Biden. Axios fa una impietosa ma realistica analisi. Biden è impotente contro la inflazione.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-05-18.

«Il presidente è in gran parte impotente a far calare l’inflazione»

«Durante le sue osservazioni, Biden ha riconosciuto chiaramente che “alcune delle radici dell’inflazione sono al di fuori del nostro controllo”»

* * * * * * *

«President Biden is blaming three culprits when it comes to controlling inflation: Vladimir Putin, the pandemic and congressional Republicans»

«The problem is: He doesn’t control any of them»

«By conceding he’s mostly powerless to meaningfully reduce inflation, Biden is bracing the country for higher prices»

«He’s also trying to make a case for the Democratic Party — and the remainder of his term — in this fall’s pivotal midterm elections»

«Working down a logic train in his inflation speech Tuesday, the president wanted to convince voters about who’s to blame for soaring prices — whether it’s national gasoline at an all-time high of $4.37/gallon or food prices soaring with each checkout»

«The president is largely powerless to bring down inflation»

«During his remarks, Biden plainly acknowledged “some of the roots of the inflation are outside of our control.”»

«As for direct causes, Biden cited Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and supply-chain snarls caused by the pandemic as the “two major contributors to inflation.”»

«Republicans — as well as Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who effectively killed Biden’s ambitious spending agenda in December — believe the president’s proposals will increase inflation»

«But he was wrong to omit the important contribution to the problem from excessive fiscal and monetary stimulus»

* * * * * * *

Biden. Sondaggio stratificato di gradimento. A confronto Stalingrado fu un trionfo tedesco.

Biden. Addio al clima. La realtà annichilisce i programmi utopici. Reuters è mutato.

America. Le sanzioni di Joe Biden hanno beneficiato Mr Putin e sono state pagate dagli americani.

India. Prosegue tranquilla a comprare petrolio dalla Russia. Non accetta le sanzioni di Joe Biden.

Biden. È crollato nei sondaggi. Sette su dieci Elettori lo disapprovano. Straparla.

Midterm. Sondaggi per stato. I repubblicani potrebbero vincere il Senato.

America. Wall Street. Da Set21 hanno perso 8.5 trilioni Usd di capitalizzazione.

Biden mette al bando i test anti-satellite. Russia, Cina ed India nemmeno rispondono.

Superpotenze militari. Gli equilibri sono rotti. Una guerra è opzione appetibile.

* * * * * * *

In calce riportiamo una traduzione in lingua italiana.

* * * * * * *

---

Biden is “powerless” to tame inflation

President Biden is blaming three culprits when it comes to controlling inflation: Vladimir Putin, the pandemic and congressional Republicans. The problem is: He doesn’t control any of them.

Why it matters: By conceding he’s mostly powerless to meaningfully reduce inflation, Biden is bracing the country for higher prices. He’s also trying to make a case for the Democratic Party — and the remainder of his term — in this fall’s pivotal midterm elections.

                         – Working down a logic train in his inflation speech Tuesday, the president wanted to convince voters about who’s to blame for soaring prices — whether it’s national gasoline at an all-time high of $4.37/gallon or food prices soaring with each checkout.

                         – “It is a lot better that he is de facto admitting this than overpromising and underdelivering about a low inflation rate by Election Day,” said Jason Furman, a Harvard economist and chair of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Obama.

                         – “The president is largely powerless to bring down inflation.”

Driving the news: During his remarks, Biden plainly acknowledged “some of the roots of the inflation are outside of our control.”

He spoke a day before the release of the April Consumer Price Index, in which economists expect an 8.1% inflation rate.

                         – As for direct causes, Biden cited Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and supply-chain snarls caused by the pandemic as the “two major contributors to inflation.”

                         – He also singled out Republicans for their tax plans, saving particular scorn for Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.). The president also blamed “ultra-MAGA Republicans” for blocking his Build Back Better plan, which he claims would lower prices.

                         – Republicans — as well as Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who effectively killed Biden’s ambitious spending agenda in December — believe the president’s proposals will increase inflation.

Between the lines: Biden was careful not to directly blame the Federal Reserve for the current 8.5% annual inflation rate, but he reminded voters the Fed “plays a primary role in fighting inflation in our country.”

