저자: RayDalio · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 달리오는 현재 시장이 2000년 닷컴 버블이나 1929년 수준은 아니지만 그 중간쯤 버블 단계이며, 저금리·풍부한 유동성이 지속되는 한 자산 가격이 계속 밀려 올라갈 수 있다고 봄. 시장 버블 진단: 새로운 기술의 혁신은 좋지만 투자자들이 과거 추세를 외삽하고 가격에 충분히 주의를 기울이지 않을 때 버블이 형성된다고 설명함. 현재는 2000년이나 1929년만큼은 아니지만 절반 정도 와 있는 수준으로 평가함. 섹터 로테이션: 성장 기술주의 기대 수익률은 상대적으로 줄어들 수 있고, 안정적인 전통 기업들이 상대적 수혜를 받는 순환매가 나타나고 있다고 봄. 다만 이는 스티뮬러스 체크 등 자금 흐름에 따라 주기적으로 바뀔 수 있음. 채권과 금리: 40년간 이어진 채권 강세장을 언급하며, 미국 명목금리 약 1.6%는 실질 기준 마이너스 약 1%로 실질 구매력이 장기간 잠식된다고 주장. 미국에서는 구매력을 회복하는 데 약 50년이 걸릴 수 있다고 계산함. 연준이 1930년대와 전쟁기처럼 금리 상한(캡)을 두는 정책을 쓰면 금리는 낮게 유지될 수 있다고 봄. 미국채 금리 방향은 현 수준에서 낮게 머무를 가능성을 암시하나 명시적 방향 전망은 없음. 비트코인: 10년간 해킹 없이 작동했고 추종자가 늘었으며 대체 가치저장 수단·디지털 현금 성격이 장점이라고 평가함. 다만 내재가치가 없어 대중의 믿음에 의존하는 자산이라 버블 성격이 있다고 봄. 정부가 금을 금지했던 것처럼 비트코인 금지 가능성도 '상당히 높다(very likely)'고 언급하며 인도 사례를 예로 듦. 비트코인의 향후 1~3개월 가격 방향에 대한 명시적 예측은 없음. 리스크: 버블 형성 가능성, 정부의 화폐 독점 욕구에 따른 규제 리스크, 외환 통제 가능성, 실질금리 마이너스에 따른 현금·채권 보유의 구매력 손실. 출연자 전망: 명시적 단기 목표가나 방향성 예측은 없고, 장기적 관점의 구조적 견해 위주임.
다듬은 글
what's happened is that a lot of new ideas new technologies new things come along and they make fabulous revolutions and they and they grow things and that's great um but there's a tendency of investors to extrapolate the past and get uh and not pay too much attention to price and when that happens you start to emerge as somewhat of a bubble uh by our measures the bubble is not as what it was in 2000 and not what it was in 1929 but it's kind of like halfway there if i look at the types of uh qualities in other words and so what that means from a value point of view if you're calculating you know what can i realistically expect um you um it's expect to return shrink relative to the others however the uh kind of the meat and potatoes type of companies uh didn't benefit as much from those and and they're fairly stable and so on and so that's why you're starting to see that kind of rotation now that can change uh it can come and go in these phases like when people get stimulus checks and then you know they might be hot on you know the exciting things and they run up again and so on but that that's going on and of course uh there's bitcoin and other things that are going on um so um however the big thing is plenty of liquidity and ridiculously low interest rates now on you ask about the 1.6 percent i think we've been we have been in a 40-year bull market in bonds so now you look at that 1.6 that's a negative one percent uh about real okay that's a so so you're guaranteed and you ask yourself if you're gonna hold a bond any investment the only purpose of an investment is so you can sell it to buy something you want and and so when you look at what is the length of time it's going to take me to get my money back if i give an investment nowadays in the united states i'm going to have to wait about 50 years to get to get back the buying power to start and then i'll start earning money if i'm in other countries uh some europe and uh japan i'm i will have less and if i'm measured in all those countries in real terms i'm going to have less money so basically what that means if i is if i just bought anything that didn't depreciate in real terms if it just matched inflation i'd be better off than than to have those things and so um now i don't think those rates um those rates will only stay down there i think if the federal reserve does what it did it like in the 1930s in the war period which is to put a cap on rates to make um in short-term interest rates low in relationship to the cap like back in the 30s in the war years they made one percent was the short-term interest rate and two and a half percent was the bond yield so it was profitable to buy those bonds funding it with one percent and you got two and a half percent that could put a lid on it but because those two assets cash and bonds were such bad investments relative to other things there was the movement to those other things still and then the government outlawed them i mean things like uh gold they outlawed gold that's why also outlawing bitcoin as um you know good probability and um and that um they also establish foreign exchange controls because they don't want the money to go elsewhere let me let me jump in right because that that comment you made about bitcoin i mean so it's a two-part question is that in a bubble maybe three-part question is it dangerous and what do you think the likelihood of the government outlawing it isn't and is that even feasible bitcoin has proven itself over the last 10 years um it proved um it hasn't been hacked uh it's by and large therefore worked on an operational basis um it has built a significant following it is an alternative um in a sense um storehold of wealth it's like a digital cash um and those are the pluses uh bubbles are financial assets that have imputed value it's it's an asset that doesn't have intrinsic value it has imputed value it's whatever we think it is um and if you look at some of the bubbles in the past um great book is extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of the cla of the crowds by mckay 1845 or something um but it he talks about the south sea bubble and he talks about the mississippi bubble and so on it is when people love it um it's the dot-com bubble and so on and it um that you know that could be so when you look at bitcoin it's a possibility it you know it's an alternative um because what there aren't many um such assets there are not some so many assets that might have intrinsic value that can't be uh messed around as far as the government allowing it um the history was um you know banks always used to exist and then um with the bank of england um they decided that they it was in their interest to have a monopoly on banking at a out of country and so what we did is we every country treasures its monopoly on controlling the supply and demand they don't want other monies to be operating or competing because things can get out of control so i think that uh it would be very likely that um you will have um it under a certain set of circumstances uh outlawed the way gold was outlawed and you're watching that question arise in india today
댓글 0