Bottom-line: ์ด๋ฒ ๋ฌผ๊ฐ์งํ ์์น์ ์ฃผํ ๋ถ๋ฌธ์ ๊ธฐ์ฌ๊ฐ ํฌ์ง๋ง, ์ค์์ํ์ด ์ด ๋ถ๋ฌธ์ ์ ์ธ ํ ๋ฌผ๊ฐ๋ฅผ ๋ฐ๋ก ๋ณด๋ฏ, ํํํ๋ ํญ๋ชฉ์ด๋ ์ ์ด ํต์ฌ์.
The biggest contributor to the gain in prices for April was housing. But remember that this is a lagging indicator -- the statisticians are only now incorporating changes in rates that happened months ago, back to 2022. Thatโs one reason why Powell looks at a core gauge, excluding housing.
The biggest contributor to the gain in prices for April was housing. But remember that this is a lagging indicator -- the statisticians are only now incorporating changes in rates that happened months ago, back to 2022. Thatโs one reason why Powell looks at a core gauge, excluding housing.
Bottom-line: ์ค์์ํ ํ์ ์์ฅ์ด ๊ฐ์ฅ ๋์ฌ๊ฒจ๋ณด๋ ํต์ฌ ๋ฌผ๊ฐ ์งํ๋ 3์ ์๊ฐ 0.4% ์์น์์ 4์ ์๊ฐ 0.1% ์์น์ผ๋ก ๋ฌผ๊ฐ ์์นํญ์ด ๋ํ ๋จ.
Application specialist Owen Minde shows us a breakdown of month-over-month that Supercore CPI figure (i.e., core services excluding rent of primary residence and owners equivalent rent of residence). The April number is +0.1%, down from +0.4% in March.
Application specialist Owen Minde shows us a breakdown of month-over-month that Supercore CPI figure (i.e., core services excluding rent of primary residence and owners equivalent rent of residence). The April number is +0.1%, down from +0.4% in March.
Bottom-line: ์ค์์ํ์ด ๊ฐ์ฅ ์ ํธํ๋ ํต์ฌ๋ฌผ๊ฐ์งํ์ ์ ๋
๋๋น ์์น๋ฅ ๋ 3์ 5.8% ์ฆ๊ฐ์์ 4์ 5.1% ์ฆ๊ฐ๋ก ๋ํ๋จ. ์ด๋ ํญ๊ณต์ ํฌํจํ ์ด์ก ๋ถ๋ฌธ ๊ธฐ์ฌ๋ ํ๋ฝ ๋๋ฌธ์.
Supercore year-on-year comes down significantly from 5.8% to 5.1 in April, application specialist Owen Minde notes, largely due to airline base effects bringing down the โTransportationโ contribution from 3% to 2.5%.
Supercore year-on-year comes down significantly from 5.8% to 5.1 in April, application specialist Owen Minde notes, largely due to airline base effects bringing down the โTransportationโ contribution from 3% to 2.5%.
Bottom-line: ์ค๊ตญ ์ ๋ถ๊ฐ ์ธ๊ตญ์ธ ํฌ์๋ฅผ ์ ์นํ๋ ค๋ ๋ชฉํ๋ฅผ ์๋ฐํ๊ธฐ๋ ํ์ง๋ง, ์ค์ ํฌ์ ์ ์น๋ฅผ ํตํด ๋ํ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ๋ง๋ จํด์ผ ํ๋ ์ค๊ตญ ๊ธฐ์
๋ค๋ ๋ง์ ์ํ, ๋๋ฌธ์ ์ค๊ตญ ๊ธฐ์
๋ค์ ์ฌํด ์ธ๊ตญ์ธ ํฌ์๋ฅผ ์ ์นํ๊ธฐ ์ํ ๋ค์ํ ํ๋์ ํ๊ณ ์์. ๋ถํํ๋ ํฌ์์๋ค์ ์์ธก ๋ถ๊ฐ๋ฅํ ์์ญ์ ์ค๊ตญ ์ ์ฑ
๋ณํ์ ๊ฒฝ์ ์ฑ์ฅ์ ๋ํ ์๊ตฌ์ฌ์ผ๋ก ํฌ์๋ฅผ ์กฐ์ฌํ๊ณ ์์.
