저자: RayDalio · 외국인
요약 보기
Dalio는 현재 미국 시장이 '골디락스' 국면이라고 진단하며, 디레버리징 완료·낮은 인플레이션·양호한 성장 속에 감세 등 재정 자극이 더해진 상태라고 본다. 사이클 후반부에 진입했으며 이 마지막 구간은 1년 정도 지속될 수 있다고 전망한다. 현금이 풍부해 투자 자금이 몰리면서 시장이 과열(블로오프)될 가능성이 있다고 본다. 금리 측면에서는 채권시장과 자산가격이 현재가치 할인 구조라 금리 상승에 매우 민감하다고 강조한다. 평균 긴축 사이클은 약 500bp였고, 현재 수준에서 100~125bp만 올라도 자산시장이 무너질 수 있으며 약 4% 수준이 위험선이라고 본다. 기업들은 레버리지를 평균 2~2.5배로 늘려 금리 민감도가 과거보다 크다. 연준은 과도한 긴축을 피해야 하며 인플레이션 우려보다 자극 효과를 즐겨야 한다고 주장한다. 부의 불평등 문제도 짚는다. 상위 0.1%의 순자산이 하위 90%와 맞먹고, 하위 60% 중간계층 소득은 정체됐으며 사망률 상승 등 사회문제가 심각하다고 본다. 기업 이익이 노동 몫보다 빠르게 늘어난 점도 지적한다. 2년 뒤 대선 전후로 경기침체 위험이 있으며, 그때 사회적 분열이 커질 수 있다고 우려한다. 비트코인은 버블이었다고 평가하되 블록체인 기술 자체는 긍정적으로 봤다. 테슬라 관련 질문에는 머스크 보상 구조 논의가 있었으나 특정 방향 전망은 명확하지 않았다.
다듬은 글
We have Ray Dalio here. I don't think he he may not know about this. I'm actually here. We'll we'll We want to talk about stocks in the markets with you, but do you have Do you have a view about this? This Does this guy is going to get nothing? But he only gets money he only gets paid if he raises the company's market value by $50 increments and at the same time has uh before revenue and adjusted EBITDA numbers that exist.
And if he doesn't hit either, he gets nada. So, I don't know the particulars of the deal, but if it's just as you're telling me, I think it's fabulous. Also, I mean the the man is uh the man is Tesla. I mean, it's his dream. He's built the dream. And And so, when we start to think about who's going to be the other person Is it a dream Is it a Is there anything illusory about the about the dream?
Cuz there are people like Tainter who says without all the subsidies it's it's worth zero. And And the market said if it's an infinity times EBITDA right now. But if But if the company's worth zero, then he gets zero. So, he gets nothing. But There are so many companies that are like that. The question is what the future holds.
Right? I don't know. I don't I don't I don't know. holds. So, I'm just saying it's your choice. You don't have to invest in it. Don't invest in it. If you think it's too high, well, short it. You do whatever you want to do. Okay, the question is what is his incentives? So, I mean, all the critiquing about that, you know, don't short it.
I We don't do either. do either of those. Okay, but I'm just saying um I I think it ties in together. It's It's his It's the dream. You either buy into the dream and you have the right incentives idea of saying that your compensation is tied to market capitalization, those are factors that are out of your control cuz markets can be completely irrational to one side or the other.
But he also has to hit the operating numbers. That's his risk as much as everybody else, but isn't it partners with the the people who always I would think hitting your operating numbers and if you want to tie it to stock performance, maybe that's different than tying it to market capitalization. But if the stock performance is the market capitalization.
No, it's not. There are other factors that affect market capitalization. Everything can't be precise, right? You could tie it to earnings, but then market capitalization makes a big difference, but they're partners. If you're a shareholder, you're a market cap person. So, that ties it to that. Whether you do that or not, I think it's a secondary consideration relative to the notion that he's on on the line for to do things for short-term rather than long-term?
think that's him. But, you have to make a choice whether that's him or not. I mean, the character, you have to decide where the man's coming from. That's been the case with this company all along. It's all about Elon Musk and what you think get to vote. And I would also say, as I said before, even once the shares vest, if he actually hits all the things, he then has to hold the shares for 5 years.
So, you can't temporarily boost prop up the thing and then have it go to zero later. That's to me why You don't have to buy into it. You don't buy into of whatever it goes to. I mean, it's not necessarily a binary question with the 100 million or 100 billion or zero. Um we should properly introduce him cuz we haven't had a chance to.
Uh Ray Dalio is here. He's the founder of of Bridgewater, chairman, chief investment officer. Um we're always thrilled to see you and spend time with you here in Davos. And uh always get your ideas about where you think uh the market is and how the machine, you've always talked about the machine and your principles uh work right now.
