최근 시장 금리 동향 분석

### 최근 미국 채권 시장 동향 및 제조업 데이터 분석
* 📈 최근 시장 금리는 **채권 발행 증가와 잠재적인 트럼프 정책에 대한 우려**로 인해 약 **4.4%까지 상승**했습니다.
* 🏛 채권 시장은 무역 장벽과 재정 적자 등 비용이 많이 드는 정책으로 인해 **구조적 인플레이션에 대한 기대감**을 반영하고 있습니다.
* 🔀 최근의 금리 변동성은 일시적인 것으로 보이며, **트럼프의 금리 조정 유연성**을 고려해야 합니다.
* 🏭 미국 제조업 데이터는 점진적인 감소 추세를 보이고 있으며, **방위산업을 제외한 내구재 주문은 완만한 하락세**를 보이고 있습니다.
* 🛠 실제 기업 투자의 핵심 지표인 자본재 주문은 **5월에 감소**하여 향후 투자 확대에 대한 불확실성을 시사했습니다.
* 📉 기업 투자는 점차 감소하고 있으며, 이는 **중장기 경제 전망에 대한 신뢰도가 낮음**을 나타냅니다.
* 📊 투자 사이클을 따르는 재고 수준은 **최저점에 가까워지고 있어** 생산 활동과 경기 위축을 예고하고 있습니다.
* 🔄 현재 상황은 거의 **사이클의 바닥에 도달**하여 조정 단계로 나아가고 있는 것으로 볼 수 있습니다.

최근 시장 금리가 상승한 것은 채권 발행 증가로 인한 재정 적자에 대한 우려와 트럼프 정책의 잠재적 영향 때문일 수 있습니다.

Yesterday, the market interest rates rose significantly. If you look at June 29th, it's about the 10-year trend. The middle trend line that I showed you before, I slightly expanded the end part. As you can see, the middle trend line accurately resisted and rebounded. Currently, it has risen to around 4.4%. However, as I mentioned, whether this can be a turning point depends on whether the disinflation trend continues and the cooling of the job market is highlighted. I mentioned that depending on these factors, the middle trend line is likely to break downward. Regarding the recent sharp rise in market interest rates, it is ultimately not due to the Fed's influence. I think concerns about the increase in bond issuances that have been pressing on the bond market have expanded. It can only be explained by the Trump factor. In fact, yesterday, whether it's PC or not.

In terms of consumer sentiment, macro data came out poorly. Even in such a situation where the market's movements are excessively focused to the extent that it is incomprehensible, typically, when there is such a focus, one should consider using it as an investment opportunity. Ultimately, the only explanation can be the Trump factor. In other words, as the possibility of Trump being elected increases, concerns about an expansion of tax reduction policies have grown. This has led to concerns about fiscal deficits, and in fact, concerns about fiscal deficits have been a very shaky topic in the bond market over the past 1-2 years. Since bond issuances will have to increase, it seems inevitable to maintain high interest rates for a long time. Moreover, in the case of Trump, there are many trade protectionist policies, naturally.

Costs can only increase, and eventually, inflationary pressures structurally have to rise. It seems like the bond market has reflected this to some extent. However, even though these negative factors quickly expanded in the bond market, in the past, during the Trump administration, there were times when the aftermath of the US-China trade war intensified. At that time, Trump, in order to reduce the burden of the government's debt repayment, advocated for interest rate cuts. Trump pressured the Federal Reserve aggressively, even going as far as saying to lower interest rates to zero or below zero. Looking at such cases of pressure, we should not only focus on the increase in bond issuances leading to fiscal deficits but also consider artificially adjusting interest rates thereafter.

We should also consider Trump's logic that he can drop. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, Janet Yellen also said that there is a bit of exaggeration in the current crisis if everyone ends up in debt due to the burden of the ranking. I posted a video on that aspect, so if you refer to the video I uploaded about 2 or 3 weeks ago, you can explain the related content in more detail. Ultimately, what I want to say is that in the current bond market, as the bond issuance volume increases, there is no choice but to implement costly policies such as trade barriers, which will act as a structural inflationary factor. Consequently, deficits will expand, and this negative aspect has rapidly spread. This is what was reflected until yesterday.

