저자: CathieWood · 외국인
요약 보기
AI·자동화 기반 기술혁명 초입으로 자본지출 사이클이 길게 갈 것이라 주장. 반도체지수 선행지표(LLM 토큰 지출지수)의 최근 하락은 과도한 공포로 보나 지출 변동성은 인정. 생산성 향상이 디플레이션 압력을 만들고, 인플레는 M2 대비 낮을 것으로 봄. 장단기 금리차는 단기금리 상승 우위로 역전 기조, 산업혁명기처럼 디플레 환경 가능성 제기. 아부다비의 OPEC 탈퇴 후 증산으로 유가 급락 및 디플레 촉진 전망, 미국은 셰일·에너지 수출 영향으로 혜택 제한적.
다듬은 글
We believe this will be a long cycle and that the market's fears about the hype around artificial intelligence are somewhat exaggerated. I know we're going to see some volatility in spending, perhaps due to some uncertainty, but we believe we 're in the early stages of a real technology revolution, and the capex rate has been flat for 25 years.
We need to make up for a lot of lost time. What if the biggest technological revolution in decades was just beginning, and Bitcoin was part of that transformation? Katie Wood believes that artificial intelligence, automation and explosive productivity can transform the global economy, while falling energy costs and prices create powerful deflationary forces.
But if this technology cycle is still in its early stages, what could it mean for Bitcoin markets and the next big investment opportunity? The answer may surprise you. post notifications to receive similar videos. Here, we've already explained this a few times, but we've added a few lines to explain it a little more in detail.
You can see that during the 1990s, when we were going through the Internet revolution and the wireless revolution , this measure of capital spending— orders for non-military capital goods excluding aircraft— grew about 9% a year; and then, because of the overbuilding at that time , we saw the consequences, and then we peaked at about where that initial peak was, three times.
So, if this were a stock chart, I would tell you, "Okay, resistance didn't hold, resistance didn't hold." We broke through resistance, partly due to COVID, as we needed to digitize our world even before ChatGPT came along. The numbers dropped a bit when interest rates rose, and then we had a ChatGPT moment.
We are back in the future, and we believe this will be a long cycle. The market's fears about the hype around AI are somewhat exaggerated; I know we will see volatility in spending due to some uncertainty, but we believe we are in the early stages of a true technology revolution. And for 25 years, this capital expenditure figure remained unchanged.
We need to make up for a lot of lost time. Now on capital spending: this is causing a lot of fear, particularly for the semiconductor index. The semiconductor index is marked in green, and the LLM Silicon Data token spending index is marked in purple . We moved it forward 15 months because at least recently it has been a pretty good indicator of a decline in semiconductor indices.
So, this is causing quite a stir in the market. But let's look at this in more detail. In this chart, you can see the previous index broken down into price, which is highlighted in purple, and volume, which is highlighted in green. Prices are going down and you see an X mark indicating the current week.
These are weekly price and volume indices. The average price for the five days leading up to Friday will be published on Sunday. This is where you see the X mark. The volume, however, starts to increase again. We had a little scare, like it was around April. Part of this is because companies are saying, "wait, we need to improve efficiency, we're spending too much." So we see these kinds of small adjustments .
And then there's a turnaround, because the ability of companies to increase productivity is simply amazing. And here you can see the equivalent of the income index. Combining the two indicators I just showed, we again see a slight decline in April. This time the decline was bigger because, I think, there was a reaction to the overuse of tokens .
And now we are back on the path to growth. Here, in contrast to the 4- year annual rate of change in M2, the annual growth rate of M2 is shown, which is about 5.6. And again, for reference, you can see that in a historical context, this is not an extreme value. This is probably the middle of our range.
Will it continue to grow? Maybe it will grow. But will this cause further increases in CPI-based inflation? We don't think so. This brings us back to the conversation about inflation. In the last month alone, there have been several surprises in the direction of lowering inflation expectations. Overall CPI, this was for June.
And we will receive data for July next week. Minus 0.4. The baseline was 0. This is month-to-month. The month-on-month ISI is minus 0.3. The personal consumption deflator was minus 0.1. This is for June, and the baseline was only 0.1. So, on an annual basis, consumer indices are still mostly at three percent.
The core and overall PCE indices, as well as the overall and core CPI indices... the core CPI is 2.6% year-over-year . So we are still fighting for a 2% to 3% range for this baseline amid the recent rise in oil prices. But why don't we think the CPI will continue to grow in line with the money supply on an annualized basis?
First, I just cited statistics that show that we are starting to see results that are below expectations. Second, it has to do with the labor force participation rate, which I just talked to you about. As you can see, it falls pretty quickly. And I've given you the reasons, covering both sides of that spectrum.
This brings us back to what I was wondering about: the correlation —not causation, of course, but a correlation—between labor force participation rates and the velocity of the money supply, M2. When people worry about their future, they tend to hold back on spending a little and perhaps save a little .
Although they didn't manage to postpone much, and I'll get to that a little later. But I believe that this decline in labor force participation, especially among baby boomers, is because they are now relying solely on retirement income. Therefore, they are probably more cautious in their spending. On the other hand, young people aged 16 to 24 are probably also a bit worried.