                         – He also was explicit he would “never interfere with the Fed’s judgments.”

                         – Biden’s approach is in contrast to President Trump, who publicly tried to pressure Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell into keeping interest rates low while threatening to fire him.

The big picture: Congressional Republicans and prominent Democratic economists, like Harvard’s Larry Summers, have insisted that pandemic spending has contributed to inflation.

They cite the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill Biden signed into law last March.

                         – Economic experts have also faulted the Fed, which announced its biggest rate hike in history last week, for keeping interest rates too low for too long.

                         – “The president was right to call out Ukraine and COVID as factors in our inflation,” Steve Rattner, a former economic adviser to President Obama, told Axios.

                         – “But he was wrong to omit the important contribution to the problem from excessive fiscal and monetary stimulus.”

                         – “And he overstated the extent to which his current actions and proposals are likely to ameliorate the problem.”

Go deeper: Biden, when directly asked if he bore any responsibility for inflation said, “I think our policies help, not hurt.”

                         – He also cited the FY21 federal deficit, which was $2.8 trillion, as helping to reduce inflation.

                         – It was roughly $350 billion less than Trump’s record $3.1 trillion deficit, in 2020.

The intrigue: Biden hinted his administration is considering reducing some of the China tariffs imposed by Trump — a source of debate inside the administration.

                         – “No decision has been made on it,” he told reporters.

* * * * * * *

---

Biden è “impotente” a domare l’inflazione

Il Presidente Biden accusa tre colpevoli quando si tratta di controllare l’inflazione: Vladimir Putin, la pandemia e i repubblicani del Congresso. Il problema è che non ne controlla nessuno.

Perché è importante: Ammettendo di essere per lo più impotente a ridurre significativamente l’inflazione, Biden sta preparando il Paese ad un aumento dei prezzi. Inoltre, sta cercando di difendere il Partito Democratico – e il resto del suo mandato – nelle cruciali elezioni di midterm di quest’autunno.

                         – Nel suo discorso sull’inflazione di martedì, il Presidente ha voluto convincere gli elettori di chi sia la colpa dell’impennata dei prezzi, sia che si tratti della benzina ai massimi storici di 4,37 dollari al gallone, sia che si tratti dei prezzi dei generi alimentari che aumentano a ogni controllo.

                         – È molto meglio che lo ammetta de facto, piuttosto che promettere troppo e non dare nulla per un basso tasso di inflazione entro il giorno delle elezioni”, ha dichiarato Jason Furman, economista di Harvard e presidente del Council of Economic Advisers sotto il presidente Obama.

                         – “Il presidente è in gran parte impotente a far scendere l’inflazione”.

La notizia è stata trainata: Durante le sue osservazioni, Biden ha riconosciuto chiaramente che “alcune delle radici dell’inflazione sono al di fuori del nostro controllo”.

Ha parlato un giorno prima della pubblicazione dell’indice dei prezzi al consumo di aprile, per il quale gli economisti prevedono un tasso di inflazione dell’8,1%.

                         – Per quanto riguarda le cause dirette, Biden ha citato l’invasione dell’Ucraina da parte di Putin e le difficoltà di approvvigionamento causate dalla pandemia come i “due principali fattori che contribuiscono all’inflazione”.

                         – Ha anche criticato i repubblicani per i loro piani fiscali, riservando un particolare disprezzo al senatore Rick Scott (R-Fla.). Il Presidente ha anche incolpato “i repubblicani ultra-MAGA” per aver bloccato il suo piano Build Back Better, che secondo lui abbasserebbe i prezzi.

                         – I repubblicani – così come il senatore Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), che a dicembre ha di fatto bloccato l’ambizioso programma di spesa di Biden – ritengono che le proposte del presidente aumenteranno l’inflazione.

Tra le righe: Biden è stato attento a non incolpare direttamente la Federal Reserve per l’attuale tasso di inflazione dell’8,5% annuo, ma ha ricordato agli elettori che la Fed “svolge un ruolo primario nella lotta all’inflazione nel nostro Paese”.

                         – È stato anche esplicito sul fatto che non avrebbe “mai interferito con le decisioni della Fed”.