It's a part and still, even the government, as a fundamentalist, would feel burdened by the ranking of interest rates, there is plenty of room to artificially lower interest rates. I wanted to mention this point a bit, as I mentioned last time, it was close to the mid-3s. At that time, the interest rate was 4.2%. However, now it seems to be stabilizing and it is likely to break through the lower interest rate. There is some interest in whether it will break through the lower level and move downward. As I mentioned at the beginning, it cannot just keep falling in a straight line. Now, as it is showing signs of rebounding, there was a possibility of rising to the first support level of 4.4%, and now it seems to be moving in that direction. So, it has been falling all the way down, then rebounded to 4.4%, and it may continue to move in the direction of falling again. So, we can expect that, and then how far it will

Can it go up? When you look at the downward trend line, you should consider the possibility of up to 4.5. This means you can forecast the flow with this cold trend. Therefore, the volatility is likely to be temporary as the recent movement in the market itself is not significant. It can be seen as a factor influenced by Trump, but ultimately Trump also has the flexibility to adjust the level of interest rates. We need to consider this together. Moreover, there is no macro data yet to reverse this downward breakthrough. Prices have not clearly rebounded, employment market has not recovered, and the US manufacturing sector has not shown signs of revival. Therefore, such temporary volatility in the market should always be seen as an investment opportunity. What we need to confirm is whether the current U.S. economy...

It is more important to determine whether we can withstand and maintain the current interest rate level and direction. In that sense, if we look at the May durable goods orders, it increased by 0.1% to $283.1 billion. In fact, the figure for the previous month of April was revised significantly downward from 0.7% to 0.2%. Therefore, the increase this time does not hold much significance. The overall trend in the U.S. manufacturing sector continues to show a sustained slowdown. When looking at durable goods orders, excluding defense, it decreased by -0.2%. In the previous month, there was actually no change, but it was revised to -0.5%, a significant downward revision. Since it decreased further from the revised downward trend, in essence, durable goods orders excluding defense have significantly weakened.

I can explain it as rapidly entering a recession zone, and this kind of anomaly in the U.S. manufacturing sector, where a decrease of more than 7% rarely occurs, was mentioned to have happened once earlier this year. When you look at the change in durable goods orders excluding defense, it decreased by 1.64% compared to the previous year. It has been steadily rising and started to fall after reaching a peak. If you look at the current situation, it has entered the negative territory. However, the important thing is that historically, when durable goods orders excluding defense fell into the negative territory, except for the period highlighted with a green arrow in 2015, all fell into a recession. You may be familiar with the 2015 case, which is mentioned in terms of insurance rates or cases. But during this period, as I always mention, both short-term and long-term interest rates...

The situation was not reversed. Therefore, looking simply at the defense industry, excluding defense orders, even though it fell into a negative territory in 2015, there was no economic downturn. Rather than considering this as a success case, it should be noted that at that time, the short-term and long-term interest rates had not reversed. Therefore, it is necessary to examine it with more attention. As the data has a certain level of volatility, it is important to look at the trend of non-defense orders to understand the outlook of the manufacturing industry. To do so, excluding aircraft orders is essential. Due to the increase in private aircraft orders, there was an upward trend at that time. However, when excluding aircraft orders, it remained flat. Despite the overall expansion of the manufacturing industry, the headline data could lead to a misconception that the manufacturing industry was recovering. Private aircraft orders have significant volatility.

