Ken Fisher Discusses Why Most Investors Misunderstand Quantitative Easing

요약 보기

결론: 양적완화(QE) 테이퍼링은 흔히 긴축이라 여겨지지만 실제로는 대출 스프레드를 확대해 은행 대출을 늘리므로 오히려 경기 부양적이며 주식에 긍정적이다. 핵심 주장: QE는 통념과 달리 부양적·인플레이션 유발적이 아니라 수축적·디플레이션적이다. 중앙은행이 채권을 사들여 장기금리를 끌어내리면 은행의 단기 예금-장기 대출 스프레드가 줄어 대출 유인이 떨어진다. 근거 논리: 은행은 단기 예금으로 장기 대출을 조달하므로 스프레드가 영업이익률과 연동되고, 스프레드가 클수록 대출 인센티브가 커진다. 저금리 상황에서 금리를 조금 더 내리는 것은 차입 수요에 거의 영향이 없고, 공급 측면에서 은행 대출을 줄인다. 과거 사례: QE가 테이퍼링으로 되돌려질 때마다 주식에 매우 강세였고 경제 전반에 좋았다고 주장. 전망: 테이퍼링이 실제로 진행되면 주식·경제·대출에 좋은 일이며, 이에 대한 공포는 잘못된 공포다. 투자자는 '테이퍼 탠트럼'을 두려워할 것이 아니라 오히려 환영해야 한다. 리스크: 발언에 특정 리스크 언급은 없음. 시장 전체에 대한 낙관 논리 중심. 출연자 견해: 10여 년간 같은 주장을 해 왔으나 대중이 이해하지 못한다고 봄. 개별 종목 언급 없음.

다듬은 글

※ 자동 자막 원문(다듬기 전)

01. one of the things that's caused certain amount of people certain amount of fear as we've moved through the summer is the fed's july announcement that later this year 2021 they would start tapering is the phrase they use off of their bond purchases in what otherwise is thought of as quantitative easing and this is commonly thought to be bearish because most people and i will say falsely presume that quantitative easing is stimulus quantitative easing is always described as stimulus quantitative easing is not stimulus now i'm just gonna say this simply i've written about quantitative easing since quantitative easing was first deployed in america now over a decade ago and if you just just hear me out for a second i'm going to tell you that quantitative easing is almost always and by everybody including the people that are supposed to be the most sophisticated people on all this stuff completely misunderstood upside down and backwards it is not stimulative it is not inflationary it doesn't create money it is contractionary and deflationary and always has been everywhere it's ever been applied the fact is in america or in britain or in japan where in in the eurozone where quantitative easing has been deployed it is not any of the things that people have thought it to be and i've always found it just stunningly amazing that that isn't understood better but i'm not going to take a lot of time on this now just a little bit but if you want to read me or see videos of me on why quantitative easing isn't stimulative inflationary up one side and down the other but is in fact contractionary and deflationary and therefore the tapering of it in reverse is actually stimulative if you just do a google search of ken fisher quantitative easing it'll take you to a lot of stuff going back a long time in lots of different formats of whatever type of format you'd like to read or see me in for that including videos including videos of me on tv doing that but the fact is banks are in the core business of taking in short-term deposits to finance long-term loans and the spread between them is parallel to their gross operating profit margin it's reflective of the profitability of subsequent loans that they will make and the bigger that spread is the more incentive they have to lend now central bankers and so many others have always thought of quantitative easing in the vein of we've got low short-term interest rates we push long-term interest rates down low at low interest rates people want to borrow and the lower interest rates are the more people do have a propensity to borrow that's true that's what you could think of as demand side thinking about interest rates and money lower interest rates will cause more people to want to borrow but with rates already low pushing them down a little lower does not have much effect on lending only it's a little tiny bit in fact the more you make that spread between short and long-term rates smaller which is what quantitative easing tends to do as central banks use their credit to buy bonds pushing up the price and down long-term interest rates inherently as you push the price of bonds up long-term interest rates go down you know that they reduce that spread and disincentivize banks from lending and the more they disincentivize banks from lending this is supply-side thinking the more banks don't lend when banks don't lend it's not inflationary it doesn't create money it is not stimulative in fact it's the reverse of all those things the tapering that motivates the central bank in their mind to be less prone to try to keep interest rates low that is they're not going to put so much on the demand side in reciprocity actually buoys up the bank's supply-side tendency to lend and whenever quantitative easing has been tapered off in the past it's very bullish it's stimulative it's great for stocks it's just generally great so this thing that they fear is a false fear false fears are always bullish tapering to the extent they really do it will be a good thing for stocks for the economy for lending it is just generally good all the way around and i've now after over a decade of this kind of given up on the notion that people will get this in their brain right they're going to keep thinking of it upside down and backwards but you as an investor should embrace the fear of tapering and not subject yourself to what some people would call a taper tantrum because there's nothing about tapering that's bad it's all good thank you very much for listening to me today