저자: 제이미다이먼 · 외국인
요약 보기
JP모건 CEO 다이먼은 2023년 10월 인터뷰에서 IPO 시장은 여전히 열려 있으나 금리 변동에 따라 기업 상장 여부가 달라질 수 있다고 봤다. AI는 트레이딩·리스크 등 모든 프로세스에 적용되며 일부 일자리를 대체하겠지만 기술 발전은 결국 긍정적이라고 주장했다. 다만 AI의 악용(사이버 공격 등)은 가장 큰 부정적 요인이라고 지적했다. 거시경제에 대해 소비자는 여전히 양호하나 신용 상태는 정상화 중이라고 평가했다. 재정 지출 확대와 지정학적 리스크로 인플레이션 압력과 변동성이 커질 수 있고, 10년물 금리가 최대 7%까지 오를 가능성도 대비해야 한다고 언급했다. 최악의 시나리오는 저성장·고금리의 스태그플레이션이라고 봤다. 지정학 리스크로는 우크라이나 전쟁과 미·중 관계를 꼽았으며, 우크라이나 문제가 해결되기 전까지 중국 관련 긍정적 결과를 보기 어렵다고 했다. 자본 규제 강화안에 대해서는 분산투자 효과를 처벌하는 방식이라 우려되며 국제 기준과의 형평성 문제가 있다고 비판했다. 빅테크의 금융 진출에 대해서는 경쟁자이지만 실존적 위협은 아니라고 평가했다. 언급된 개별 종목 및 가격 방향에 대한 구체적 예측은 없었다.
다듬은 글
So we just saw a few tech companies go public. Instacart arm, Klaviyo. What's happening in the markets? Are we back or is this a blip? I think it's open for now for different types of companies. But you know, you see IPO markets are like an accordion. I think there are like 400 plus deals and 21 and 40 and 22 and I think something like 50 or 60 this year.
You know, obviously interest rates change a lot will help you evaluate whether they will go public, the value of cash flows or earnings and cash cows a little bit more the kind of before. But for now, it's open. Markets are healthy. You know, the economy is still okay. So it's open. Maybe not for everybody, but it's open given we're in London, you don't see the same wealth of tech companies that you've seen in Silicon Valley.
They want more big star tech companies here. Why haven't we seen that? I think it's the I look at the other way around us was the center of tech, you know, not just Silicon Valley. It's all over America. I recently came from, you know, Boise and other places. It's staggering. But so the diaspora is actually moved overseas.
You have some I was reading in Berlin and Paris with their tech startups everywhere. Now they're quite good. They're more of a going public. You know, we're the leader of taking them public here. So I think it's a great thing. And obviously you've you always had it in China and a little bit India still.
It's not in Europe, it's not quite the United States. But the fact is here is a very good thing. JPMorgan's tech footprint has gotten even bigger now that we've seen clients flood out of SVB. You bought First Republic. How big is the opportunity to be the new incumbent bank for startups and VCs? And how will you, Jamie Dimon, manage the risk differently?
Yeah, I think first of all, we didn't want to benefit in the world by that kind of thing happening, so it wasn't good for banks or good for us. HAVE having said that, when that happened, you know, we had people working around the clock literally to open those accounts. I recently came from a Sequoia thing.
I know a lot of venture capital is, you know, Saturday, Sunday's through the night to, you know, to onboard these accounts and help them through it. And, you know, one of the great we always were there. We always did okay. I always want to do better. We're going to we're adding people. I think the biggest difference Silicon Valley Bank before I get the first Republic is they did a great job at some of the stuff.
So obviously certain things they did on a macro level which weren't right. They did a lot of things, the micro level, the right, how they deal with the client, how they service them, they service them locally. So we have unbelievable products and services to bring them digital consumer subscription line financing globally, the research, you name it.
