为了订阅约翰·奥瑟（John Authers）的新闻通讯，请点击注册。
• 中国的信用记录不再是关注焦点。
• 刺激计划可能会让经济增长保持一段时间，但这并非关键因素。
• 然而，要实现实质性改善将非常困难。
• 资产配置者已经形成共识，认为中国政府能够通过信贷刺激实现5%的经济年增长目标。
• 另一方面，最近宣布的支持股票市场的800亿元人民币（约113亿美元）计划，以及直接为股市和抵押贷款提供支持，显示出投资者对政府行动的渴求。这个举动在中央银行术语中被视为一次“救市行动”，并表明北京将采取措施来提振经济。
• 这个计划出乎意料的部分是，在推出刺激政策时，市场普遍认为其不会给人民币带来负面影响；实际上，离岸人民币甚至突破了7.0大关，达到自去年5月以来的最高水平。许多分析师担心该计划并未触及中国经济面临的最大问题。
• 不过，这些措施仍然符合此前对政府干预的看法，并未让人感到特别意外。David Roche指出，这一系列行动更像是试图最大化影响的“重炮”策略，而非常规的增量式方法。
• 除了投资者对中国经济前景越来越不乐观外，值得注意的是全球资产配置者的信心已经出现明显下降。最近一项由Absolute Strategy Research进行的调查显示，对中国经济能否实现5%增长目标的信心在过去三个月内显著下滑，同时其他预测结果的变化幅度不大。这表明，在当前宏观经济不确定性增加的情况下，市场普遍认为中国股市和货币市场的刺激措施对全球经济的影响有限。
• 虽然中国股市因此次刺激政策出现上涨，但外界对于这些措施是否能持久推动经济增长，实现5%的增长目标持怀疑态度。此外，全球投资者似乎也更关注中国经济放缓可能带来的风险而非其增长机会。
• 人们普遍认为，中国的经济困境对于全球其他地区的影响不再像过去那样显而易见。尽管最近的全球资产配置调查显示对中国经济的信心下降，但其他预测结果并未出现显著变化。
• 国际投资者担心的是中国是否能够克服长期存在的信心不足问题。在过去几年中，信贷刺激措施通常无法从根本上改变企业不愿借贷的趋势，这表明中国面临的挑战可能比过去更为复杂。
• 虽然全球投资者对中国经济增长放缓有所担忧，但他们现在普遍认为这个国家的经济表现不再像以往那样直接影响到全球经济，尤其是对于那些与中国经济有着直接关联的资产类别而言。
• 例如，对中国商品高度依赖的一些行业遭受了损失。更重要的是，与中国的100个最大市场暴露度相关的MSCI股票指数相对于整体MSCI世界指数下跌近20%。这意味着国际投资者对中国经济前景不再抱有与以往相同的预期和信心。
• 在这次刺激措施宣布后，中国以外市场的反应较为乐观，美股略有上涨并达到历史新高。不过，这种积极反应似乎与市场对中国经济的担忧形成了矛盾。毕竟，中国的经济状况被认为是全球经济衰退风险的关键因素之一，而且全球通货膨胀正在下降，部分原因是中国作为主要出口国的影响。
• 因此，尽管政府采取了措施试图止住中国经济下滑的趋势，并且短期内提振股市和货币，但外界普遍认为这不足以对经济增长产生持久影响。经济学家、投资者和其他市场参与者都在探讨如何应对这种变化的经济环境，以及是否需要新的政策工具来刺激增长或防止可能发生的硬着陆。
• 综上所述，中国政府所采取的最新刺激措施似乎在短期内提供了一些缓解，但全球投资者对其长期影响持谨慎态度，并寻求更好的投资策略和对冲风险的方法。对于未来的市场趋势、最佳交易选择以及应对潜在经济挑战的资产配置策略，市场参与者正积极讨论并分享观点。
• 我们将持续关注这一话题，并为您提供最新的分析和见解。如需了解更多内容，请访问我们的相关页面进行订阅或获取更多信息。
新闻来源：www.bloomberg.com
原文地址：China's Credit Bazooka Isn’t What It Used to Be
新闻日期：2024-09-25
原文摘要：
To get John Authers' newsletter delivered directly to your inbox, sign up . • China’s credit isn’t a . • Stimulus will probably boost for a while. • But meaningful improvement will . • Asset allocators have convinced themselves that the Chinese economy . • AND: More songs about .China’s , announced with uncharacteristic fanfare, is a last-ditch effort at halt the economy from slipping further into an abyss. In classic central bank terminology, there were calls for a ; and if there had been any doubt about the Beijing would go to revive its economy, the policy campaign unveiled by Pan Gongsheng, governor of the People’s Bank of China, should provide the answers. It involved lower rates, lower reserve requirements for banks, direct support for the stock market and for mortgages. The showed investors’ thirst for any semblance of assurance from the government.And yet Tuesday’s stimulus package, especially the parts targeting the real estate sector, comes as anything but a surprise. made the most robust case yet for an intervention that jolts failing consumer demand, with the Federal Reserve’s jumbo cut relieving pressure on China’s currency and cementing those calls. Indeed, the yuan actually strengthened to its highest (and the offshore yuan even broke the 7.0 barrier) since May last year in the wake of a move that should have been directly negative for it:And many analysts complained that this package still doesn’t address the biggest problem facing China. David Roche of Quantum Strategy made trenchant criticism:Some of the measures still came as a surprise. Pan’s announcement of 800 billion yuan, about $113 billion, to support the onshore equities market in a “stock stabilization fund” sent the Shanghai Shenzhen CSI 300 soaring. This TS Lombard chart captures Tuesday’s rally as the central bank unpacked its reforms:This move looks a lot like a particularly shameless version of a “Fed put,” in which traders assume the central bank will jump to the rescue in times of