So, if we exclude this part and look at it more closely, we can examine the manufacturing industry's situation more accurately. In this regard, excluding aircraft, durable goods orders increased by 1.08%, and then decreased by 0.1%. Overall, a gradual decline trend is apparent. Looking at the current situation, since the yy growth rate did not sharply drop into negative territory, it is not an immediate concern for the U.S. manufacturing industry. However, the overall trend is gradually showing a mild decline. This means that we should not expect a clear recovery or a current upward trend. Therefore, it can be summarized that the manufacturing industry is not distinctly recovering or showing an upward trend. So, looking at it this way, it seems that we need to consider the possibility of the manufacturing industry recovering in the medium to long term.

Instead of looking at the amount of orders, we need to assess whether companies receiving durable goods orders can impact the actual investment and production cycle. To examine this aspect, you need to look at capital goods orders. When you look at capital goods orders, in fact, in May, capital goods orders decreased by -0.6%. This decrease implies that the actual investment indicators of companies have decreased. This means that goods directly involved in production, such as land, factory buildings, and machinery, have decreased. Therefore, even if companies see an increase in orders, it may not lead to actual investments. It can be interpreted as a sign that it is difficult to have high certainty about future expansions. In terms of data that can be examined together in this regard, the level of transportation equipment is one aspect. Although there is a trend of a 0.6% increase in the upper part, in reality, the previous month was 1.2%.

In the case of an adjustment to -0.1 from an increase, it can be seen that the increase itself is not significant. In the broader context, when looking at the current trend of corporate investment, it is in a stagnant situation. Due to this, inventory levels are likely to show a similar trend. Since I have explained a lot about the relationship between corporate investment and inventory cycle, I will skip that in this video. For those who are curious, it would be helpful to watch a previous video. Today, I will provide some additional explanations on this topic. When you look at the trend of changes in corporate investment and inventory, as you can see, corporate investment moves ahead of inventory. It is natural that during an economic upturn, investment takes place first, followed by inventory, and in the latter half of the economic cycle, investment decreases first, followed by inventory.

Yes, this is natural because companies predict future demand and make investment decisions. Then inventory adjustments take place, but there is a time lag. If you look at the current trend, both indicators are close to a 0% change compared to the previous year. There is no clear direction at the moment, but ultimately, it is important to understand the direction of corporate investment in analyzing the future trend of the U.S. economy. Looking into details, corporate investment has decreased by -0.16% year-on-year and -0.6% month-on-month. From a distance, it shows a stagnant trend, but if you zoom in and look closely, there is a gradual decreasing trend. Although not sharp, the direction of corporate investment is gradually declining. Despite this, the reason for not decreasing sharply is due to restrictive high-interest rates.

The reason why we were able to endure this situation is the semiconductor investment law. Various effects due to increased fiscal spending are currently emerging. It seems that we should evaluate it this way. Especially, when we look at M, we can see that although there is volatility, the overall level is steadily decreasing. In other words, corporate investment is gradually decreasing. When corporate investment decreases, as I mentioned earlier, it means that companies do not have confidence in the expansion of the economy in the medium to long term. Ultimately, when we examine the trend of corporate investment, we can understand the inventory levels. This aspect provides us with data that allows us to estimate overall economic activity. Manufacturing data is very accurate hard data, so it is very useful for assessing the economy. Looking at the current changes in inventory, we can see that the investment cycle of companies is at its lowest point, which indicates how the new economic policy will be.

When it comes to determining the direction, it is showing very clearly through signals. Excessive investment, increased inventory, manipulation, entering a downward cycle of the economy - these are all cycles that have always been repeated in the past and now we are in the adjustment phase. It can be seen as almost reaching the bottom, approaching the stagnation phase. In this situation, if the manufacturing industry does not recover, production activities will contract, and the economy will deteriorate. In such a situation, the burden of high interest rates adds up. It can be confirmed that in the past, each time it led to an economic downturn. Therefore, regarding the flow of the bond market yesterday, there is no need to worry too much. There were no significant changes in the monetary policy, and there were no concerns that have been consistently worried about.

As the factors expanded and underwent rapid adjustments, a rebound phase appeared along with some profit-taking demand. It seems like this interpretation is necessary, and there is a high possibility that the cold itself will progress like this. That's how I see it. Thank you.

