2018年は市場に何が起ころうとしているのか。 投資家たちは極めて楽観的だ。しかし、2人のアナリストは彼らが大きなリスクを無視しているのかもしれないと危惧している。

What 2018 has in store for the markets
Investors are very optimistic. But two analysts think they may be ignoring a big risk
Dec 18th 2017by Buttonwood


I don't know what is in store for me. : 私にはどんな未来が待っているのか、知る由もない。/自分の将来がどうなるのか分からない。

WHAT is in store for economies and markets in 2018? Around this time of year, a large number of analysts and fund managers are giving their views. Among the most interesting and thoughtful approaches can be found at Absolute Strategy Research (ASR), an independent group founded by David Bowers and Ian Harnett. 

ASR adds extra depth to its analysis by contrasting its own views with those of the consensus. To do so, the group polled 229 asset allocators, managing around $6trn of assets, for their views on the outlook for economies and markets. They found a groundswell of optimism; the probability of equities being higher by the end of 2018 was 61%, and that shares will beat bonds is 70%. The allocators think there is only a 27% chance of a global recession. And they are not worried about the prospect of the Federal Reserve pushing up interest rates. 

asset allocation:資産(運用)構成,資産配分,アセット・アロケーション((資産運用においてトータル・ファンドに組み込む各アセット・クラス(資産別,例えば債券/株式/外貨建証券等)の組入比率を決定するプロセスである.どの資産にどれだけの比率で資金を投入するかをasset allocationという.目的は,特定のアセット・クラスに集中することによるリスクを回避し安定したリターンの確保にある.基本的には“分散投資の原理”に基づくリスク最小化/リターン最大化の戦略である.asset allocationの戦略目標は,変化する市場条件の中での付加価値の創造にある.先物futuresも指標連動型ファンドindex fundsも用いられる.なおasset allocationに必ず出てくるcashは文字通りの現金ではなく,米国では財務省短期債券T-billを意味する。

groundswell:(世論・支持などの)高まり; (地震・嵐による)大波.
optimism:楽天[楽観]主義; ≪…に関して≫ 楽観的であること, 楽観的傾向 
beat bond:債権にまさる

There are some disconnects within the consensus view. The first is that investors expect volatility (as measured by the Vix) to rise next year. Usually, equities struggle in such circumstances. The second disconnect is between their views on the business cycle and those on the stockmarket; since last year, their optimism about the former has reduced while their bullishness about the latter has increased. A third disconnect is between their views on high-yield or junk bonds and equities. Normally, the two asset classes perform well at the same time. But investors are unenthusiastic about junk, preferring the debt issued by emerging market governments. 

struggle:struggle to shore どうにか海岸に達する
bullishness:〘株式〙〈相場が〉上向きの, 強気の
business cycle:〈米〉景気循環

Messrs Bowers and Harnett think investors may be caught out by a slowdown in China. They are not forecasting anything dramatic; growth of 6.1% rather than the expected 6.7%. But that will drag down global growth to 3.3% from 3.5%. In addition, interest rates may rise a bit faster in America than investors expect. David Bowers says it is the “second derivative” that often drives markets—not the change, but the change in the rate of change. 

caught out by :【予期せぬ出来事・悪天候などで】窮地に陥る 

ASR points to the tightening of monetary policy that has occurred in China this year in the form of higher interest rates and slower money growth; given the normal lags, this will have its main impact in 2018. Signs have already emerged in the form of house prices in Beijing and Shanghai which were lower in October than they were a year ago. American and European companies have stepped up their capital spending given the signs of stronger global growth but they may be disappointed by the outcome in 2018. 


The other big worry is longer-term. The long era of quantitative easing (QE) has caused investors to look at asset classes in a different way. They have been deprived of their traditional source of portfolio income; government bond yields have been driven down to historic lows and have been locked away on central-bank balance sheets. Equities have been used as a source of income instead, with companies generating cash in the form of dividends and share buy-backs. And investors have sought to juice up their portfolios with alternative assets such as private equity. But these assets are illiquid, and backed by a lot of debt. So there may be a nasty shock in the next crisis when investors try to realise those illiquid assets. 

deprived:deprive the king of his power 王から権力を奪い取る
lock away:しまい込む
juice up:物事をよりおもしろくする, 活気づける; 強力にする.
private equity:未公開株式
nasty:a nasty cold ひどい風邪.


