저자: BillGross · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 중앙은행의 양적완화가 신용 확장을 이끌어 위험자산 가격을 떠받치고 있으며, 이 유동성이 멈추기 전까지는 자산가격이 유지되지만 그 과정은 점진적 수익률 저하와 과도한 밸류에이션 부담을 동반한다. 시장 배경: S&P500은 사상 최고치에서 11포인트 떨어진 상태로 출발했고 선행 PER은 약 19배, 하이일드 스프레드는 370bp 수준이다. 동시에 미 10년물 금리는 약 2.15%, 엔화는 연초 대비 6.5% 강세로 안전자산 선호와 위험자산 강세가 동시에 나타나고 있다. 유동성과 신용: 연준은 대차대조표 축소 국면이지만 일본은행(BOJ)과 유럽중앙은행(ECB)이 각각 월 600억 달러 규모로 자산을 매입해 연간 약 1조 2천억 달러가 시스템에 공급되고 있다. 마이너스 또는 극저 수익률 자금이 채권과 고평가된 주식으로 몰리고 있다. 정책 전망: 이 흐름은 QE 펀치볼이 회수되기 전까지 유지될 것으로 보이며, 회수 시점과 방식(정책 전환 또는 민간 반란)이 핵심 변수다. 기관 투자자는 인덱스 구조상 듀레이션을 유지해야 하므로 매도 파업이 곧바로 나타나기 어렵다. 투자 전략: 저수익 환경을 받아들여야 하며, 할인율 5~10%로 거래되는 레버리지 폐쇄형 펀드가 상대적으로 매력적이라는 입장이다. 지방채는 5~6%, 회사채는 8~10% 수준의 수익률을 제시한다. 국채·현금: 선진국 중 금리가 가장 높은 편이지만 여전히 고평가이며 노출은 신중해야 한다. 마이너스 듀레이션 포지션을 취해 현금성 수익률을 받아들이는 전략도 언급했다. 연준 전망: 옐런 의장은 강한 리더십을 가진 인물로 평가되며, 차기 이사 후보인 Quarles와 Goodfriend의 영향은 아직 불확실하다. 규제 완화 흐름 속에서 레버리지 재구축 우려가 제기된다. 리스크: 신용 비용 상승이 레버리지 기업의 디폴트와 청산으로 이어져 다음 경기침체를 촉발할 수 있다.
다듬은 글
again with this question how do you explain to yourself again with this question how do you explain to yourself because you have to do it a world in which the sp500 started the day eleven points off of its all-time record high and which is trading at almost nineteen times forward earnings high-yield spreads at three hundred and seventy basis points but at the same time you have the ten-year Treasury again starting the day at two fifteen and the yen having rallied six and a half percent year-to-date you know these haven trades playing out strongly yet the wrist trades also playing out strongly well and you mentioned several assets are you talking about bonds you're talking about stocks you're talking about the world investing world that you have to confront every day yes and I if there's a commonality to it or a common factor I would say it's the the expansion of credit in the credit that's been generated by central banks you know the Fed has been out of it in terms of building this balance sheet but they the the BOJ and the ECB have been move along at the same pace at sixty billion a month a total of 120 and one trillion a year and so money is being pumped out into this system and money that is yielding less than nothing in many cases seeks a haven not only in bonds that that are under yielding but in stocks that are overpriced so is that to say this edition if you will of liquidity will help to continue supporting risk asset prices so long as the BOJ and the BOE excuse me well not more importantly the ECB are quantitative easing well I think so that's been the game plan and it worked wonderfully and it has Jordan not criticizing you know basically the worked wonderfully for investors yeah the global economy as well it was pulled out of the Great Recession that which could have turned into a Great Depression and so you know not criticizing the policy but it has to continue in my opinion in order for credit spreads to be typed in order for yields to remain low and in order for stocks to have such high fees be the fundamental basis for it is the central bank policy that that keeps creating additional credit so it stays it continues until that the QE Punchbowl gets pulled away I think so okay and the question becomes how quickly the punchbowl is taken away and and/or whether it's a policy move or something precipitated by the private sector in an revolt against low interest rates they move somewhere else you know the old money in a mattress an individual can do that in Germany can put their move euros in a mattress but a but an institution can't and but gradually at the margin the system itself may degenerate simply because the returns are unattractive and it and they prefer to sit in their mattress but they may not be the same button vigilantes of old but they'll be for sure yeah yeah the bond vigilantes of old are basically index oriented and so they must maintain certain high levels of duration even when fields are unattractive individuals then they're a smaller part at the margin but individuals can play a different game and simply avoid themselves of hearts so you sound a little bit hopeful do you think this buyers strike if you will is going to actually happen well those slowly and that's the problem for an investor because as it happens slowly and if you void your hand so to speak of of a certain suit or if you void your hand risk assets then you use you accept much lower returns and there are those investors individuals that require think they require higher returns and so voiding is is perhaps reasonable and common sensical but not necessarily practical in this type of environment well you're practicing some of that a little bit yourself are you not you told me earlier this morning that your level of risk aversion has been higher only once before in the lead-up to the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy so I presume that your provision positioning if you will reflect some of that at the same time though timing is difficult to predict how do you balance the caution with the need to earn some return what do you own well you own obviously what would you think are the most attractive and at least overvalued assets you know I would suggest as we do that there are attractions and closed-in funds that sell it discounts and five to ten percent net asset value discounts that are levered to some extent off of that chief leverage and yield five six percent of the muni market and eight nine ten percent in the corporate market so you go there and and you basically tell your investors that it's a changed world that returns are going to be lower and that if you want to sleep at night and to accept the market as it is that the low volatility requires low return what about Treasuries what about cash well interest rates are the most attractive of the developed market and in comparison to the ten-year bond for instance at 25 basis points what only there quickly 100 to 190 basis points and relative to a ten-year jgp that one's easy because they yield 10 you know that's 205 basis points and so here they're more attractive on a yield basis but still I would suggest that they're overvalued price-wise and under yielding