저자: LarryFink · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 래리 핑크는 인플레이션이 일시적이 아니라 2년 이상 지속될 구조적 공급 요인이라며, 증시는 당분간 등락 박스권에서 횡보할 가능성이 크다고 봄. 시장 상황: 올해 증시는 성장주 재조정(금리 인상 영향)으로 부진했고, 에너지·원자재 기업은 상승해 종목 간 격차가 큼. 불확실성이 커져 공포 구간이 반복될 것으로 봄. 경기 침체 전망: 2023~2024년 심각한 하락 시나리오도 가능하나 기본 시나리오는 현 수준 부근의 횡보(상승 5%·하락 10% 범위)로 제시. 한 달 전 대비 침체 우려는 완화된 상태. 채권·자금 흐름: 최근 ETF 채권 순유입이 대규모로 늘어 금리 상승 재평가가 진행 중. 양적긴축(QE 축소)의 영향은 주시가 필요하나, 중간·장기 금리가 크게 더 오를 필요는 없다고 봄. 인플레이션 원인: 중앙은행은 수요를 줄이는 도구만 가졌으며, 현재 문제는 수요보다 공급 측면이 큼. 세계화 후퇴, 이민 축소(최근 5년 합법 이민 약 200만 명 감소), 에너지 전환 비용, 대규모 재정 지출(코로나 기간 7조 달러), 러-우 전쟁이 복합적으로 작용. 금리·정책: 파월 연준 의장을 신뢰하나 연준이 공급 문제를 해결할 도구는 제한적. 과도한 긴축은 침체를 부를 수 있어 시간이 필요하다고 봄. 4% 이상 인플레이션 환경이 2년 정도 지속될 수 있고, 이후 3~4년 내 공급망 재편과 에너지 기술로 완화될 것으로 봄. 에너지: 유가 적정 가격대를 배럴당 70~80달러로 보며, 전환기 이후 해당 수준으로 복귀 가능성을 언급. ESG: 유럽은 러시아 가스 의존 해소를 위해 오히려 탈탄소를 가속 중. 스코프3 공시 강제는 반대하며, 기업에 환경 감시 역할을 떠넘기는 것은 부적절하다는 입장. 스코프1·2는 수용. 정책 제언: 합법 이민 제도 개선(고학력 외국인의 그린카드 취득 용이화)이 가장 시급하다고 강조. 주요 종목 언급: 개별 종목 방향 예측 발언 없음(에너지·원자재 상승 및 성장주 조정이라는 업종 수준 언급만 존재).
다듬은 글
the markets have had sort of a rocky road can we say so far this year as you look forward is there any real prospect it can recruit they can recoup in the second half of the year probably not not totally let's start off the market has recalibrated itself we we witnessed now a change in policy in the federal reserve we raised short rates we have so we saw a recalibration of growth stocks that's principally the majority of the downfall and yet and the index are masking some of the problems because part of the index or energy companies commodity companies that are up quite a bit so if you look at the you know the the volatility in the market and the spread between winners and losers it's pretty broad this year and so we've taken out a lot of those gains that we saw during the covet years and uh during the two years where we were you know changing our lives and we were emphasizing different companies and now we're seeing the reverse impact of that so that was one of the foundations of it but now there's greater recognition that inflation is is not transitory it is probably with us for a number of years and it's the type of inflation that you know i don't believe the federal reserve has the policy or the tools to do much with it right now and i'm personally not blaming the federal reserve for where they where we are right now but i believe most of the problems we're living with today are more policy generated and supply generated demand right now in our economy is by the equivalent to the demand that we saw pre-covet and so we're witnessing all these supply shocks um and that's creating these intended price increases and so it's more supply driven it's been aggravated now obviously by covet and lockdowns in different parts of the world where we are manufacturing goods it has been further aggravated by the ukraine uh russian war and where we have supply shock but i have this fundamental view that much of the inflation has been generated by some very large polish policy shifts in the united states and i want to talk about exactly what caused it but just before that we have jamie dimon talking about a hurricane potentially are you saying something that significant what's the chance of recession and not so much this year but in 2023 or even 2024.