So, um where are you? So, I think we that let's let's particularly talk about the US, but I think it's generally true of the world. We are in this Goldilocks period right now in which um we have had a beautiful deleveraging. The inflation isn't a problem. Growth is good. Everything is pretty good with a big jolt of stimulation coming from the changes in tax laws and and such.
That is going to at the part of the cycle we're at the later part of the cycle. So, if you look at the operating rates and you look at the GDP gap and measures, we're going to have um a jolt of stimulation into that. Um and there's a lot of cash on the sidelines. I don't mean just investor cash. I think banks have a lot of cash.
Corporations have a lot of cash. So, we're going to be uh I think inundated with cash. I think that that's going to produce a lot of stimulation and I think um perhaps a market blow-off. In other words, uh we're in a situation where if you're holding cash, you're going to feel pretty stupid. And And with that, everybody is going to become more deployed.
Classically, this is late cycle behavior. And as you get that movement, then the interesting question is how does the Federal Reserve react? Or how do other central banks react? I think it's a very difficult thing to get monetary policy precise. Oh, that's why we have recessions cuz you never can get it exactly right.
I think it's particularly difficult to get it right now because of the fact that uh with interest rates so low, the all assets uh the present trade at the present value of the future cash flow. So, interest rates affect all assets. Because of the duration of um bonds and debt has lengthened, it just takes a little change in interest rates to have a bear market.
And so, the things that we look at are in terms of the tightening of monetary policy, will it be tighter than is discounted in the curve? Right? We have a very small amount of tightening which is built into the curve. If it is greater and interest rates rise to greater, that can affect all asset prices.
But you're not necessarily talking about four moves instead of three. You're talking about something a little greater greater than a quarter percentage point off, right? Um it's all a matter of degree, right? We are entering that part of the cycle. Right? That last part of the cycle. That last part of the cycle, I think can last a year.
Um but I would say when we come back here next year, probably when we're dealing with the issue of the preciseness of monetary policy, the delicacy is going to be a particular issue. So, I think that what I think what you're going to get um a reaction I think that the Fed should think about how much of it is to jolt to stimulation and they should let it go.
That the notion of inflation worry Um what is the problem with inflation? They're struggling to get it to 2%. All the central banks are struggling to get it to 2%. Uh we're not going to probably even hit a core inflation rate of 2% because there are other things that are happening in the economy. So, let it go, enjoy it, but probably we're going to enter Okay, but the the the last the last second.
But if this is the last is the if this is the last leg, not only is the Fed have to get it right, you as the investor have to know when to be in and then clearly when to be out. That's my game. Uh well, mean, that's right. Yeah, I got to know it. We all got to know it. So, we need to recalibrate what we think is is a high interest rate and what is a low interest rate because even if like historically I'm I'm just conditioned to think that I don't know.
I'm used to 6 and 7%. So, this time 5% could be high and that could be enough to to dislocate So, we need to recalibrate I think to calibrate it, you have to ask what does it mean for asset prices first and then what does it mean for economic activity. If you look at asset prices, um if they're all calculated as the present value of future cash flows.
So, if the bond market goes down, uh to put that in perspective, if there's a 140 per basis point rise in bond yields, you will have the greatest bear market in bonds ever. That the biggest bear market. Because and and when you do we're still at a relatively low level historically. can't You can't have a significant rise in interest rates without knocking over the whole asset markets.
Yeah, all markets, private equity, real estate, everything in terms of markets is trading at cap rates or yields that are very low. If all of a sudden you raise the discount rate on that, they're all going to go down, right? So, you have a sensitivity from asset prices. The average increase in the tightening cycle has been about 500 basis points.
I don't think you can have 100 or 125 basis points from here without knocking it over. The same thing is true to put a fine point on it, Joe mentioned 5%. You're talking 4% potentially. Like four Yeah, I I I I I I don't think you can get Yeah. Okay. And then so for for asset prices. And then if you look at the nature of there has been a leveraging up of of many parts of the company.
Corporations, um the return on equity was high relative to the return on cash. So, the typical companies leveraged two to two and a half times what they were before. Now, did they get that right? Okay, that's the the key thing. So, what you're going to have a sensitivity to that. You're going to have you still have a fair amount of of debt.
So, there's a lot of sensitivity, much more sensitivity to interest rate changes than there has ever been. So, is it So, the Fed really does need to tread lightly, but is the Fed in control or are they is is the market going to decide where interest rates are? The Fed um Is that what you're That is going to determine what the level of real interest rates are.
They can. Okay. Right. The only thing that the only thing that can matter there's been $15 trillion of pushing of buying central banks buy. We do have an issue that we're now entering the reverse part of that cycle, right? Right. And so, as as we're looking at that, there is a supply-demand issue. Because as they let the balance sheet run off and we have a larger deficit then we have to sell more bonds.