채권시장의 두 얼굴, 공포에 질린 패닉인가? 함정에 빠진 과민반응인가?

안녕하세요. 과거 대기업 재무팀(PF), M&A, 투자검토, 신규사업, 공시업무 등 직무 관련 경험을 기반으로 가치투자를 지향하는 개인입니다. 어쩌다 대만(Taiwan)에 정착하여 중화권 비즈니스를 하고 있습니다. 자녀 국제학교 학비를 벌기 위해 투자를 하며 고군분투하는 채널입니다. 나스닥( TSMC, SOXL,  SMH 등) 반도체 섹터, 미국국채(TMF, TLTW, TLT), 코스닥(스몰/미드캡 위주), 공모주(IPO) 청약-레버리지 활용, 스팩(SPAC)-현금보유개념, 증자플레이(유상/무상/실권주 초과수익률 공략)을 즐겨합니다. 투자에 대한 아이디어를 공유하며 함께 성투하길 원합니다. 관심 있는 분들은 "구독"과 "좋아요"로 동참해주세요. 감사합니다. 


십대들 주식

트럼프의 정책이 채권 시장에 미치는 영향

최근 시장 금리의 급격한 상승은 채권 발행 증가와 트럼프가 제안한 감세 정책의 잠재적 영향에 대한 우려로 인해 발생했습니다.

트럼프의 무역 보호주의 정책은 비용을 증가시키고 구조적으로 인플레이션 압력을 높일 것으로 예상되며, 채권 시장도 이러한 우려를 반영하고 있습니다.

채권 시장은 또한 금리 조정에 대한 공격적인 압력을 포함한 트럼프 행정부의 과거 및 향후 잠재적 조치의 영향을 받아 현재 상황에 기여하고 있습니다.

금리는 등락을 거듭하며 잠재적으로 낮은 수준을 돌파할 조짐을 보이고 있습니다.

시장은 일시적인 반등을 경험했지만 전반적인 추세는 다시 하락할 가능성을 시사하고 있습니다.

미국 경제, 내구재 주문, 제조업 경기 둔화 등의 요인에 영향을 받는 시장의 변동성은 투자 기회로 여겨지고 있습니다.

미국 제조업의 변동하는 트렌드

방산을 제외한 내구재 주문은 꾸준한 증가세를 보이다가 최근 감소세를 보이고 있어 제조업 경기 둔화 가능성을 시사하고 있습니다.

과거 데이터를 보면 이러한 주문 감소가 경기 침체로 이어진 적이 있어 주의 깊은 관찰이 필요함을 강조합니다.

항공기 주문을 제외하면 내구재 주문이 점진적으로 감소하는 것으로 나타나 제조업이 현재 뚜렷한 회복세나 상승세를 보이고 있지 않을 수 있음을 시사합니다.

내구재 주문이 기업 투자에 미치는 영향

6% 감소한 것에서 볼 수 있듯이 내구재 수주가 반드시 실제 투자로 이어지지는 않습니다.

기업 투자의 정체 추세는 운송장비 수준에도 반영되어 크게 증가하지 않은 것으로 나타났습니다.

기업 투자가 급격히 감소하지는 않았지만 점진적으로 감소하는 것은 고금리의 영향을 받고 있습니다.

반도체 투자법이 기업 투자에 미치는 영향

반도체 투자법으로 인해 기업 투자가 점진적으로 감소하고 있으며 이는 경기 확장에 대한 확신이 부족하다는 것을 나타냅니다.

현재 투자 사이클의 저점은 경기, 특히 제조업의 잠재적 침체 가능성을 시사합니다.

채권 시장의 안정과 통화 정책의 큰 변화가 없는 것은 급격한 조정 속에서도 어느 정도 안도감을 주지만, 제조업이 회복되지 않으면 경제는 여전히 위축될 위험에 직면해 있습니다.