Chinaโs unpredictable policy making is deterring foreign investment that the countryโs cash-strapped cities are desperate to entice. Local officials are cold calling foreign entrepreneurs and bringing roadshows overseas as they seek to bolster coffers depleted by years of pandemic spending and a cratering property market. They also face pressure from the central government to boost investment in what the commerce ministry has dubbed the โYear of Investing in China". Their efforts are being met with a lukewarm reception from business communities outside China. While memorandums of understanding have been signed and some deals announced, many potential investors remain cautious about the countryโs economic growth and wary of unexpected policy shifts.
Chinaโs unpredictable policy making is deterring foreign investment that the countryโs cash-strapped cities are desperate to entice. Local officials are cold calling foreign entrepreneurs and bringing roadshows overseas as they seek to bolster coffers depleted by years of pandemic spending and a cratering property market. They also face pressure from the central government to boost investment in what the commerce ministry has dubbed the โYear of Investing in China". Their efforts are being met with a lukewarm reception from business communities outside China. While memorandums of understanding have been signed and some deals announced, many potential investors remain cautious about the countryโs economic growth and wary of unexpected policy shifts.
Bottom-line: ํ์ด๊ฑฐ ๊ธ๋ก๋ฒ ์์ฐ์ด์ฉ์์ ํฌ์ ์ค์ธ ๋น์์ฅ ์์ฐ๋ค์ ์์ต ์คํ์ด ์ด๋ ค์์ง์ ๋ฐ๋ผ, 2์ฐจ ์์ฅ์์ ๋งค๊ฐ์ ๊ฒํ ์ค์ธ ๊ฒ์ผ๋ก ์๋ ค์ง. ์ฐ ์ด ๊ธฐ์ค 510์ต ๋ฌ๋ฌ ์๋น์ ์์ฐ์ด ์ ์ ๊ธฐ์
์ ํฌ์๋์ด ์๋ ๊ฒ์ผ๋ก ์๋ ค์ก๋๋ฐ, ์ด์ ๊ฐ์ ์์ฐ๋ค์ ๋งค๊ฐํ๊ธฐ ์ํด ์ต๊ทผ ์๋ฌธ ์ธ๋ ฅ์ ๊ณ ์ฉํจ. ์ด๊ฐ์ ๋ฌธ์ ๋ ๋์ข
์ ์
๊ณ ์ด์ฉ์ฌ๋ค์ด ๋์ผํ๊ฒ ๊ฒช๊ณ ์์ผ๋ฉฐ, ๊ทธ ์ด๋ค ์๊ธฐ๋ณด๋ค ์ด๋ ค์ด ๋์ ์ ์ง๋ฉดํด ์๋ค๊ณ ํ ์ ์์. ์ด๋ค์ ์ ์ ๊ธฐ์
๋ค์ ๋ง์ ๋์ ๋น ๋ฅด๊ฒ ํฌ์
ํ๋ฉฐ ๊ธฐ์
๊ฐ์น๋ฅผ ํฌ๊ฒ ๋์ฌ๋จ์ง๋ง, ๊ธฐ์ ์ฃผ ์ค์ฌ์ ํ๊ฒฉ ์์ ํฐ ํผํด๋ฅผ ์
์ ์ํ์. ํด๋น ์ด์ฉ์ฌ๋ ์๋
ํฌ์ํ ์ ์ ๊ธฐ์
๋ค์ ๊ฐ์น๋ฅผ 33% ์๊ฐํ์ผ๋ฉฐ, ์์ฅ๋๋ ๊ธฐ์
๋ค ์๋ ์ค์ด๋ฌ์ ๋ฐ๋ผ 2์ฐจ ์์ฅ์ ํตํ ์ถ๊ตฌ ์ ๋ต์ ๊ณ ๋ คํ๊ณ ์์. ์ด๋ ์๊ธ์ ์ฌ๋ถ๋ฐฐํ๊ฑฐ๋ ๋น ๋ฅธ ์์ผ ๋ด ํ๋ณต์ด ์ด๋ ค์ธ ๊ฒ์ผ๋ก ๋ณด์ด๋ ํ์ฌ๋ฅผ ๋งค๊ฐํ๊ธฐ ์ํ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ผ๋ก ํ๋จ๋๊ณ ์์.