trouble. The central bank pledged to create a 500 billion-yuan swap facility, allowing securities firms, funds, and insurance companies to use bonds, stocks, ETFs, and other assets as collateral to obtain highly liquid assets from the PBOC. TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Freya Beamish argue that this “put” suggests a may be in the offing. Indeed, the bank’s unusual sudden and explicit involvement in the equity markets suggests panic, the analysts argue:They caution that in an uncertain macroeconomic environment, the stock rally should be seen as a trade, not an investment — and one that is best approached with caution. Previous relief rallies since 2021 have been “fast and furious” and ultimately short-lived. And China has an unfortunate history of intervening clumsily in the stock market, causing bubbles in A-shares that burst in 2007 and 2015. Without serious demand-side follow-through, the current rally will likely keep within the post-Covid trend, feeding into the unmissable pessimism that preceded Pan’s latest efforts.Is such negative sentiment justified? In recent years, stimulus policies have typically been delivered piecemeal, engendering distrust. Rayliant Global Advisors’ Jason Hsu argues that this approach is more of a “bazooka” in which authorities fire massively all at once in an attempt to maximize the impact, than the usual incrementalism: But the general tenor of reaction has been more negative, because China’s problems appear too deep to fix with the kind of credit stimulus that it used in the past. says companies aren’t gloomy due to a lack of credit supply or because credit is too expensive. Rather, they’ve been unwilling for years to borrow, regardless of credit conditions, because corporate sentiment is so poor:That leads to a swiftly forming consensus among investors; that monetary expansion and support for the stock market aren’t that important, and that instead fiscal measures will be needed to lift the economy out of what is widely seen as a Japan-style deflationary slump. The Communist Party’s intent to deliver a jolt was necessary. It drove a big rally for China’s stocks and currency, both of which were in need of some relief. But it’s hard to find any analysts outside the country who believe that this will make a durable difference. The jury is out on whether these measures will be enough to get economic growth over the 5% target. —Richard AbbeyIf China’s economy is in trouble, does it matter for the rest of the world? For much of this century, that has been a silly question: of course it does, a lot. The bazooka package of stimulus measures late in 2008 was crucial in restoring sentiment in the worst days of the Global Financial Crisis. But that is changing, and consciously or otherwise, investors are now placing a big bet that the great Chinese growth machine can at last start to sputter without affecting everyone else.That’s implicit in the latest survey of global asset allocators carried out by Absolute Strategy Research, conducted last week before the flurry of news from China. For the the last three years, it’s asked whether Beijing can achieve its target of 5% growth over the next 12 months. (Before that, there was no need to ask the question as growth of at least 5% was assumed.) The survey shows a serious shift in confidence toward China over the last three months:What’s interesting is that this big drop in confidence in China has co-existed with minimal shifts in the perceived probability of other outcomes. It simply hasn’t moved the needle much elsewhere, if at all:Further, machine language analysis to group