i think jamie said one outcome could be a hurricane it may not be that so i'm you know you know i know that sounds so perfect for the media the hurricane but i i don't i i could see scenarios where it could be quite bad another another downward draft of significance and that's going to be dependent on earnings going forward but i could also see a scenario where we're going to be muddling along for the next year or two right around this level and you know maybe up 5 down 10 but we're going to be in this range-bound area until we have better information i mean one thing i will say with total certainty we're going to be living with more uncertainty and and so with that in mind we are going to have bouts of fear which is going to bring down the markets and and a little more confidence going on forward but we have not witnessed huge asset allocation changes by our investors i was going to ask about that what are you seeing in your funds for example are people buying bonds again for example in your phone oh my gosh in the month of may we've had we had the biggest increase in etf bond purchases um i mean we had 30 something billion dollars of inflows and bonds whether it was credit or all that so you were certainly seeing a revaluation of how far interest rates need to go upward uh and so that's also one of the big trends i mean i'd say 30 days ago many people were calling for a deep recession and now people are mitigating that obviously there are views that we could have a deep recession or a hurricane but that's just one of the outcomes i mean i could i think there's higher probabilities of outcomes that we're going to be more range bounds with a lot of volatility certainly there's uncertainty about exactly what happens with the fed maybe not so much on rate increases as what are the consequences will be of the quantitative tightening which actually started this week this week what are those consequences likely to be in your judgment you better find new buyers i mean i mean that i think the marketplace does not understand the dependency of low rates was on the qe purchases the trillions of dollars at the federal reserve but let's all be clear between japan and china they own you know close to two and a half trillion dollars of u.s treasuries too so there are big owners and big players and and obviously uh what will be the future clearing price at it rates uh with with less qe and now reversal do we need to get up to a three percent tenure to to to meet a lot more demand and so much of this we're all going to have to see what is what are the consequences if if the demand that we saw in intermediate treasuries uh it may carry on qe may not be the reversal of qe is not going to be as big of a problem if we don't if if we have that fear that that inflation is going to be longer and higher then obviously we're going to have to reset all that and we're going to probably have higher rates but i don't i belief that we we don't have to have much higher intermediate and long rates for our global television radio and youtube audiences this is a simulcast with of course larry fink he's the chairman and ceo of blackrock let's go back to something you raised larry and that is inflation uh not just what it is but what has caused it because we've been told in the past for example from chair powell that he's got the tools he needs to take care of it right now the data don't necessarily indicate that he's taking care of it yet do we have the tools well first of all i'm a strong believer in chair pal and the federal reserve doing the right thing i have great confidence in in his abilities to assess the market so you may know a lot more than i do so i'm not going to be judging him i believe the problems of inflation are not fed related as much as policy related so i believe inflation is really based on some big macro policy changes that that were that are now you know that had good intentions but the unintended consequences are more inflationary for instance post-world war ii america's foundation of economic policy was based on consumerism we built this entire economy post-world war ii by by with a belief that we could if more americans can have more things uh then we have happy americans and we built a whole geopolitical uh platform around that and then with the fall of the soviet union and we had the peace dividend we were able to accelerate globalization and building things and that's one of the fundamental reasons why we had deflationary pressures for the last 30 years that whole movement towards supply chain navigation and lower prices i would say 10 years ago the rise whether you call it nationalism or the rise of this belief that we have to focus on communities that have been devastated by globalization we need to find ways of creating better jobs for more americans that in itself is inflationary when you move away from the cheapest price ever to another area and so that's a fundamental change we change your immigration policies and i'm talking about legal immigration okay our legal immigrations that was changed about five years ago where we've reduced the amount of legal immigration if you look at the rate of increase of immigrants legal immigrants in the united states from 2000 to 2017 and the rate that we are growing immigration in the last five years we're down 2 million 2 million new entrants to the united states legally that is very inflationary when we have full employment when we have these jobs think about all the need for workers what does that could mean when we start implementing our infrastructure bill when it's going to take up quite a few new jobs where those employees going to be coming from it's going to create rising wages and if you look at earnings many companies are saying rising wages are a part of the degradation of their margins and maybe to add to that we're also going through an energy transformation globally and that can't be free and i've i've said in my letters that that energy transition it can be highly inflationary and i've always said that an energy transition must be fair and just and we can't be just mitigating supply we need to be finding way solution so we have a strong view on that that that if we don't find a way to be working with the hydrocarbon companies with the energy companies making sure that we have adequate global supply of hydrocarbons at the same time move technology to create a more de-global uh decarbonization uh platform and pathway you know and it's it's not going to be a straight line it's going to be lumpy like what we're seeing now that is also inflationary and let's be clear the seven trillion dollars i want to underscore seven trillion dollars of fiscal stimulus uh during the covent years is beyond any stimulus we've ever seen in fiscal policy in our history of a country so you add all those things up it it was a foundation of inflation and then you overlay you overlay the russian ukraine war and the supply shocks and then you overlay now covet and the lockdowns and what it's doing for supply chains all of that is adding on so getting back to the federal reserve and your question the federal reserve does not have tools to fix supply problems the federal reserve's tools like every other central bank is to reduce demand through higher interest rates as i said i don't think we have a demand problem we have a supply problem and so if they are if they believe they have to change demand that will put us into a recession and i believe we need more time so i'm under the belief we're going to have a two year period of time of elevated inflation but i do believe as we reconstruct our supply chains we find better sources of energy in the interim as we create more