저자: JeremyGrantham · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 미국 증시는 1929·2000년급 슈퍼버블 말기에 가까우며, 큰 하락 위험이 있으니 미국 대형 성장주 비중을 줄이고 해외 가치주로 이동하는 것이 낫다. 주요 근거: S&P500 블루칩이 끝까지 버티는 동안 러셀2000 등 중소형 성장주는 이미 꺾였다. 러셀2000은 지난 1년간 손실이었고 S&P500은 약 23% 상승했다. 이 괴리는 1929·2000년 슈퍼버블에서만 나타난 패턴이다. 추세와 하락 폭: 과거 버블에서 시장은 추세선 아래로 크게 빠졌다. 이번 추세선은 S&P500 기준 약 2500선으로 제시됐다. 2000년엔 나스닥 -82%, 아마존 -92%가 나왔고, 연준 개입으로 S&P는 -50%에서 멈췄다. 이번엔 연준이 막기 어렵다고 봤다. 매수 행태: 증권사들의 '저점 매수' 권유는 버블 특징이다. 기관은 상승장에 머물러야 수익이 나기 때문에 '게임 종료'라고 말하지 않는다. 대응 전략: 미국 주식 비중 축소, 특히 성장주 비중 축소. 러셀2000 공매도 보유. 일본·영국·신흥국 등 해외 가치주가 상대적으로 저평가. 미국 시장은 '약간 비싼 게' 아니라 '충격적으로 비싸다'고 평가. 거시 리스크: 주택·주식·원자재(유가 88달러) 동시 버블. 실질금리는 역사상 최저 수준이며, 정부 부채/GDP 비율과 연준 대차대조표는 크게 늘었다. 인플레이션은 앞으로 계속 주기적으로 튀는 변수가 될 것으로 봤다. 구조 문제: 원자재 고갈로 병목과 가격 급등이 반복될 것이다. 규제 포획으로 기업 이익의 GDP 비중은 늘고 노동 몫은 줄었다. 인플레와 자산 가격 상승은 부자를 더 부유하게, 노동자를 더 어렵게 만든다. 출연자 전망: 미국 주식이 다른 지역보다 훨씬 더 떨어질 것이라고 본다.
다듬은 글
the the Blue Chips the S P 500 have kept strong right up to the last second and wave after wave of the stocks that had made the real running uh peel off and drop in 1929 the the flakes were down for the year before the market broke they were down 30 the year before they'd been up 85 they had crushed the market the really classic example of this is the Russell 2000 which is stock number 1001 to 3 000 they're multi-billion dollar companies they're a serious Enterprise in the last year they are down they have not made any money at all the s P's made 23 percent the Russell 2000 is meant to go up about 1.2 times the market in a bull market like you're saying there was it should have been up about 30 percent it it wasn't even up recently this is this is a huge Divergence of a kind that has never happened other than the super bubbles of 1929 and 2000.
2000 you may remember the growth stocks peeled off and were down 50 percent the s p was flat which meant the remaining 70 percent had risen 20 percent this is an enormous Divergence and it happens on the upside for the Blue Chips when I sat down a year ago we had seen the accelerating phase that you need in a bubble that had taken place last year with the NASDAQ up over 100 from the low but also up 58 percent from December of 2019 so even granted that covid decline it was a hell of a year it was a year of acceleration and and the NASDAQ has started to weaken relative to the Blue Chips the Russell has started to weaken much much more so I think we're now in the buy the dip mode which the super bubbles specialize in you don't have two years of buying Frenzy the dying overnight typically so even in 1929 you had some magnificent rallies and buy the dip is the watch word of practically every brokerage house out there and it always is you never almost never have a major brokerage house say the game's over it doesn't happen the commercial imperative is is overwhelming to stay bullish it's how you make money the trend line being slightly generous is 2500.