But we have to deliver to them in a way they actually like it and they want it, which is what Silicon Valley Bank did. So we're organizing around it. If you speak to a bunch of people here, you hear them talk about, you know, we're adding we just took out a whole bunch new space in Palo Alto. We hired John Chino as my top people out of Silicon Valley Bank organized around the innovation economy.
We'll get it right. I just want to make sure they're happy with us a year from now, Not just just today, but we're already leader this. That's what we do all day long. It's not it's for us, it's incremental risk. It's a slightly different kind of risk. So, you know, and this happened years ago. Would a bank lend to a non revenue company?
But the answer, you know, 20 years ago was zero. But we did Facebook. So we've learned how you can do that when you do that. But again, the risk is it's not the risk, it's the venture capital company is the venture capital partners is the then the their investee companies. It's the investee companies managements is that whole ecosystem.
And so we're just organizing around it. You've got a top notch group investigating what are they up to, What's the next level of finance you think I can unlock? Yeah, I think the most important thing is that it's air is real. We already have thousands of people doing it. Top scientists around the world, Manuel Veloso, who ran Carnegie Mellon machine learning.
It's a living, breathing thing. So people want an answer. What's going to do? It's a living, breathing thing. It's going to change. They're going to be all different types of models and different types of tools and technology. But the way to think about for us is every single process. So errors, trading, hedging, research, every app, every database you can be applying AI.
So it might be as a co-pilot, it might be to replace humans. You know, I doing all the equity hedging for us for the most part is idea generation is large language models. It's no taking while you're talking to someone and while taking notes. It may actually say to you that, you know, here's the thing of interest decline my interest in all error, all customer service, it's a little bit of everything, but it is going to replace some jobs, of course.
Yeah, but I look at folks people love. Take a deep breath. Okay? Technology's always replace jobs. Your children will live to 100 and not have cancer because of technology and literally they'll probably be working three days a week. So technology's done unbelievable things for mankind. But, you know, planes crash, former shoes get misused.
There are negatives. This one, the biggest negative in my view, is AI being used by bad people to do bad things. Think of cyber. You know, Cami Kissinger talks about warfare. But, you know, the fact and I do think, you know, eventually have legal guardrails around, it's kind of hard to do because it's new, but it will add a huge value.
And, you know, for JPMorgan, if it replaces jobs and we hope to redeploy people like at First Republic, you know, we've offered jobs to like 90% of the people they accepted. But we also, you know, we've told them, as we some of those jobs are transitory, but we hired 30,000 people a year. So we expect to be able to get them a job somewhere local in a different branch or a different function, if we can do that.
So and we'll be doing that with any dislocation that takes place, as if as a result, I, I want the Jamie Dimon forecast on the broader economy. First it was hurricanes and then it was storm clouds. And your annual letter. What's the weather now is a risk. You guys have consistently got this wrong. Okay.
I'm not giving you a forecast. I'm I'm trying to I blame myself. Okay. The US has been very strong for a while. No surprise. $5 trillion was pumped, pumped in fiscally, you know, 3 trillion, a fortune of QE. And now that's been reversed. The consumer still in good shape. They're still spending money.
They still have more money than pre Covid. It's spending down home prices gone for 15 years. Asset prices have gone for 15 years. They're in pretty good shape. And then the people are talking about deterioration. Credit is not cheer, credit card all time highs, not inflation adjusted or GDP adjusted or income adjusted.
And yeah, it deteriorated. We think it is normalizing and corporate credit's been quite good. You have a strong economy. That's the here now and all the data is a little distorted because of COVID and things like that. When you ask the question about a forecast and I don't make forecasts, I look out there and say, what are the range of outcomes from hurricane to storm clouds?
No, I put several storm clouds. I said when I said hurricane, I was correcting. So instead, the storm storm clouds dissipate. I said, no, that one may be a hurricane. We don't know what it is. Here's what they are. There are two of them that are different than other things. So we always have you know, I don't worry about the weather and I don't have to spend all the time guessing about the economy.