Okay? That selling of bonds is a is is a factor. That and that then of course it has its effects. It has its effect on the markets. It has its effect on the economy. So, the markets do play a role, but the Fed can decide how much they're going to accommodate that or how much they're going to let it go.
That'll be the Fed's balancing act. By the second half of this year, I think and when we meet again, we're going to be talking about that. You know, did they get it exactly right and how difficult it will be to get it exactly right. Let me ask you about what you've called two different economies or two different markets that we're living in in terms of the in the United States, which as you've talked about sort of inequality in the in in the country.
Are you surprised by and we're talking about the Jamie Dimon news this morning? JP Morgan you know, offering 10% increasing salaries by 10%. You have all these bonuses that came out right after the the tax reform plan. Are you And and do you think that's going to seep meaningfully into the into the real economy?
I don't think it's going to it's I don't think it's going to move the needle, okay? I What I broke of the economy up is in two parts. So, because I think when we look at averages, they're misleading because the top 1/10 of 1% of the population's net worth is equal to the bottom 90%. If you look at income or if you can't look at averages and be representative.
So, I broke it into two parts, the upper 40% and the bottom 60% and I picked the bottom 60% cuz that's the majority of the people. And if you look at that, that's majority it has no it's had no income growth. It's been the the group that has suffered the most in terms of income change has been the middle class and so less income growth.
It has the only rising death rates in the world and it you know, it has opiates and suicides. It has a number of issues that are there. Now, we're So, I go through the calculations. I see what companies are saying that they're going to do. There will probably be about a one-time maybe 10% pass-through of that of that benefit in terms of trickling down to to workers.
So, I think that there should be metrics. In other words, they really take the economics of the income. Because what I'm worried about is what would the next downturn be like? I'm not worried about an immediate downturn, but I would say that if we were to look two years forward, okay, probably right before the next presidential election, there is a good chance that you will have a downturn.
And if you have a downturn for that segment, I'm worried about how we will be with each other in that that element of cohesiveness. I mean, basically, the formula for having problems, social political problems, is have a difference bet- a lot of difference between rich and poor people who are who their budgets are tied together, so they have to decide on those things, and you have an economic downturn because there'd be a lot of arguing.
Are Are you Are you concerned about what that will be like if you have a downturn? I think we may. I think we may. We're getting We're getting along so well now. So, I don't think when we look at the stocks You When you look at um if you if you look at how it passes through um let's say revenue growth, we've we've boosted tax after-tax earnings because of the changes.
It's great for shareholders. And then if you look at the percentage of profit revenue that goes to profit and the percentage of revenue that goes to the worker, there's been it was typically profit has been about 7% of revenue, and it's gone to about 14% of revenue, and the amount that's gone to the worker has gone less.
That That's capitalism and and it Okay, because we invent better technologies and and do such things which are wonderful for productivity in its various ways. But there is a question of how that's working for the majority of people. That is That's our So, I don't worry about debt service payments. I don't worry about inflation.
I think we're in good shape, you know, just let that Let's Let's just let it go a little bit, but I do worry about a downturn with that set of conditions. it the age-old question is is it make more sense to try to divide a a a stagnant or lower pie more evenly or to hope that the bigger pie somehow divides itself more equally.
I mean that's that's the thing. I would agree that that group you can't give away money. If you just give away money, that's not good for it's not going to make people productive and that's not good for their state of mind and it's not good for productivity. But to find ways to make those people productive.
I think there should be a national initiative, a commission that's basically uses metrics of that particular group and say how do we do that probably in private public partnership so shareholders say I can buy into that particular program Right. That's going to be able to have an effect and because if they're going to do because you have to develop you have to have usefulness for that population.
Well, it all comes down to the the work and the dignity of work and the skill set you need to to be productive in in the dignity of work, right? So it all comes down to that. That's right. You got to figure that out. That's why we're in Davos here. We got to run, but you you did mention this idea of a recession before the next election.
Do you think that's going to change the I I think I think it would make greater polarity. I think the left will be more left and the right will be more right. And I think this isn't just an American phenomenon. If Macron doesn't do well in France, we'll have a choice between two extremes. Wait, the left can't get any more left.
There's no no room left of left where they are right now. It's impossible. Um And I got to ask you before you go. Last time we saw you you said you thought Bitcoin was a bubble. It hadn't even got into 19,000 at that point. It has come off since then. Have you new view? Well, it was a bubble. It's a bubble.
It Well, no, you know what bubbles are. They have their own particular dynamic. A perfectly good market can be in a bubble. Dot-com bubble, we had internet companies and so on. They had a bubble and then they had a bust. I don't trade dot I don't know how to value it. I'm not I believe in the blockchain technology.
I think it's great, but that notion of how to trade it and value it is not my expertise so I'll keep my mouth shut. But that was a bubble. It looked like a bubble. Okay, we're going to leave it there. Thank you. Thank you. Great conversation. .
Comments 0