decarbonization technology all of this in three or four years is going to work itself out and when you talk to the energy complex of today they they believe fair value for for for gas for oil is about 70 to 80 a barrel and so we've seen this before we're in this transition and i do believe within you know within a few years we'll be back to seventy eighty dollar oil given all of that yeah is it realistic to have a two percent target on inflation or are we actually encouraging the fed in a sense to do something that will drive us into recession because given there are fundamental factors that push that number above two percent should we be really rethinking what does that mean for investors if we're looking at a four percent inflation world well i think we are living in a four four percent or higher inflation world for the next two years investors gonna have to look beyond this period the question is okay you know you know what will happen in three or four years is this gonna be a short-term pop i mean you even heard one of the governors yesterday talk about you know we need to raise rates a few more times and then i can see in a year we're going to lower rates okay uh and and and and so you know in my opinion we need to get to a to a two percent level just a level set and let the data determine where it is but i do believe because this is supply generated and and policy generated not as much monetary policy generate it's hard for them if they overshoot we'll definitely get into a recession and then they're going to have to ease very quickly and we still may have the supply problems and and in all the conversations i have with business leaders around the world and i've had a couple meetings the last two days with some significant ceos of major international company and they're all talking about the supply problems and they're also talking about the the need of of labor and they're all seeing this problem and and it's it's it's it's a real big issue one other thing that you've been out spoken on and that's environmental social and governance esg investing and it became quite the vogue at the same time now it's getting a little bit of tarnish on it for example on some of the green washing allegations that we saw certainly with the dws but also the sec going at it what do you make of green washing and what can should be done about that as a problem well i could tell you what we've done we've always believed this could be data dependent and so we've been very aggressive in building out analytics and data so we could look at and review and judge companies through the lens of better understanding of how companies move forward in a decarbonizing world we overlay uh satellite imaging and technology to understand how how physical uh climate risk can impact an asset a piece of real estate uh an office building a a factory um and so we believe you we cannot move forward without a proper taxonomy and i do believe the sec has to be focused on that but importantly um let's be clear clients in europe are actually more aggressive on moving towards sustainability not less europe right now today they have the existential problem of russian dependency of gas and oil and they're moving away from that europe actually said we're going from 2050 to be net zero to 2035.
and so in in actuality they're they're accelerated they d their decarbonization process at the same time europe did change their taxonomy a year ago their taxonomy said gas was brown magically now becomes the problem gas is green um and and david i've always said the energy transition is not brown to green it's gonna be from dark brown the medium brown the the medium light brown the light brown and on and on and on we may develop new technology to leapfrog a couple of those shades but i can't see that technology yet but let's be clear to do this transition and the problem is some environmental is saying larry we don't have time to do that right and there lies the debate do we have time to go from dark brown on the medium brown the light brown we can all debate that the question is do politicians have the time to allow that and there lies the construct that we're living in today and what's the best way into this problem is it through government regulations standardization of these standards or is it through things like shareholder initiatives i mean you said you're not going to back as many i think at blackrock as you have in the past we're going to the proxy season now do you anticipate backing any of those esg so we're almost done with proxy season in fact in the u.s we're done we still have a few more in japan um what we said we're not going to be as prescriptive as last year we're almost at the same level we were last year i think the biggest change in proxy season this year more and more companies are volunteering information so we there were much less issues in proxies this year we worked really well with it with companies around the world there was only a few companies where there was a large disagreement um and so i i think people once again are conflating the facts the facts are we said and i've always been loud on this we are not going to support scope 3 at this time and the reason why i don't want to be in the environmental police i think it's wrong to ask the private sector to tell all of us the entire society we have to move forward and i don't i i have no problem in doing scope one and two but we've always said scope three is forcing big companies banks and asset managers to be the environmental police and i've been loud about this i've spoken about this at cop26 i'm against this a lot of people got angry at me uh but i i believe uh there are some sort of strong merits but let me be clear the energy companies and all the attending companies they're moving and they're moving with um with a deep understanding and there's not an energy ceo does not believe we have climate risk and they all you know they may disagree in the speed in which we could fix this but i was with a bunch of energy companies recently and they're all trying to focus on how do we create um carbon sequestering how do we capture how do we take carbon capture this is going to be a big thing and every energy company is talking how can we make hydrogen cheap enough to be a major source of energy one last one larry you spend a fair amount of time talking to our leadership in washington as well as other capitals around the world uh right now i think it's fair to say that the administration has got something a challenge on its hand when it comes to the economy it's not getting a lot of credit whether it should or not if you were to give them one piece of advice about what to do right now that could make some difference in the short to medium term what would it be fix fix immigration for legal immigration uh you know and i think we all would have said that you there's you know if you talk to all the business uh the business roundtable the u.s chamber i mean we have to be really focused on things like that um we can't build america back but if we're going to build america back in a non-inflationary way if we're going to grow america we're going to have to do that not just with our own we're going to have to allow legal immigration we could bring you know we educate over you know a few million young people every year that are in advanced degrees in america and it's harder and harder for them to get a green card in america today um we need to be rethink about you know the foundation of america the foundation in america was on immigration catch and release catch and keep yeah right i you know we're educating and letting him go um you know that doesn't sound like a good policy to me
Comments 0