저자: RayDalio · 외국인
요약 보기
달리오는 부채 사이클과 인플레이션 연계 자산 배분을 강조하며 인플레이션연동채권(TIPS 계열)과 금을 신용위험 없는 분산투자 수단으로 제시한다. 기술주는 과도한 집중과 불확실성 때문에 주의를 요구한다. 장기적으로 부채 증가, 내부 정치갈등, 지정학적 갈등 등 4~5개 힘이 맞물린 대순환을 설명하며, 신흥 중립국(인도, 인도네시아, 일부 ASEAN)의 성장을 언급한다. 일본 사례로 부채자산의 실질 가치 하락을 강조한다. 1~3개월 단기 가격 예측은 없고, 금과 TIPS에 대한 장기적 선호만 확인된다.
다듬은 글
um, do you have gold in your portfolio, where, what is your security? So for balance, there should be no bias. So as your starting point with those things, and then when you also add the element of gold, there's no credit problem, you know, and there's no, gold is an asset that you kind of want to have when it comes to having the value of money.
Money—this debt becomes more difficult because you have to focus on the fact that these are not the good old days anymore. Um, that doesn't mean you shouldn't keep money in the United States, but think about technology stocks. technology stocks were, you know, great investments. Don't focus on technology stocks .
Okay, I'm not trying to say, like, run and do it. Um , when I think about this, for example, I think about what assets would be diversified? So, how many inflation-indexed bonds do you have? Um, I, I, I especially like inflation-indexed credit bonds for balance sheet. Um, do you have any gold in your portfolio?
Where, what is your safety? So for balance, there should be no bias. So, what's your starting point with these things in mind, right? You see , when you own an inflation-indexed bond, if the real rate falls, you get an appreciation in its value. So, not only do you have inflation, but a decrease in the real rate also leads to a price increase.
But it's also a time when , you know, central banks are changing course and lowering rates. So this is a very important point because you will get this compression of the real rate and you will get credit-free inflation without credit risk because it is a government obligation. Yes. And it's not really , you can't, they can't monetize it the same way because that would lead to inflation and you'd get it.
That's right. And then when you also add the element of gold, there are no problems with lending, you know, and no, gold is an asset that is to some extent desirable. When it comes to owning the value of money, money is debt. Yes. You are holding Yes. Debt is how you hold money. So when you have that combination of circumstances, purely from a tactical standpoint, leveraged inflation-indexed bonds —not that they have high volatility , but credit inflation index funds and gold are diversifying in and of themselves without credit risk.
Well , it's not what people usually do, okay, but if you look at the structure and the behavior, I'm not saying throw a bunch of money, like: run and do it. I mean, when you think about how to diversify your portfolio without credit risk, or when we're dealing with technology stocks, there's excessive concentration and a lot of uncertainty.
I went through the dot-com bubbles and stuff; we may find ourselves in one of them. This doesn't mean stuffing yourself with them, have some of them, but the point is, how do you maintain real returns, positive real returns, in an environment where there are threats that are not just market-based? These are tax threats, currency risks and things like that, you know.
We see these cycles, and they are almost marked by wars, because in the final stage there is war, destruction, debt cancellation, and everything starts again, so you can trace this cycle starting from the end of World War II, right? So, in the beginning you have internal order, productivity and so on.
But over time, debt grows relative to income, and debt is money. One person's debt is another person's money, and as it grows over time, a lot of borrowing occurs, which creates an economic cycle associated with this "great wave " of borrowing, and of course, this has consequences. Late in the cycle, you have a huge debt-to- income ratio; Debt is purchasing power, and that's where the problem arises.
Yes , it's part of the cycle. During this growth, the wealth gap also increases , and you know that's the nature of the cycle. It's noticeable, but these large property gaps become part of the picture, so you see an internal conflict starting to brew. That's why we see four civil wars in the 1930s. I won't list them, but in general, this conflict, when both of these processes occur simultaneously, usually the internal conflict precedes the third, external one.
In other words, there is a conflict between great powers in the world. When there is a winner in a war, there is a dominant force, and then order comes for the reasons I have described. But over time, this dominant state may lose relative power compared to others, resulting in great power conflict. In this period of destabilization, when economic problems are combined with political ones—I mean internal political and social unrest—it is these three factors that form a great cycle.
We can call this a grand cycle; It can vary, but it usually lasts about the same as a human life, somewhere around 80 years, although it can vary. Well, imagine that these are streams that coincide in time . In general, for example, if you have a debt crisis, then there will probably also be a crisis of internal order due to finances and their influence.
And this, in turn, leads to conflict in the external order system. So these cycles usually occur simultaneously. As you said, there is a fourth factor— weather, climate effects, and things like that. And through all of this comes human ingenuity. In other words, it continues to grow at different rates.
But this concept of evolution to higher levels, particularly the fifth force— technology—is particularly important. Classically, the private sector is increasingly indebted, and the public sector, especially governments with the support of central banks, is taking on debt. So, we see that the public debt has increased significantly.
Yes. The economy is less sensitive to this, since the state assumes the debt, and the central bank supports these efforts in one way or another. True. We still see this trend of rising debt-to- GDP ratios, which, of course, has caused the current problems with inflation and other factors. So we still see cyclical increases in total debt relative to GDP, approaching peak values, and then we deal with the cost of debt service , which depends on the interest rate.