Tiger Global Management is seeking to offload hundreds of millions of dollars worth of private companies into the secondary market, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The vast majority of assets at Chase Colemanโs firm, which managed $51 billion at the beginning of the year, is in startups. The investment firm has hired an adviser to explore options to sell a portion of that, the Financial Times reported Sunday. Like many of its peers, Tiger Global is grappling with one of the most challenging periods that venture investors have faced in years. They poured money at a rapid pace into splashy startups, bidding up their valuations, only to get burned in last yearโs tech swoon. Tiger Global marked down its venture investments by about 33% last year, resulting in a $23 billion decline in value. Now, as fewer companies are going public, investors are turning to the secondary market to find an exit. They may seek liquidity for several reasons: to provide distributions to clients, fund add-on investments to existing portfolio companies or to ditch companies they donโt believe will bounce back fast enough. Tiger Global has invested in hundreds of venture-backed companies, including ByteDance, Snyk, Discord and Chime.
Tiger Global Management is seeking to offload hundreds of millions of dollars worth of private companies into the secondary market, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The vast majority of assets at Chase Colemanโs firm, which managed $51 billion at the beginning of the year, is in startups. The investment firm has hired an adviser to explore options to sell a portion of that, the Financial Times reported Sunday. Like many of its peers, Tiger Global is grappling with one of the most challenging periods that venture investors have faced in years. They poured money at a rapid pace into splashy startups, bidding up their valuations, only to get burned in last yearโs tech swoon. Tiger Global marked down its venture investments by about 33% last year, resulting in a $23 billion decline in value. Now, as fewer companies are going public, investors are turning to the secondary market to find an exit. They may seek liquidity for several reasons: to provide distributions to clients, fund add-on investments to existing portfolio companies or to ditch companies they donโt believe will bounce back fast enough. Tiger Global has invested in hundreds of venture-backed companies, including ByteDance, Snyk, Discord and Chime.
Bottom-line: ํ๋ํฌ๋ ๋ถ์งํ ์ค์ ๋ฐํ์ ํจ๊ป ์ฌํด ๋งค์ถ ์ฑ์ฅ์ ๋ํ ์ ๋ง์ ๋น์ด ์ ๋
๊ณผ ์ ์ฌํ๋ค ํ๋ ๊ฒ๊ณผ ๋ฌ๋ฆฌ ์ ๋
๋๋น -5% ๊ฐ์๋ก ์ ์ ํจ. ๊ณผ๊ฑฐ ์ฃผํ ๊ฐ๊ฒฉ ์์น๊ณผ ๊ฐ์ข
๋ณด์กฐ๊ธ ์ง๊ธ, ๋ฐ์ด๋ฌ์ค ๋ํ์ฐ์ผ๋ก ์ธํด ์ฃผ๊ฑฐ์ง์ ๋จธ๋ฌด๋ฅด๋ ์๊ฐ ์ฆ๊ฐ๊ฐ ๋ณตํฉ์ ์ผ๋ก ๋ง๋ ํญ๋ฐ์ ์ธ ์ธํ
๋ฆฌ์ด ์์๊ฐ ์ฑ์ฅ์ ๊ฒฌ์ธํ๋ค๋ฉด, ๊ทผ๋๋ ๋ฌผ๊ฐ ๋ฐ ๊ธ๋ฆฌ ์์น ์์ ์๋น์ ์์๊ฐ ํฌ๊ฒ ๋ํ๋๊ณ ์๊ธฐ ๋๋ฌธ์ด๋ผ ์ค๋ช
ํ์.