Why is America more tolerant of inequality than many rich countries?
Ignorance about the scale of the problem is part of the answer
Dec 18th 2017by C.K. | WASHINGTON, DC


MOST Americans are unenthusiastic about Republicans’ efforts to reward the richest with the biggest tax cuts. In polls taken on the eve of a vote on the government's tax bill in the Senate on December 2nd only between a quarter and a third of voters supported the plan. But in general Americans seem more willing than the inhabitants of other rich countries to tolerate inequality. 

willing:Are you willing that he (⦅主に英⦆should) be our leader? 彼が我々のリーダーになるのに異存はありませんか.

Data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) suggests that America is a relatively unequal country and that the government does comparatively little to redress the balance. The most common measure of inequality, the gini coefficient, takes a value between zero (if everyone earned exactly the same) and one (if all income were earned by one person). America’s gini before taxes and transfers was 0.47 compared with the OECD average of 0.43. After taxes and transfers, America’s gini falls to 0.39. The OECD average is 0.31. In 2014, taxes and transfers reduced American inequality by a mere 18%; this compares with 25% in Britain, 29% in Germany and 34% in France. 

redress:〈間違い・差別など〉を正す, 是正する, 改善する.

Americans appear to be less averse to inequality than citizens of other rich countries. Lars Osberg and Insa Bechert of Dalhousie University found that the most inequality-averse 10% of Americans resemble the inequality-averse in other countries, favouring an earnings ratio between CEOs and unskilled labourers of about two to one. From there the gap widens: the most inequality-tolerant Americans see the ideal ratio as 50 to one; compared with 24 to one amongst the most inequality-tolerant in Britain. In Sweden the figure is five to one. 

averse:≪…を≫ 嫌って, ≪…に≫ 気が進まなくて, 反対して

Why the difference? One reason may be that Americans don’t realise how unequal incomes are. In common with the inhabitants of other wealthy countries, most Americans believe there is too much inequality. But they underestimate just how much of it there is. The average American puts the current ratio of CEO to unskilled worker pay at thirty-to-one; their preference is for about seven-to-one. But the actual CEO-unskilled wage ratio in America is 354 to one. 

Ignorance about the scale of inequality is a global phenomenon. In a new paper in Economics and Politics Vladimir Gimpelson and Daniel Triesman write that across countries there is only a tenuous relationship between (post-transfer) inequality and perceived inequality. And research suggests that those who have a more realistic understanding of inequality worry more about it. 


Michael Norton and Sorapop Kiatpongsan of Harvard and Chulalongkorn Universities found that those who strongly agree with the idea that differences in incomes are too large estimate the CEO-worker wage gap at 12.5 to one. Those who strongly disagree estimate the gap at 6.7-to-one. There is broad agreement about the “ideal” income gap between these groups (which ranges between four to one and five to one); the difference is over what they believe the ratio actually is. 

A second reason Americans may differ in their view of inequality is that they seem not to trust the government to fix the problem—or to believe that this is part of its job. The researchers from Dalhousie University suggest that American respondents tend to be more sceptical about the role played by government in reducing inequality. And when Jan Zilinsky at the University of Chicago randomly exposed a sample of Americans to information about inequality in America, it made them depressed about the issue but no more likely to support cash transfers to the poor. Most Americans may dislike a tax bill that increases inequality. But that does not mean they would support one that did the opposite. 



swingby_blog at 19:06コメント(0) 


  情報を記憶: 評価:  顔   星



海野 恵一



Swingby 最新イベント情報
海野塾のイベントはFacebookのTeamSwingbyを参照ください。 またスウィングバイは以下のところに引っ越しました。 スウィングバイ株式会社 〒108-0023 東京都港区芝浦4丁目2−22東京ベイビュウ803号 Tel: 080-9558-4352 Fax: 03-3452-6690 E-mail: clyde.unno@swingby.jp Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/clyde.unno 海野塾: https://www.facebook.com TeamSwingby

Recent Comments
  • 今日:
  • 累計:


社長ブログ ブログランキングへ