                         – L’approccio di Biden è in contrasto con il Presidente Trump, che ha cercato pubblicamente di fare pressione sul Presidente della Federal Reserve Jerome Powell affinché mantenesse bassi i tassi di interesse, minacciando di licenziarlo.

Il quadro generale: I repubblicani del Congresso e importanti economisti democratici, come Larry Summers di Harvard, hanno insistito sul fatto che la spesa per la pandemia ha contribuito all’inflazione.

Essi citano il disegno di legge di 1.900 miliardi di dollari per il soccorso al coronavirus che Biden ha firmato lo scorso marzo.

                         – Gli esperti economici hanno anche rimproverato alla Fed, che la scorsa settimana ha annunciato il più grande rialzo dei tassi della storia, di averli tenuti troppo bassi per troppo tempo.

                         – Il presidente ha fatto bene a citare l’Ucraina e il COVID come fattori di inflazione”, ha dichiarato ad Axios Steve Rattner, ex consigliere economico del presidente Obama.

                         – Ma ha sbagliato a tralasciare l’importante contributo al problema di un eccessivo stimolo fiscale e monetario”.

                         – E ha sopravvalutato la misura in cui le sue attuali azioni e proposte sono in grado di migliorare il problema”.

Approfondisci: Biden, alla domanda diretta se fosse responsabile dell’inflazione, ha risposto: “Penso che le nostre politiche aiutino, non danneggino”.

                         – Ha anche citato il deficit federale dell’anno fiscale 21, che era di 2.800 miliardi di dollari, come un aiuto per ridurre l’inflazione.

                         – Si tratta di circa 350 miliardi di dollari in meno rispetto al deficit record di 3.100 miliardi di dollari previsto da Trump per il 2020.

L’intrigo: Biden ha lasciato intendere che la sua amministrazione sta valutando la possibilità di ridurre alcuni dei dazi sulla Cina imposti da Trump – una fonte di dibattito all’interno dell’amministrazione.

                         – “Non è stata presa alcuna decisione in merito”, ha detto ai giornalisti.

Banche occidentali. Loro esposizioni in Russia.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-03-20.

«Credit Suisse said it had gross exposure to Russia of 1.6 billion Swiss francs ($1.73 billion) at the end of last year»

«Goldman Sachs, which has a credit exposure to Russia of $650 million, said on Thursday it was winding down its business there»

«Just hours later, JPMorgan said it was “actively unwinding Russian business” and was not pursuing any new business there»

«Western companies have pulled out of Russia en masse as the United States, European Union and Britain imposed sanctions aimed at cutting off Moscow’s access to the global financial system in response to its Ukraine invasion»

«Credit Suisse was the latest European bank to reveal the size of potential losses»

«Italy’s UniCredit and France’s BNP Paribas have also disclosed billions of euros worth of Russia risk»

«Deutsche Bank said its credit-risk exposure to Russia and Ukraine was 2.9 billion euros»

«The conflict has also potentially upended planned interest rate increases by the European Central Bank»

* * * * * * *

Sotto la pregiudiziale che i bilanci addotti dalle banche occidentali siano veritieri, fatto da non darsi troppo per scontato, le banche occidentali sembrerebbero avere poche esposizioni sulla Russia.

I dubbi sono alimentati da questa frase:

«analysts and investors fear it could derail their turnaround plans and halt payouts to shareholders» 

Qualcosa non torna.

* * * * * * *

---

Goldman, JPMorgan unwind Russia business, EU banks disclose more exposures

– Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank detail Russia exposure

– Financial firms scramble to distance themselves from Russia

– BNP Paribas cuts Russia workforce off from systems

* * * * * * *

London/New York – Goldman Sachs Group Inc and JPMorgan Chase  became the first U.S. banks to wind down business in Russia after it invaded Ukraine, while Credit Suisse said it had gross exposure to Russia of 1.6 billion Swiss francs ($1.73 billion) at the end of last year.

Goldman Sachs, which has a credit exposure to Russia of $650 million, said on Thursday it was winding down its business there, in a move that will likely increase pressure on rival lenders to follow. Any losses would be “immaterial,” according to a source familiar with the situation.