Home Depot Inc. cut its outlook for the year after first-quarter sales dropped more than expected, a sign that economic uncertainty is leading to a pullback in home improvement spending. Comparable sales are now forecast to decline as much as 5% this year, following a bad start to the year affected by lumber deflation and poor weather, the company said Tuesday. Home Depot, which previously predicted sales would remain flat this year, said demand is softening more than it had expected. The first-quarter results show the companyโs performance is starting to lag after several years of soaring home-improvement spending that was sparked by a booming housing market and stimulus payments that let consumers invest in their homes during pandemic restrictions. That binge has now begun to slow amid rising inflation and interest rates.
Home Depot Inc. cut its outlook for the year after first-quarter sales dropped more than expected, a sign that economic uncertainty is leading to a pullback in home improvement spending. Comparable sales are now forecast to decline as much as 5% this year, following a bad start to the year affected by lumber deflation and poor weather, the company said Tuesday. Home Depot, which previously predicted sales would remain flat this year, said demand is softening more than it had expected. The first-quarter results show the companyโs performance is starting to lag after several years of soaring home-improvement spending that was sparked by a booming housing market and stimulus payments that let consumers invest in their homes during pandemic restrictions. That binge has now begun to slow amid rising inflation and interest rates.
Bottom-line: ์๋งคํ๋งค ์งํ๋ ์ฌ๋ฌ ์ธก๋ฉด์์ ๊ฒฝ๊ธฐ์นจ์ฒด๋ผ๋ ์ ์น์ฌ์๊ฐ ๋ฌธ ์์ ์์ฑ์ด๊ณ ์์ง ์๋จ๊ฑธ ์๋ ค์คฌ์ง๋ง, ๋ง์ฐฌ๊ฐ์ง ๊ธ๋ฆฌ์ธํ ๋ํ ๋ ์์ ์์ง ์๋จ ์ฌ์ค์ ์๋ ค์ค. ๊ทธ๋ฌ๋ฏ๋ก ๋๊ฐ ์ด ์งํ๋ฅผ ๊ธฐ๋ปํ ๊น ์๋ฌธ์ ๊ฐ์ง๋ ๊ฒ์.
Well, I guess some more of the recessionary concerns have been assuaged. While headline retail sales were lower than expected at +0.4% (vs a forecast rise of 0.8%), the important core aggregates such as control-group sales handily bested expectations, rising 0.7%. Meanwhile, the revisions were revised again, though the aggregate impact looks relatively modest. The three-month annualized gain in control-group sales is 4.7% -- so much for negative growth!-- which hardly suggests that consumers have hit a brick wall and that the economic Grim Reaper is at the door. Is it enough to entice the Fed to hike again? No, but it certainly suggests that rate cuts are far, far from an imminent prospect, which is not welcome news to anyone trading like they are.
Well, I guess some more of the recessionary concerns have been assuaged. While headline retail sales were lower than expected at +0.4% (vs a forecast rise of 0.8%), the important core aggregates such as control-group sales handily bested expectations, rising 0.7%. Meanwhile, the revisions were revised again, though the aggregate impact looks relatively modest. The three-month annualized gain in control-group sales is 4.7% -- so much for negative growth!-- which hardly suggests that consumers have hit a brick wall and that the economic Grim Reaper is at the door. Is it enough to entice the Fed to hike again? No, but it certainly suggests that rate cuts are far, far from an imminent prospect, which is not welcome news to anyone trading like they are.
