Stewart Richardson , 首席投资官,2015.02.02
当美联储在上周提高其对美国经济评估时，我们有点困惑。12月至1月之间肯定发生了什么事让他们改善看法，而这件事只能因为美国消费者将会支付更低的能源价格，他们期望消费者将节省下来的资金用于其他消费。尽管企业方面消息不利好，但是他们或许仍相信就业率会上升。
目前，我们看到了美国经济中的两股竞争力量。一方面，消费者以及非能源企业会得益于较低的能源价格。如果他们将这笔意外利润用于国内消费，那么我们有很好的理由相信美国经济会继续很好地发展下去。另一方面，自从金融危机以来，能源领域很好地促进了美国经济的发展，创造了很多高薪工作并产生了极好的乘数效应。此外，直到去年夏天，美元一直被低估，而这也使跨国公司收益。随着油价的暴跌以及美元将近上升了20%，跨国企业现在成了美国经济的潜在风险。
有很多评论员认为，美联储政策已经造成了金融泡沫。我们认为，泡沫的一部分有可能包含高管在上市公司的利润。意思是说，企业高管通过购股权可以获得大部分的报酬，因此，他们会想尽一切办法来促使所在公司的股价上升。最明显的机制是股份回购，但是每季度的收益预期竞争，收入的不断报告vs公认会计准则收入，缺乏资本支出（意思是企业短期负收益，但是长期收益会改善），以及灵活使用劳动力政策也加速了报酬泡沫现象。如果想进一步了解，Andrew Smithers对这一问题进行了详细描述，你可以参照他最近出版的书以及他在英国《金融时报》的博客。
所以，我们最关心的是，能源领域的破产以及高管利润泡沫的破裂是否会在美国消费者有充分时间将能源节省下来的资金用于消费之前损害美国经济。上周我们认为美国经济正面临下行风险。周五发布的美国经济预报显示或许这早已发生。尽管预期2015第一季度以及第二季度将会相对增长2.8%~2.9%，但是2014年第四季度的增长从第三季度的5%下降到2.6%。我们认为风险有可能会轻易地推翻这些预期。
非金融公司在近年来一直是股票的重要买家。因此，如果经济放缓，回购突然降低，那么这就很容易造成股票市场的走低。事实上，标普尔500已经没有超过上五个月的高点，纽约证券交易所也回到了11个月以前的水平，我们认为市场已经失去动力，现在比起2011年更加脆弱。
如果股市在今年的一小时图中进入熊市，那么随着实体经济潜在的负收益循环，经济衰退的风险将会急剧上升。就是说，美国消费者以前混淆了预期，那么他们可以在2小时图上拯救，但是如果那样，将会产生多大的损失？
对于我们来说，我们的投资组合仍然保持守势。我们认为美联储过于乐观，今年将继续被迫保持利率不变，这有助于外汇以及证券市场，这也就是我们最近的投资焦点放在实际收益回报基金的原因。美国的股市十分脆弱，相比来说，我们更喜欢欧洲以及日本的股市。外汇方面，我们已经看到了14家央行的货币战争，日央行已经放宽货币政策（丹麦两周内三次！）。这对于活跃的账户经理，比如我们来说，是很好的交易机会，这也是我们迄今为止如何定位于外汇策略的方法。
The US Consumer is Vital for Equity Markets
February 02, 2015
Stewart Richardson
Chief Investment Officer
We were somewhat bemused when the Fed upgraded their assessment of the US economy at their FOMC meeting last week. Events must have occurred between December and January for them to announce this upgrade and it can only be because they expect the consumer to spend the “tax cut” from lower energy prices. They may also believe that employment gains will continue despite news flow from the corporate sector that would indicate otherwise.
At the moment, we see two competing forces within the US economy. On the one hand, the consumer and non-energy corporate sector are much better off because of lower energy prices. If they choose to spend this windfall on domestic consumption, then there is very good reason to believe the US economy will continue to muddle through quite nicely. On the other hand, the energy sector has certainly boosted the US economy since the financial crisis and has created lots of high paying jobs with wonderful multiplier effects. Furthermore, up until last summer, it can be argued that the US Dollar was undervalued and this also benefitted the multi-national corporate sector. With the collapse in the price of oil and a near 20% rise in the US Dollar, the corporate sector is now a potential risk for the US economy.
There are enough commentators that argue whether Fed policies have created a financial bubble. We think that part of this bubble may include executive remuneration in the quoted corporate sector. By this, we mean that executives receive the vast majority of their overall compensation via share options and, as a result, do everything in their power to boost the share price of the companies they work for. The obvious mechanism is share buybacks (see first chart below) but the gaming of earnings expectations every quarter, the strenuous use of reporting vs GAAP earnings, the lack of capex (which is earnings negative short-term but would improve corporate performance long-term) and the use of flexible labour policies also contribute to a remuneration bubble phenomenon. For those who want to read more, Andrew Smithers has written extensively on this subject in both his FT blog and his recent book.
So, our biggest concern is whether the bursting of the energy sector alongside a bursting of the executive remuneration bubble will hurt the economy before the US consumer really has time to spend their windfall from lower gas prices. We argued mid last week that the risks to the US economy were on the downside. The advance estimate of US GDP released on Friday indicates that this may be happening already. Growth slowed from 5% in 3Q to 2.6% in 4Q, and although consensus estimates have growth in 1Q and 2Q to 2.8% and 2.9% respectively, we think the risk could easily tip to the downside on these estimates.
Non-financial companies have been THE major buyer of equities in recent years (see chart below). Therefore, if buybacks suddenly slow as the economy stumbles then this could easily cause equity markets to correct lower. In fact, with the S&P now no higher than in the last five months and the NYSE composite the same level as 11 months ago, we argue that the market is losing momentum and is now more vulnerable than since 2011
If the equity market does enter a bear market in 1H this year, then with the potential negative feedback loop to the real economy, the risks of a recession escalate sharply. That said, the US consumer has confounded expectations before and could come to the rescue in 2H this year but how much, if any, damage will be done by then?
For our part, we remain very defensive in our portfolios. We think that the Fed is too optimistic and will be forced to keep rates on hold this year which should help rates and bond markets which is where we have focused recent investment in the RMG Real Return Fund. Equity markets are vulnerable in the US and we (marginally) prefer European and Japanese equities where the Central Banks are printing. In FX, we are absolutely seeing currency wars with 14 central banks having eased policy so far in January (Denmark three times in two weeks!). This should be fertile ground for active managers such as ourselves and is how we have positioned the RMG FX Strategy so far this year.
本文翻译由兄弟财经提供，文章来源：http://www.marketviews.com/us-consumer-vital-equity-markets/