Bill Ackman Has Some Thoughts on Inflation & A Recession...

요약 보기

결론: 빌 애크먼은 인플레이션이 높은 상황에서 명목 GDP 기준으로 보면 경기침체가 아니며, 금리 상승 우려로 최근 금리가 급락한 것은 레버리지 숏 청산 등 기술적 요인 때문이라고 주장하며, Fed가 금리를 4~5%까지 빠르게 올려 인플레를 잡아야 장기적으로 이롭다고 본다. 애크먼의 경기침체 정의 비판: 실질 GDP 2분기 연속 감소라는 전통적 정의는 고인플레 시기에 부적절하다고 본다. 인플레 8.6% 대비 명목 GDP가 8.6% 넘게 성장해야 실질 성장이 가능한데, 현재 소비·고용(실업률 3.6%, 구인 수가 구직자의 약 2배)·임금 상승을 보면 경제는 명목 기준으로 빠르게 성장 중이라고 평가한다. 금리 급락 원인: 금리 상승에 베팅한 숏 포지션이 역사상 가장 붐비는 트레이드였고, 6월 15일 이후 금리 하락으로 레버리지 투자자들의 평가손실과 숏 커버링이 연쇄적으로 일어났다. 7월 4일 연휴 전후 유동성 부족이 변동성을 키웠다고 설명한다. 인플레이션 전망: 주택·임대료, 에너지, 식품, 공급 제약으로 물가는 당분간 쉽게 꺾이지 않으며, 이민 제한으로 노동 공급이 줄어 임금-물가 악순환(wage-price spiral)이 진행 중이라고 본다. 저축채권 금리 9.26%를 언급하며 인플레가 일상 전반에 스며들었다고 평가한다. 시장 전망: 주식시장은 명목 기업가치를 측정하므로 인플레 자체가 기업 신뢰와 성장을 해친다. 단기 고통을 감수하더라도 인플레를 잡는 것이 장기 경제와 장기채·주식에 유리하며, 최근 급등은 기술적 움직임이라 믿지 말라고 조언한다. 애크먼의 포지션: 고품질 성장주·가격결정력 있는 기업에 100% 롱을 유지하면서, 금리가 급등할 경우를 대비한 헤지를 함께 보유하고 있다고 해석된다. 캐시 우드와의 대비: 진행자는 캐시 우드가 재고 과잉, 수요 둔화, 기술혁신에 따른 디플레이션을 근거로 금리 인상이 불필요하다고 보며, 이는 그녀의 고성장 기술주 보유와 이해관계가 맞닿아 있다고 평가한다. 애크먼의 견해가 맞는지는 향후 인플레와 수요 추이로 판단할 과제라고 마무리한다.

다듬은 글

※ 자동 자막 원문(다듬기 전)