Docent: ํฉ๋ฆฌ์ ์ธ ์ด์ ๋ก ์ค๋ช
๋์ง ์๋ ์ผ์ด ์ง์๋๋ค๋ฉด, ๊ทธ๊ฒ์ ์ฐ๋ฆฌ๊ฐ ์ค์ํ ๋ฌด์ธ๊ฐ๋ฅผ ๋์น๊ณ ์๋จ ์ข์ ์ ํธ๋ผ ํ ์ ์์. ์ข
๊ตญ์ ์ผ๋ก ํ์์ ์ดํดํ๊ฒ ๋๋ ํต์ฌ์ ๋งค์ฐ ๊ฐ๋จํ์ง๋ง, ๊ทธ ๊ณผ์ ์ ์ด๋ฅด๊ธฐ๊ฐ ๋ํ ๋งค์ฐ ์ด๋ ต๋ค๋ ๊ฒ๋ ์ฌ์ค์. ์ด๋ฐ ํ์ ์ค ํ๋๊ฐ ๋ฐ๋ก ๋ง๋ํ ์์ ์ฑ๊ถ ์ ๋ฌผ ๊ณต๋งค๋ ํฌ์ง์
์ด๋ผ ํ ์ ์๋๋ฐ, ์๋
๊ณผ ๊ฐ์ ๊ฒฝ์ฐ ๊ธ๋ฆฌ๊ฐ ์ง์์ ์ผ๋ก ์์นํ๊ธฐ ๋๋ฌธ์ ๋ง๊ธฐ๊ฐ ๊ธด ์ฑ๊ถ์ ๋ํ ๊ณต๋งค๋ ํฌ์ง์
์ด ํฉ๋ฆฌ์ ์ด์์ง๋ง, ์ฌํด์ ํ๊ฒฝ์์๋ ๋์ ํ ์ค๋ช
ํ๊ธฐ ์ด๋ ค์ด ์ํ์. ๊ทธ๋ ๋ค๋ฉด, ์ฐ๋ฆฌ๋ ์ธ๊ณผ๊ด๊ณ์ ๋ํด ๋ค์ ํ ๋ฒ ์ดํด๋ด์ผ ํ์ง ์์๊น? ๋ณดํต ์ฐ๋ฆฌ๋ ์ฑ๊ถ ์ ๋ฌผ์ ํฌ๊ธฐ์ ํฌ์ง์
๊ณผ ๊ณต๋ชจ ํ๋์ ํฌ์ง์
์ ๋ฐ๋ก ๋ถ๋ฆฌํ ๋ฟ ์๋๋ผ ์๋ก ๋ฐ๋ ์์ญ์ ์๋ค๊ณ ์๊ฐํ๋๋ฐ, 2006๋
์ดํ 10๋
๊ตญ์ฑ ์ ๋ฌผ์ ๋ํ ๋ ์ง๋จ ๊ฐ ์๊ด๊ด๊ณ๋ -0.89๋ก ๊ฑฐ์ ๋ฐ๋น๋กํ๋ ๋ชจ์ต์ ๋ณด์. ์ด๋ ์ด์ฉ๋ฉด, ํค์งํ๋์ ๋๊ท๋ชจ ์ฑ๊ถ ๊ณต๋งค๋๊ฐ ์๋๋ผ, ์ค์ ๊ณต๋ชจ ์ฑ๊ถ ํ๋ ๋งค๋์ ๋ค์ ๋๊ท๋ชจ ์๋งค์์ผ ์๋ ์๋ค๋ ๋ป์. ํค์งํ๋์ ๊ณต๋ชจํ๋๋ฅผ ์ด๋ถ๋ฒ์ ์ผ๋ก ๋๋๋ ํ๊ณ์ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ๋ก ์ ๋ฒ์ด๋๋ณด๋ฉด, ์ต๊ทผ์ ๊ธ์ฆํ๋ ์ฑ๊ถ ์ ๋ฌผ ๋ฏธ๊ฒฐ์ ์ฝ์ ์ ๋ํด ์ดํดํ ์ ์๊ฒ ๋จ.