the respondents found that bulls and bears had no significant difference of opinion over China. It simply isn’t regarded as a pivotal issue either by those who are positive or negative. All of this amplifies the results of Bank of America Corp.’s monthly survey of fund managers, which also found a steep decline in confidence but no concern that the Chinese economy represented a tail risk. this BofA chart last week:This is, to put it mildly, a big change. The massive stimulus of 2008, but also smaller credit bazookas in 2015 and during the pandemic in 2020, drove strong performance by developed equities — even though they shouldn’t be directly affected by changing availability of finance to Chinese consumers and businesses. This chart compares changes in Bloomberg Economics’ measure of the China credit impulse (the change in new credit issued as a percentage of gross domestic product) with the MSCI World index of developed market stocks. The latest rally in the MSCI World is the first since the GFC that’s been achieved without any help from a surge in Chinese credit:The underlying belief that China’s economic health is essential for everyone else has taken a battering. That shows up from the relative performance of stocks and bonds in the US and China. With a brief divergence for a Chinese stock bubble in 2015, the stock/bond ratio in the two economic powers tracked each other closely until 2021. Since then, the divergence has been dramatic: It’s not that international investors don’t think China’s growth is faltering. Rather, they believe that it just doesn’t matter. International assets most directly affected by China show significant disquiet. , for which China has long been the biggest customer at the margin, suffered a slide earlier this year. Most interestingly, MSCI’s index of the 100 stocks in the MSCI World with the greatest exposure to China has dropped by almost 20% relative to the MSCI World as a whole:Response to Tuesday’s measures outside China was positive, with US stocks up a little to new all-time highs. But it wasn’t ecstatic. And the rally does appear to be contradictory. China would seem to be central to any possibility of a hard landing, and goods inflation is falling globally in large part because China is exporting deflation. David Bowers, who compiles Absolute Strategy’s survey, suggests that psychology may have been shifted by the move toward deeming the Chinese stock market uninvestable: “You might not be able to invest in China any more, but it really makes a difference to the market environment.”What’s the best trade to chase for the rest of the year, and what is the most foolish? Now that the Federal Reserve has launched its long-awaited easing cycle with a bang, how to trade it? How many more cuts this year, and which asset class will do best? This is your latest chance to share your views in a quick Bloomberg for MLIV Pulse.The results should be interesting. Please give it a little of your time. We have more starry song recommendations following on from the discussion of . Try by Smash Mouth, by Kenny Chesney, by Simply Red, by Nickelback, by Post Malone feat. 21 Savage, by DaBaby feat. Roddy Ricch, by Tinie Tempah, “Sign of the Times” by the , by Elton John & LeAnn Rimes, by the Kids From Fame, by Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone from La La Land, from The Greatest Showman, by Jason Robert Brown (also covered by , by Wilco/Billy Bragg, by OMD, by Franciscus Henri, by The Firm, and by Crosby, Stills and Nash. More stars welcome. More From Bloomberg Opinion: Want more Bloomberg Opinion? . Or you can subscribe to .