and investors should be cautious in terms of how much they want at home relative to relative the cash do you have a cash position have a large cash position how large oh I put it in a durational context so the unconstrained fund which has a zero duration benchmark you know has a negative one to two year duration which means that it's accepting a cash like and in some cases a lower than cash like return by his positions hmm a bill when we spoke at the when we last spoke it was at the Milken Global Conference in Los Angeles last month right you told me that you'd give yourself an a-minus for performance in the two and a half years that one and a half years excuse me it's been since running the agendas that constrain two and a half don't have losing track of time and a half years September of 14 that a C+ were fundraising so what I want to know is how do you turn the c-plus into a minus or better well you continue to promote to talk to viewers and Bloomberg to express your philosophy and concern and to let them know that you're still active and in the game I suppose do you need to travel more probably that that's something that I haven't done but I tend to generate my communication through writing investment outlooks and through TV and so on but yep traveling would would help and Janice has just completed its merger with Henderson oh yes will that help I think so you know I think Henderson can can join in in terms of asset growth and the asset growth of the unconstrained fund while not you know can feel like in terms of numbers you know it's positive every day it's a 2 or 3 million every day and it's a smaller world it's a small world after all like in Disneyland but you know it's an enjoyable one and as long as investors are increasingly putting money in I'm a happy camper bill a question to you about the Fed there are no puffs of white smoke yet from the White House but it does look like we know know who the next two nominees to the Fed board are going to be Marvin good friend and Randall Quarles how do you think Fed policy will be different if they were to be nominated approved and sit on the Fed board well well we'll have to we'll have to it sees we'll have to see me well but but I think Janet Yellen despite her demeanor you know it's a very tough-minded chairwoman and not necessarily any tougher than then Bernanke maybe a little less tough than Volcker but but she's tough and she dominates and so I think she has a team she listens but I think she guides and directs do you think they'll be inclined to allow leverage to rebuild in the financial system something you've warned against I hope not and that comes from the regulatory side of the Fed one in which they failed you know pre layman you know to criticize alan greenspan he was never a regulator it was always a an interest rate director and so you know regulation has become more more important the trend seems to be shifting the other way but you know I think ultimately credit and credit extension is at risk or rests another recession if only because if the price of credit Rises in a levered world then the cover or the ability to service becomes at risk and companies start to default and physicians start to be liquidated and you it's a haven not only in bonds that that are under yielding but in stocks that are overpriced so is that to say this edition if you will of liquidity will help to continue supporting risk asset prices so long as the BOJ and the BOE excuse me well not more importantly the ECB our quantitative easing well I think so that's been the game plan and it worked wonderfully and hazarded not criticizing you know basically the worked wonderfully for investors yeah the global economy as well it was pulled out of the Great Recession that which could have turned into a Great Depression and so you know not criticizing the policy but you have to continue in my opinion in order for credit spreads to be typed in order for yields to remain low and in order for stocks to have such high Pease because the the the fundamental basis for it is the central bank policy that that keeps creating additional credit so it stays it continues until that the QE Punchbowl gets pulled away I think so okay and the question becomes how quickly the punchbowl is taken away and and or whether it's a policy move or something precipitated by the private sector in an revolt against no again with this question how do you explain to yourself again with this question how do you explain to yourself because you have to do it a world in which the sp500 started the day eleven points off of its all-time record high and which is trading at almost nineteen times forward earnings high-yield spreads at three hundred and seventy basis points but at the same time you have the ten-year Treasury again starting the day at 2:15 and the yen having rallied six and a half percent year-to-date you know these Haven trades playing out strongly yet the wrist trades also playing a strongly welded and you mentioned several massive interest rates they move somewhere else so if you know the old money in a mattress an individual can do that in Germany can put their move euros and I'm not but a but an institution can't and but gradually at the margin the system itself may degenerate simply because the returns are unattractive and they prefer to sit in their mattress but they may not be the same button vigilantes of old but they'll be for sure yeah yeah the bond vigilantes of old are basically index oriented and so they must maintain certain high levels of duration even when they're talking about bonds you're talking about stocks you're talking about the world investing world that you have to confront every day yes and I if there's a commonality to it or a common factor I would say it's the the expansion of credit in the credit that's been generated by central banks you know the Fed has been out of it in terms of building this balance sheet but they the the BOJ and the ECB have been move along at the same pace at sixty billion a month a total of 120 and one trillion a year and so money is being pumped out into this system and money that is yielding less than nothing in many cases
Comments 0