Whenever you see a persistent anomaly that appears to defy rational explanation, thatโs usually a good sign that youโre missing something important. Sometimes the rationale ends up being quite simple, but on other occasions there a lot of layers to unpeel before uncovering the truth. The enormous short in Treasury bond futures across the curve is one such phenomenon thatโs a little difficult to take at face value. The usual go-to explanation doesnโt hold much water, either. In truth, the big short looks like a combination of carry maximization on the part of asset managers and some arbitrary categorization choices by the CFTC. Itโs a question Iโve been asked from time to time this year, including as recently as yesterday: Whatโs behind the big bond-futures short position? Over the last year, the combined speculative short position (defined as non-commercial net shorts in the legacy CFTC Commitment of Traders report) across the bond futures complex has exploded, and now sits at a record of nearly 3.6 million 10-year futures equivalents. This proliferation made sense last year when bonds were tanking and short duration was an obvious trade. So if basis trading isnโt that attractive and the position makes little sense from a macro thematic or P/L management perspective, whatโs going on here? I suspect that the chain of causality is being misidentified. The driving force is not the desire to be short bond futures on the part of speculators, but rather the desire to be long on the part of asset managers and commercial users. Certainly the trading of futures has exploded recently, as we can see from the aggregate open interest of the entire bond futures complex. It is virtually an accounting identity that โleveraged fundsโ are the inverse of โasset managersโ in the positioning data; since 2006, the correlation of the two cohortsโ positions in 10-year futures is -0.89. Itโs somewhat lower if we look at the weekly change in positions (-0.67), but still quite significant. In this case, I suspect that โthe big shortโ is essentially a residual of the real driver of bond futures positioning. In truth, the real driver at hand is not the hedge fund short ... itโs the massive bond-manager long.
Whenever you see a persistent anomaly that appears to defy rational explanation, thatโs usually a good sign that youโre missing something important. Sometimes the rationale ends up being quite simple, but on other occasions there a lot of layers to unpeel before uncovering the truth. The enormous short in Treasury bond futures across the curve is one such phenomenon thatโs a little difficult to take at face value. The usual go-to explanation doesnโt hold much water, either. In truth, the big short looks like a combination of carry maximization on the part of asset managers and some arbitrary categorization choices by the CFTC. Itโs a question Iโve been asked from time to time this year, including as recently as yesterday: Whatโs behind the big bond-futures short position? Over the last year, the combined speculative short position (defined as non-commercial net shorts in the legacy CFTC Commitment of Traders report) across the bond futures complex has exploded, and now sits at a record of nearly 3.6 million 10-year futures equivalents. This proliferation made sense last year when bonds were tanking and short duration was an obvious trade. So if basis trading isnโt that attractive and the position makes little sense from a macro thematic or P/L management perspective, whatโs going on here? I suspect that the chain of causality is being misidentified. The driving force is not the desire to be short bond futures on the part of speculators, but rather the desire to be long on the part of asset managers and commercial users. Certainly the trading of futures has exploded recently, as we can see from the aggregate open interest of the entire bond futures complex. It is virtually an accounting identity that โleveraged fundsโ are the inverse of โasset managersโ in the positioning data; since 2006, the correlation of the two cohortsโ positions in 10-year futures is -0.89. Itโs somewhat lower if we look at the weekly change in positions (-0.67), but still quite significant. In this case, I suspect that โthe big shortโ is essentially a residual of the real driver of bond futures positioning. In truth, the real driver at hand is not the hedge fund short ... itโs the massive bond-manager long.
Bottom-line: Debate Signs.