And that that to me is the sunnier Rainier. I don't worry about that. We run the company to serve clients through thick and thin. That's what we do to serve governments, to satisfy regulators. And that's all weather. But there are two things which are extraordinary today which may have different outcomes.
And think of them as storm clouds. We don't know if they're going to hit, when they're going to hit, what they're going to do. I'm not predicting that. But I'll tell you what I worry about. So one is the fiscal money being spent is so big. Largest in peacetime ever America and kind of around the world with already very high deficits and cute we've never had.
So I know some people think it will be uneventful. I'm not so sure I minimize. I expect volatile markets. And then you've got and then all the long term fiscal things are kind of inflationary. You know, oil prices, certain commodity prices, the green economy, you know, the restructuring of trade, you name it, I see is adding to inflation, not subtracting inflation.
So I don't think inflationary will be that, you know, keep on going down. It may not and therefore rates may go higher. But the biggest dominoes geopolitical is Ukraine, the humanitarian crisis. You know, it's a war not far from here. It's a long 600 miles, 500,000 people were killed. It's nuclear blackmail.
It's going to affect all global relationships in America and China. Trade alliances. We don't know how is going to show it either. So I just put those two things is I keep a close eye on. And then how it affects the economy is different. And when I've been talking about that is I just tell people, be prepared for higher rates and slower growth percent.
Are we really going there? And I don't know. When I said 5%, they are we going there? Yeah, it's possible. You know, which I when I talk to my board, they say, yeah, it cannot go to 7%. The answer is yes. Are there factors that would drive it, you know, higher than you know where it is today, you know, four, four, six or forced September the ten year bond now.
Yes. Is supply and demand could push I yes I'm just saying be prepared for it so and and then the worst case is stagflation, you know higher rates because you have a booming economy. There's a lot of competition for capital. It's not the same thing as stagflation. What are what are the ripple effects of the stress of that 7% rates on business, on your growth?
Well, I'm not worried about JPMorgan. Well, you know, we are prepared. We can handle 7%. We can handle 2% again, 8%. Yeah, we can handle that, too. I mean, that's I mean, that's that Risk management is not the same thing as guessing the future. What risk management? Look at the range of potential outcomes and bonuses.
So if we can have this, we can have at least one or two expect it and we can handle the in between. You know, if you bet your company and you know, one outcome. So I think all companies do that. You know, every company's got different exposures, you know, input prices, output prices, you know, some interest rates don't matter that some it's the price of mozzarella.
So what is your business? Your business is different. So but I think we don't know the effect of these things, the economy. So they may we may have a soft landing, we may have a mild recession, may have a harder recession. You know, obviously there are potential bad outcomes, though. You know, the worst one would be economically is stagflation, where you have low.
Growth, high interest rates. And obviously if that happens, you can see, you know, a lot of people struggling. Where's China on the list of risks? Or when I say geopolitical, that's the big one. It's the it's the it's the threat from Ukraine, oil and gas, food, migration, all our relationships, the most important one being China.
That is the most important for the future, the world. And then obviously, Ukraine is affecting it. And in fact, it's very hard to see really positive outcomes with China until the Ukraine war is resolved, hopefully where the Ukrainians can say they have a victory of some sort. You said you're worried about another Trump presidency.
How worried? I don't know if I've said that. I'm hoping the American public, we look, we need good American leadership. And I think that we need to explain to people why that's so important for the world. You know, and so there's all this, you know, America first. And, you know, no American president is going to say America second.
But but we need to explain why Ukraine is important to us and why American security relies on global security and why our allies rely on that. And if they can't rely on America, they will have to rely on someone else. And so I just think it's very important. You know, Bob Gates writes in his book The Exercise of Power about the symphony of power and all the soft things, not the military, which we've overused, but diplomacy, development, finance, education, communication, all, and obviously economic trade, investment, all those things.