01. all right everybody our boy bill our boy bill he has a theory of what's going on and today we are gonna explore our boys bill's theory in depth so let's get into his pin tweet that he talked about i'm gonna try to analyze and give my analysis as well as we are reading it over the past two weeks rates have declined dramatically reportedly due to fears of a recession friday's move was particularly stunning for the scale of the move and for the degree of the intraday volatility i put forth a theory here of what is going on bill ackman and his theories let's read it on the risk of a recession a recession is defined as a two-quarter decline in real as opposed to nominal gdp in a highly inflationary economy it is more difficult for nominal spending and growth to exceed inflation in order therefore for today's economy to grow on a real basis nominal gdp growth must be more than 8.6 because eight point six percent is the reported uh inflation rate which we all know is probably higher than that which is a difficult hurdle to exceed nominal g p growth is not going to grow at upwards of nine percent that that doesn't happen it has been a 40 years since we have experienced inflation at current levels and as a result market participants are used to a world with four to five nominal gdp growth and two percent inflation more gdp growth with two percent inflation four versus two actually allows the economy to keep going and stabilizes everything but inflation at eight percent is a different issue with inflation at two percent nominal gdp growth need only to decline from four to five percent to less than two to three percent for two quarters in a row for real gdp to be negative and for the economy to be deemed in a recession two quarters of negative gdp growth does not however seem to be a reasonable definition during a period with high inflation so he's sort of contesting the type of traditional economic definition we have about two quarters with gdp decline uh in a in a time where inflation is just incredibly high particularly when inflation has spiked to nearly nine percent nominal spending growth of eight percent for the last two quarters would technically put us in a recession but that does not make sense fundamentally the economy is continuing to grow rapidly on a nominal basis consumers are spending substantially more this year than last they're about two times as many job openings than people looking for worth the unemployment rate is at a 50-year low about 3.6 percent i believe during covet it got up to about 15 wages are rising substantially and it's hard to find workers now this is a little bit of a disagreement with kathy who says consumer demand is going down uh it might not be that much of a disagreement because consumers are still spending more but if that demand is slowly starting to decline as a result of the university of michigan study which is the most trusted study around consumer sentiment uh then that means that spending may start to go down a lot more q2 revenues and earnings growth should be strong for most businesses so here's the big thing that he says that i wanted to talk about real quick i don't know if this is true if this is true then the stock market's gonna be a really sticky situation because if earnings are good then the stock market really doesn't know what to do because like like if the macro is bad inflation's bad interest rates all this stuff and then earnings tank like tesla just horrible facebook just horrible like objectively horrible the stock market is allowed to sell those off without feeling regret they're like okay facebook at 150 way too expensive macro sucks they can't even keep up their ad revenue boom we're just gonna sell it off but if facebook blows earnings at the quarter tesla burns or blows earnings at the quarter you're looking at an economy that's like wait a second how can we dare sell these stocks off when they are growing so well just because the macro sucks there's a disconnect here so the market likes when there's stability and when they're certainty and if it's certain that these companies suck they can easily sell them off if they don't suck but the macro sucks it's in a weird tricky position almost kind of like what do we do do we sell do we do we not sell bill of things that's going to be good with earnings misses and margin declines for some companies which have limited pricing power consumers of approximately 2.5 trillion of excess savings while there is a mixed shift underway from goods to services overall demand is extremely strong again this is a disagreement with kathy wood we have a supply not a demand problem this doesn't cathy fundamentally disagrees with that as well when it comes to inventories this does not seem like a setup for a true economic recession regardless of the favored definition so why have rates declined so dramatically particularly short rates when the federal reserve has uh let me just go back to that has become increasingly strident about the need or aggressive tightening to bring inflation back down to two percent the answer i believe is largely due to some misunderstanding about what a recession is but more importantly the technical factors that are driving volatility and the downward move in rates market participants speculating in fixed income market particularly hedge funds often use enormous amounts of leverage because it is available and allows one to make a windfall of profits if you get the trade right this is like what he did betting kind of with 27 million and then you get 2 billion back if you're short in the market that high so like when you bet with a lot of money you get a lot of money back the bet that rates would rise became one of the more crowded trades in history going into june 15th as speculators cover their shorts on the fan news rates began to decline causing substantial mark to market losses particularly for levered participants who were forced to choose to cover uh with more data points emerging indicative of a slowing economy the recession narrative took a hold causing a further decline in rates contributing to even more losses short covering going into the quarter and when exposure are required to be disclosed in investor reports and financial statements extreme limited liquidity liquidity going into the july 4th holiday compounded the move in the volatility and paying for leveraged market participants as traders looked to and in many cases were forced to exit or didn't