A public Fed debate. James Bullard and Neel Kashkari pushed for additional hikes, with the former expecting "two more moves this year." Others were more cautious: Mary Daly declined to endorse a June pause, emphasized that monetary policy operates with a lag, and said tighter credit conditions could be worth "a couple" of hikes. Raphael Bostic backed holding next month, while Thomas Barkin said he won't pre-judge what the FOMC does.
A public Fed debate. James Bullard and Neel Kashkari pushed for additional hikes, with the former expecting "two more moves this year." Others were more cautious: Mary Daly declined to endorse a June pause, emphasized that monetary policy operates with a lag, and said tighter credit conditions could be worth "a couple" of hikes. Raphael Bostic backed holding next month, while Thomas Barkin said he won't pre-judge what the FOMC does.
Bottom-line: AI BOOM!
Nvidia surged more than 25% in late trading after it forecast sales of $11 billion for the July quarter, far above the $7.18 billion consensus. The blowout results are a sign the world's most valuable chipmaker will prosper as AI takes hold, driving demand for new gear. The earnings buoyed Nasdaq futures, with TSMC, AMD and Marvell all getting a boost.
Nvidia surged more than 25% in late trading after it forecast sales of $11 billion for the July quarter, far above the $7.18 billion consensus. The blowout results are a sign the world's most valuable chipmaker will prosper as AI takes hold, driving demand for new gear. The earnings buoyed Nasdaq futures, with TSMC, AMD and Marvell all getting a boost.
Docent: ์ญ์ฌ์ ์ผ๋ก ๋ณผ ๋ ๊ธฐ์ ์ฃผ๋ฅผ ์ค์ฌ์ผ๋ก ํ ์ฃผ์์์ฅ ๋ ๋ฆฌ๊ฐ ๋น๋์ ํผํ ์ ์ด ์์๊ณ , ์ด๋ฒ ๋ํ ๊ทธ๋ฐ ์ํ์ ์์. ํฌ์๋ฅผ ํจ์ ์์ด ์ํ์ ๊ด๋ฆฌํ๋ ๊ฒ๋ ์ค์ํ์ง๋ง, ์ง๊ฐ๊ณผ ํ์ค์ ์ฐจ์ด๋ฅผ ์ ํํ๊ฒ ์ธ์งํ๊ณ ์๋ ๊ฒ๋ ์ค์ํจ. ๋๋ฌธ์ ์ฅ๋ฌธ์ ๊ธ์์ ํฅ๋ฏธ๋ก์ด ๋ถ๋ถ์ ๋ฐ์ทํ์ฌ ์์ฝํ๊ณ ์ ํจ.
1) ์ธ๊ณต์ง๋ฅ ๊ธฐ์ ์ ํ๋๋ก ํ ๊ธฐ์ ์ฃผ ๋ ๋ฆฌ๊ฐ ์ง์๋๋ ์ค์, ์ญ์ฌ์ ์ผ๋ก ์ด์ฒ๋ผ ์์์ ์ฃผ์์ ์ํด ์์ฅ์ด ๊ฒฌ์ธ๋์ด ์ค๋ฅธ ์ ์ด ๋งค์ฐ ๋๋ฌผ์๊ธฐ ๋๋ฌธ์ ์ด ํ์์ ์ซ์ดํ๋ ์ด๋ค์ด ํ์ฐฝ ๋ ๋ค๊ณ ์์.
Rarely does a tech-powered stock rally come along that isnโt pilloried for the fragility of its foundation. Now, with a snowballing craze for artificial intelligence pretty much propping up the market by itself, the haters are out in force. Never has so much been owed to so few when it comes to the recent upward arc of indexes like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100, upon which trillions of passively invested dollars ride.
Rarely does a tech-powered stock rally come along that isnโt pilloried for the fragility of its foundation. Now, with a snowballing craze for artificial intelligence pretty much propping up the market by itself, the haters are out in force. Never has so much been owed to so few when it comes to the recent upward arc of indexes like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100, upon which trillions of passively invested dollars ride.