Perhaps everyone is concerned, but we noted that the participation rate of the middle- aged working population has nevertheless increased. So this is good news to some extent. They are the largest contributors to income. So even if the velocity of money only drops slightly and does not resume its downward trend, even though the labor force participation rate indicates otherwise, it will weaken the impact of money supply growth.
So, the speed of 5.6% slows down by 1 %. And that essentially equalizes the figure, which will take one percentage point off the strength of that 5.6%...... monetary growth. But here is the average hourly wage . This is more recent data, and you see a prolonged slowdown. So, we are back to the indicators that existed before the COVID pandemic.
I think this is important. I think this is important for the Fed. Well, as I mentioned at the beginning, it will become obvious that if we are right and we are in a rapidly growing economy, then part of the rewards associated with productivity growth should go not only to profits, but also to wages.
So, the average hourly wage. So when do we start talking about the labor shortage again—although we don't now , which is interesting. But when we start talking about this, and especially about young people, when the unemployment rate starts to drop significantly, I believe we will see wage growth along with productivity growth, and that's normal.
Wood then moves on to monetary policy. One of the indicators it tracks is the ratio between the yields on 10- year and 2-year Treasury bonds. Historically, a steep yield curve can occur when long-term rates rise faster than short-term rates. But Wood notes that the recent dynamic is different. Short-term rates are rising relative to long-term rates.
Why? She believes that one reason is that markets are receiving increasing signals that inflation may be lower than expected. Here's where you see the big surprise in the productivity report we got this week: unit costs excluding labor. What the hell is this? It is we who look back and ask ourselves: what do we not understand about what is happening ?
So we did a little research on this issue. Looks very inflationary, doesn't it? No, that's not true. This is an accelerated depreciation calculation. We know that this accelerated depreciation is probably the most extreme we've seen because the tax package contributed to it. If you build a manufacturing facility over the next two to two and a half years, you can depreciate it 100% in the first year instead of 30-40 years, getting a huge tax refund up front, the same goes for equipment, internal research, and software costs.
So this accelerated depreciation actually stimulates capital spending. This is good news. Here's a little more about monetary policy or what the Fed might be focusing on. I've given you just a few indicators that they look at and try to figure out. The last one is very interesting. This is another landmark, at least for me.
There has been a downward trend since 2008-2009. On the yield curve , measured as the difference between the yields on 10- year and 2-year Treasury bonds. What does this tell us? Typically, an increase or steeper yield curve occurs because long-term rates are rising faster than two-year rates, which are more sensitive to Fed policy.
But now we are seeing the opposite: short-term rates have recently risen more than long-term rates. I think this is because there are increasing signs that inflation is turning out to be lower than expected, and we may be entering an era similar to the Industrial Revolution, which had deflationary tendencies .
Then the yield curve was negative more than half the time. On average, it was 100 basis points lower. We may be heading back to a period that I know will be a big surprise for bond markets. Here is the spot price of oil . And interestingly, the peak oil price was $147. I think it was in 2008. Even despite the two wars we have seen, we have not managed to exceed this price.
Moreover, we have declined after the post-Covid price peak. We just reached it and the price immediately dropped. We have studied the supply and demand for oil and believe that a significant surplus is brewing, and one of the main influencing factors is Abu Dhabi. The UAE withdrew from OPEC in May, and its production has reached record levels.
That's about 4.11 million barrels per day. It seems that under OPEC quota it was limited to a level just above 3 million, or maybe less, and now they have simply thrown away those restrictions. Why do we think this happened? I was in Abu Dhabi. Abu Dhabi is one of the most innovative countries in the world.
Sheikh focused on artificial intelligence. In 2021, I spoke in Abu Dhabi to a group of world leaders on AI. I remember during the conversation they asked, "What should we do to take advantage of this technological revolution that's coming?" We did n't have ChatGPT back then. This became a wake-up call for many people.
And I said, " Bet on autonomous mobility." " Simplify the regulations for this." And they really did it. Um, and I think they got our FAA to take action. Um, and they just invested aggressively, whether it was in cryptocurrencies or robotics. Of course, AI, and certainly healthcare, as well as the impact that AI will have on medicine.
So, what did they probably get at here? They must have decided that the price of oil had peaked, and I remember telling them that the price of oil was going to crash. Well, of course, it seems ridiculous now. Maybe, maybe not, because it really started to fall, didn't it? And then, of course, there were two wars, Russia and Iran, and now it's falling again.
Abu Dhabi must have decided: let's try to get the maximum price for oil. Let's sell as much as we can now. Because oil prices are falling. And I think they see, as they move to autonomous systems, that the power grid will power many modes of transportation, and it's powered not by oil, but by natural gas, hydropower, the sun, certainly renewables, wind.
So I believe that the price of oil will drop significantly, and that's how we'll get to our beneficial deflation, because it's like a tax break for most of the world. Although I will say that for the US this is not as big a benefit as it was historically, since 2015 our exports have grown from almost zero to 6.3 million today, and continue to grow.
So, we are a clean energy producer. So it will hit us, but mainly in energy-producing regions. Katie Wood's thesis presents a very different interpretation of today's market fears. While many investors are asking whether AI spending has gone too far, Wood asks whether it has gone far enough. It sees the economy emerging from decades of relatively subdued capital spending and entering a new investment cycle driven by artificial intelligence, automation, software, robotics, and advanced manufacturing .
At the same time, she believes that investors may be underestimating the deflationary impact of productivity.
Comments 0