wish to hold open positions over the long weekends so what happens next basically the argument he's been making is that things sucked things are kind of the narrative of things sucking continued to make things suck people were levered against betting if things would suck or not suck which ultimately led to how things are currently which is kind of sucky but the market's kind of rallying but maybe it's a dead cat balance we kind of don't know powell has committed to do whatever it takes to call inflation even if doing so creates a increase in unemployment and recession which would be demand destruction that would lead to a recession inflation is not coming down soon housing and rental cost energy food and supply are constrained in higher prices are unlikely to abate for the foreseeable future wages are continuing to rise as immigration has been limited many have exited the workforce and the balance of power has gone from the companies to their labor forces companies are raising prices because they must in order to cover their cost and because they can the wage price spiral is underway what this means is if you're making eight dollars now you're making nine dollars the burger you were paying for that was four dollars is now five dollars so the nominal purchasing power that your wage gives you as an increase is mitigated it's washed by the price of the things you're paying for with those wages that are spiraling which means you don't have the ability to actually have any true wage momentum and a raise because the things you're buying just cost more money that's what happens when inflation happens while demand is moderating due to stickier shock and inflation as well as rising rates overall demand rates remain strong again this is the disagreement with kathy inflation has become embedded in a daily experience in headline news and a dinner table topic for all savings bond paid 9.26 percent or 9.62 in order to stop the inflationary spiral the fed will need to rapidly raise rates to four to five percent by next year which hopefully will be enough to snuff inflation the mild and transitory inflation being priced by the market as a friday is a fiction meaning he's saying it needs to be worse in the current in the context of or quicker in the context of interest rates rates are going up a lot soon the sooner the fed calls inflation the better the long for the better for long-term bonds and long-term financial assets like equities don't be misled by short-term technically driven market movements which is what's happening right now in terms of the crazy rally we saw yesterday i mean i was up like two thousand bucks in a day that's uh that's the shortest short term technically driven market movement stocks of high quality businesses with long-term growth and pricing power look cheap don't forget that the stock market measures nominal business value inflation is hurting business and consumer confidence and slowing growth killing off inflation will save the economy in the longer term at the expense of short-term pain which means even if we increase rates now to four five six percent which is unheard of in the past 20-30 years um it will still help the economy long-term because we got to get rid of inflation let's hope the fed gets a right i welcome your input in rebuttals and yes we put our money where our mouth is i've often wondered why investors who share their views are criticized for holding investments he's talking about you know going short and during covet we are 100 long high quality businesses growth businesses with pricing power and on hedges on which we will profit if rates rise so they are long you could say a company like nvidia i don't know if they're long in video but that's like a high growth tech business but they have hedges in place in case interest rates rise so substantially that those growth businesses obviously have their valuations compressed because when interest rates rise it's not good for high growth tech companies so our position our positioning mat as always matches our thinking and our stated views which means when he says we're 100 long high quality growth businesses he's putting his money where his mouth is because he says these businesses are cheap and he's recognizing how incredibly cheap they are because of strong demand and because consumer confidence is still strong and the economy and q2 earnings are going to be good however they have hedges in case rates rise exponentially which is what he thinks should happen theoretically if we want to quell inflation in order for them to profit both ways and that's why he runs a hedge fund that's the job of blackman now the interesting thing about this is that this is again i've been saying it a lot but it's contrary to what kathy thinks because kathy thinks a recession um rates don't need to rise because inventories and supply is so substantial and the technology that is so innovative will lead to deflation both of those factors that the fed doesn't need to rise interest rates kathy obviously has an ideological agenda that doesn't want interest rates to rise because it hurts all of her stocks because of all in the high growth tech there are no hedges against value plays or some type of plays if the market goes down in terms of shorting stocks because an etf is not a hedge fund so her argument is like we don't need to raise rates because a it's going to screw my companies but b inventories the excess inventories that we have consumer demand going down which means it's better because less people want to buy a tv so there's more tvs so that there's more tvs the price of a tv will go down and the technological innovation that's happening will lead to massive levels of deflation which is a good thing if she's right but if she's wrong and inflation continues to spike up or rates need to rise in order to destroy demand and we have to induce a recession then bill ackman would be more right here at the end of the day it's going to be interesting to see what happens ackman versus kathy wood definitely some different uh disagreements on the on the on the spectrum of where the economy ultimately is going let me know your thoughts in the comments let me know what you think is bill ackman right is he right to be saying that we need to raise rates really quickly and have that short-term pain or will inventories and innovative tech lead to more deflation in the future thank you guys so much for listening i'll see you in the next one