When the central bank restricts the money supply and begins to classically " squeeze" the economy, you see a slowdown due to the cost of debt service , and the cycle moves to the next stage. So, there are these short-term cycles that we call recessions and expansions. We have gone through 12 and a half such cycles, and we are now in the middle of a short-term debt cycle.
That is why the government is taking on this responsibility, because it has greater opportunities. For example, if a central bank loses money, it may not seem like a problem in the early stages, but it may become one later. So I think if you look at , um, Japan—that's a very good example of one person's debt being another person's asset, which has depreciated by about 90%, right?
If I hold a debt asset in Japanese yen, its value has fallen by about 90% relative to the interest rate in the US, in terms of real devaluation , by 90%. So what a colossal loss of wealth from writing off this debt in such a cyclical manner. This is the accumulation of exchange rate and interest rate differences.
Is n't that right? In other words, there was an average interest rate difference of about 3%, right? So over 15 years, that 3% adds up significantly, right? Then you also have, um, exchange rate depreciation. So it's both an interest rate differential and an exchange rate depreciation. I think it's important to understand that debt assets, even for the United States, which was the best place to own debt assets, were losing—debt assets were depreciating and they were losing because of inflation.
They lost in nominal terms on the bonds. You lost money. The relative loss in the value of money and debt in Japan was much greater, but they all lost money. And now, moving forward, the problem really is that, you know, there's too much debt and it has to be devalued somehow, and there's not going to be a default on the debt, so there's going to be a decline in the real yield on that debt.
I believe this is the classic cycle I am describing. I say there are five forces. Okay, so the last force I'm talking about is productivity, in other words, technological progress and productivity, and that other force is a very big positive force. If you look at the five forces, um, debt-money force, it's not a positive for wealth.
If you look at the power of internal order and disorder, okay, it's a threat in different ways: taxes, politically, etc. You look at the power of external order and disorder, that's, that's the problem. But if we look at, uh, climate and the impact of that, it's very, very expensive— about $8 trillion a year in a global economy that's a hundred trillion dollars a year.
So this is a big and expensive thing. These four forces are problems, they are difficulties ahead. But we have the most amazing technological breakthroughs . And so, I think when we think about impact, this other force of productivity is a big, big positive force. Although, it may be, it depends on how you use it; you know, you use technology, it can be a double- edged sword.
But the impact on productivity, so I think the real question is exactly that impact. So what the United States is doing so well at , and that's a real plus, is because of that. However, when we look at this, remember that it's basically one and a half million people out of the 333 million who work in that sector who are leading, and half of them are immigrants.
And so we have this amazing dichotomy between those who are in that part of the inventiveness with the " unicorns" and everyone else, and at the same time we have this huge portion of the population, well , let's call it the 60%, the bottom 60%. And this creates such internal political power. This is a classic cycle.
This is the power and threat of capitalism. Capitalism singles out the most productive. This is especially important now, in our technological age. A limited number of people can have the greatest productivity. That's where it comes from, and the vast majority don't . And so capitalism rewards this and so on, and creates wealth gaps.
And then it becomes generational. The children of those who are rich get a better education and so on. This has happened throughout history, but this is a truly classic example, and it is precisely in these circumstances that we find ourselves now. Don't look at averages. Got it. Got it. Averages are misleading.
If you watch these cycles, you know, I laid it out in my book, "The Changing World Order." It's like a diagram, practically, that you can follow, and it follows this diagram , right? Yeah, uh, because you have more polarity and less compromise, you develop a " win at all costs" mentality. Got it. Now there are no compromises, and you have this in the context of environmental degradation, and that's what you're talking about.
Right. Got it. Right. Is your biggest at the same time this productivity miracle happens to some and tends to exacerbate it. I mean, I don't want to say anything in black and white. There are always small details, but overall the picture looks like this . There are two sides, and then there are neutral ones.
So, in a war or a conflict of the type that we have now— fortunately, it's not a direct clash of great powers, but we have other conflicts— in the end, you see winners, losers, and neutral countries. The winners lose. The winners lose terribly, and the neutral countries are the real winners. You see how this dynamic works.
You see, in essence, a war , and at the same time you observe neutral states, those who are not involved. You see India, ASEAN countries and so on developing and prospering because they are at a point in their economic cycles where they have enough money to form capital. You know there is a development cycle.
I think there are four stages. OK. When you are a poor country and you cannot form capital because you have no money, you are poor and you realize it. When you have money to build capital, you build roads and other infrastructure to grow. During this period, you are aware of your poverty and do not waste money.
You invest them in productive purposes, so you see infrastructure development and so on. You see this happening in a number of countries: India, Indonesia, the countries that I've been analyzing to see who will grow. We just published this. Yes. Yes. This is the take-off point. OK. And when they become neutral countries from a geopolitical point of view, it is a very advantageous situation.
The climb begins. So, stage two: you become richer, but you still consider yourself poor. You still have that mentality. The third stage—you become richer and begin to understand that you can enjoy life, you don't have to work six days a week and so on. You begin to enjoy life more. You are still rich.
But you begin to realize that you are rich. Such a mentality. Then comes the next stage, when you start to get poorer but still consider yourself rich. You borrow and live lavishly , and because you are " rich," people are willing to lend you money. This is the situation. So if we look at these developing countries, many of which are neutral in this conflict and are in a take-off phase, which allows them to form capital and so on.
You see countries like India, Indonesia and some ASEAN countries succeeding while other states are in conflict. Um, the United States is achieving great results through its ingenuity and high productivity, and at the same time it has other problems that we just talked about.
Comments 0