and most of the great bubbles the super bubbles go below Trend and stay there for quite a while in the Greenspan era that tendency stopped in 2000 yes the NASDAQ came down 82 which was fairly brutal Amazon came down 92. but the Federal Reserve raised to the rescue so loudly and strongly that they stopped the decline in the s p at trend line it only declined 50 percent 50 is a hell of a big decline but it was only enough to get it back then to Trent this time trend is at most 2500.
and I would expect even if the Federal Reserve tries to do the same it will be hard to prevent the market from declining to that level and of course it declined very quickly 50 in 1929 it declined 50 in three years in 2000 and the housing market which was another great American Super Bubble went all the way back to Trend uh in three years as I said a year ago I think I think they'll do pretty well by selling I'm sympathetic to how difficult it it is to get out entirely out of equities and I would point out as I did last year that there are less overpriced parts of the equity market around the world in fact everywhere is less overpriced than the US the U.S is the peak of this bubble as it was in 2000.
and what it meant then is what it will mean today and that is the U.S will decline a whole lot more than the rest it's also true that the value end of the spectrum as opposed to the growth Act is about as cheap as it gets so if you can combine those by buying value stocks outside the U.S I would say particularly Emerging Markets but there's quite a few countries Japan the UK where the markets are if they're overpriced they're only moderately overpriced the US is not moderately overpriced it is shockingly overpriced we are indeed a short a decent amount of Russell 2000s so we we haven't been hurt in the last year which is amazing we're also sure to about half as much again as in the NASDAQ which did hurt us but not sensationally and and the point there is a lot of our money is in Venture Capital that's very growthy we need some hedging and if we weren't exposed to a large amount of growth stocks I suspect we would skip the hedging we would skip going short the same in 2000 we were basically recommending that you ease up on on U.S equities by mid 98 and that was a hell of a rally and that was brutally painful but it was still a level where you made tons of money by 2002 the market was much lower than that a standard bubble we defined over 20 years perhaps 25 years ago as a two Sigma statistical event it's just a measure of of how much of an outlier you are two Sigma is the kind of deviation that should occur every 44 years and because we're a little Wilder and less efficient than we should be it occurs every 35 years super bubbles can really wipe you out like 1929 did and that's where we are now we we entered a few months ago into three sigma territory Super Bubble territory and the other great risk is last year we also entered bubbles in real estate so this is a very dangerous year that we've just had some bubbles are very specialized to U.S growth stocks like 2000.
and they and they hurt there is a wealth effect people lose money they they pull back on their spending but they don't hurt anywhere near as much as when you combine that with a housing bubble so in 2008 where we had the only housing bubble in American history that burst and the stock market came down 50 in sympathy then you're talking serious damage to the economy through the income effect so we have a housing problem we have a stock market bubble like 2000 we have overpriced Commodities oil is 88.
and and uh we have of course the lowest real rates in the history of math now you have a much higher ratio of debt to GDP you have much more debt on the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve and you have much lower rates I haven't written about inflation for 20 years like when I did quarterly letters I never featured inflation uh it I didn't think it was on the radar screen it is now on the radar screen once again it's not that inflation will go roaring back to 1972 or 1982.
it's that it will always be part of the discussion from now on in my opinion instead of forgetting about it it will be spiking and irritating and falling back and then spiking again it will be part of the scenery in the way it used to be in the second half of the 20th century we're in the early stages of running out of raw materials of course we live on a finite Planet there's only a certain amount of cheap oil cheap nickel cheap copper and we're beginning to hit some of those boundaries so we're going to live in a world of bottlenecks and shortages and price spikes and we have to get used to it and learn to manage our way around it there is a lot of regulatory capture where people from business tend to run the agencies that regulate the industries so it's been a wonderful time to make money at the corporate system and the share of GDP that goes to corporate profits has steadily risen and the share going to labor has steadily Fallen this makes a dreadful cousin with with the asset class inflation that we've had they both have two things in common they they make the rich better off and they make the working class worser
댓글 0