And I think we need a better job in that. We just avoided another US government shutdown. Now there's talk of a McCarthy ouster. Do you have a message for anyone in Congress? Look, I. We need good policymakers. You know, shutdown is a bad idea. I'm grateful they came up with a solution. You know, democracies, by their nature, mean compromise.
That's what a democracy is. And there are a lot when I go to Washington, you know, you see in the press all the time the bad parts there. Also some great Congress folks, great senators who want to get things done in the interest of United States. And I'm glad they did this particular one. Of course, you know, 40 days, 45 days from now.
And, you know, Kevin McCarthy, the speaker of the House, and I wish him the best. I've known him for many years, and he's got a tough hand. He's peace. He's got a tough year, but he's doing okay so far. Regulators have proposed new capital rules that banks have said will make it tougher for Americans to get a mortgage.
But I'm curious, when you look across the firm, what businesses are going to have the biggest impact? Break it down. First of all, it's 100,000 pages long. So you have to go by product, by service, by country, by cross border, by type. And then there's operational risk thing. So, you know, we're you know, I don't think it's all the right stuff.
I don't I don't think it's very comprehensive or well thought through, but let them do what they want at this point. North International, as you may not know, if you're an American, we have 30% more capital than European banks the way it's currently constructed. What happens to the international requirements, like when we have like international level playing field and stuff like that?
When you get to the specifics, it really matters the ultimate rules about mortgages and small business loans, etc. In general, you know, it makes me worried. I don't like about it. For example, it punishes diversification, operating risk capital and G SIFI. And diversification is one of the true free lunches for a bank that protects it.
And I don't understand why they would do that. And I just you know, we're going to be responding. Hopefully it'll be modified and and thoughtfully done for international purposes. And mostly, you know, America's got the best financial system the world's ever seen. And, you know, that includes hedge funds and private equity and private capital and things like that.
But this is you know, I said that private equity hedge funds are dancing in the streets and this time to be quite public about it, because this is going to push a lot of stuff at the banking system. And if that's what the regulars want, so be it. Is that good for America? I don't know. We've gone from 7300 public companies in 1996 to 4500 today.
Is that we wanted. It should have been 14,000. Did you want a lot of credit to move private? You know, maybe they did. And, you know, then they accomplish their goals. The biggest tech companies prop up a huge chunk of the S&P. Is big tech too big to fail? I think that's a too broader question. You know, I think in any industry where you say too big to fail, which I've lost touch with, that really means anymore because remember, car companies are bailed out and these things are bailed out.
And, you know, I don't understand. They should ask what they want. If the regulars don't want a bank to ever fail again. Then we should do ABCD. If that's true, I didn't think that was the goal. I think Dodd-Frank actually accomplish most of the goals, which is dramatically reduce the risk, create liquidity, capital, stuff like that.
So. And big tech, you've got to be very specific. You know, sometimes companies misuse their position and sometimes they don't. Sometimes regulators capture and sometimes they don't, you know, But they're powerful, you know, And we have to deal. I've been writing about, you know, big tech coming to our business.
We got fintech, but we also have big tech and they will embed payment systems in there. So I'm going to white label banks, kind of what Apple did. You know, they have the right to do that. I'm not against that. I would be against unfair use of their position to dominance in a business. Well, Apple is going deeper into financial services.
You worry about the Bank of Apple. I wrote about it. I wrote about it like five years ago. You know how like we're like, what is a bank? Well, I'm going to compete. So they have a they have a tough competitor. But, you know, they hold money, move money. They you can put money in it, basically. You know, Mark is but a white labeled a checking account credit card, you know, all these things.
Yeah, they're a formidable competitor. You know, we also partner with them. But I'm very used to partnering and competing with lots of people. No existential threat. I don't think it's an existential threat, but I think if we were complacent about it. Yes. Jamie Dimon. We're here to talk about tech. I'll see you on stage. Jamie Dimon, chairman, CEO of JPMorgan, thank you.
Comments 0