a few others, none will be nationalized. And even though future bank profits will be held back by constant write downs of "legacy" assets (we don’t call them toxic anymore), the bears have backed off and the market rallied — Citi is now $4.

2) Zero yields. The Federal Reserve, by driving short-term rates to almost zero, has messed up asset allocation formulas. Money always seeks its highest risk-adjusted return. Thus in normal markets if bond yields rise they become more attractive than risky stocks, so money shifts. And vice versa. Well, have you looked at your bank statement lately?

Savings accounts pay a whopping 0.2% interest rate — 20 basis points. Even seven-day commercial paper money-market funds are paying under 50 basis points. So money has shifted to stocks, some of it automatically, as bond returns are puny compared to potential stock returns. Meanwhile, both mutual funds and hedge funds that missed the market pop are playing catch-up — rushing to buy stocks.

3) Bernanke’s printing press. On March 18, the Federal Reserve announced it would purchase up to $300 billion of long-term bonds as well as $750 billion of mortgage-backed securities. Of all the Fed’s moves, this "quantitative easing" gets money into the economy the fastest — basically by cranking the handle of the printing press and flooding the market with dollars (in reality, with additional bank credit). Since these dollars are not going into home building, coal-fired electric plants or auto factories, they end up in the stock market.

A rising market means that banks are able to raise much-needed equity from private money funds instead of from the feds. And last Thursday, accompanying this flood of new money, came the reassuring results of the bank stress tests.

The next day Morgan Stanley raised $4 billion by selling stock at $24 in an oversubscribed deal. Wells Fargo also raised $8.6 billion that day by selling stock at $22 a share, up from $8 two months ago. And Bank of America registered 1.25 billion shares to sell this week. Citi is next. It’s almost as if someone engineered a stock-market rally to entice private investors to fund the banks rather than taxpayers.

Can you see why I believe this is a sucker’s rally?

The stock market still has big hurdles to clear. You can have a jobless recovery, but you can’t have a profitless recovery. Consider: Earnings are subpar, Treasury’s last auction was a bust because of weak demand, the dollar is suspect, the stimulus is pork, the latest budget projects a $1.84 trillion deficit, the administration is berating investment firms and hedge funds saying "I don’t stand with them," California is dead broke, health care may be nationalized, cap and trade will bump electric bills by 30% . . . Shall I go on?

Until these issues are resolved, I don’t see the stock market going much higher. I’m not disagreeing with the Fed’s policies — but I won’t buy into a rising stock market based on them. I’m bullish when I see productivity driving wealth.

For now, the market appears dependent on a hand cranking out dollars to help fund banks. I’d rather see rising expectations for corporate profits.

moon2966

他就不能跟风一下股市么

layschips

还是那句话，
泽民同志拍拍O8的脑袋，
“呵呵，要学我们天朝玩政策市，
too young, too naive..."

hcc

看来还得涨...坚定持有..