Just hours later, JPMorgan said it was “actively unwinding Russian business” and was not pursuing any new business there.

The largest U.S. bank said its operations in Russia are currently limited to helping global clients address and close out pre-existing obligations and manage their Russian-related risk, as well acting as a custodian for client assets.

JPMorgan has about 160 staff in Moscow. The bank did not list Russia in the top 20 countries where it has the most exposure in its most recent filings.

Western companies have pulled out of Russia en masse as the United States, European Union and Britain imposed sanctions aimed at cutting off Moscow’s access to the global financial system in response to its Ukraine invasion.

Banks, insurers and asset managers, which rarely make political statements, have scrambled to distance themselves from Russia and assess their exposures, as the conflict enters its third week.  

Credit Suisse was the latest European bank to reveal the size of potential losses, which it said included lending to wealthy clients as well as trade finance and investment banking exposure.

Italy’s UniCredit and France’s BNP Paribas have also disclosed billions of euros worth of Russia risk. In an extreme scenario, banks could lose it all if Moscow seizes assets and sanctions render Russia-related securities worthless.  

Deutsche Bank said its credit-risk exposure to Russia and Ukraine was 2.9 billion euros and that it had reduced its Russia exposure further over the past two weeks.  

Russia calls its actions in Ukraine a “special operation.”

While the potential losses among major European lenders are not big enough to threaten their stability, analysts and investors fear it could derail their turnaround plans and halt payouts to shareholders.  

The conflict has also potentially upended planned interest rate increases by the European Central Bank, with its policymakers expected to go into a meeting on Thursday divided as to how to proceed and wary of making mistakes.  

BNP Paribas, meanwhile, has cut off its Russia-based workforce from its internal computer systems as it seeks to bolster its defences against any potential cyber attack, in another sign of how the conflict is hitting Western financial institutions.

The French bank, thought to be the first major lender to have shut staff in Moscow out of its IT networks, has also placed employees in other locations on high alert for cyber threats emanating from Russia.

Deutsche Bank decide di non uscire da mercato finanziario russo.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-03-13.

«Deutsche Bank said Thursday it is not “practical” to close its Russia business, despite similar moves by major corporations seeking to distance themselves from the country»

«The German bank’s chief financial officer defended the decision, saying it hinged on its duty of care to clients that still operate in the country»

«We’re there to support our clients. And so, for practical purposes, that isn’t an option that’s available to us. Nor would it be the right thing to do in terms of managing those client relationships and helping them to manage their situation»

«Von Moltke added that the bank would be willing to reconsider its position should the political situation escalate further and its clients in Russia — mostly multinationals — cease their operations in the country»

«Von Moltke did not name any of the bank’s clients in Russia»

«Shares of European banks have gyrated dramatically since Russia’s invasion, with markets seeking to quantify their exposure to the conflict and resulting Western sanctions»

«the bank said that included gross loan exposure to Russia of $1.4 billion euros ($1.55 billion), or 0.3% of its total loan book»

* * * * * * *

Prendiamo atto come Deutsche Bank non intenda ritirarsi dal mercato finanziario russo, così come altre grandi istituzioni finanziarie, ben poco turbate dalle sanzioni americane alla Russia.

È in corso una guerra economica e finanziaria che comporta anche considerevoli perdite per i paesi che hanno aderito alle sanzioni.

Constatiamo che il sistema economico e finanziario occidentale sembrerebbe essere sempre più scollato dalle azioni dei governi.

Ma nessuno saprebbe prospettare come alla fine possa essere conclusa tutta questa situazione.

* * * * * * *

---

Deutsche Bank defends decision not to exit Russia: It’s not ‘practical’ right now

– Deutsche Bank’s CFO said Thursday it is not “practical” to close its Russia business, despite similar moves by major corporations seeking to distance themselves from the pariah state.

– Speaking to CNBC, James von Moltke said the decision hinged on the bank’s duty of care to its clients in the country.

– The comments come as the list of Western companies closing or pausing their Russia operations grows.

* * * * * * *

Deutsche Bank said Thursday it is not “practical” to close its Russia business, despite similar moves by major corporations seeking to distance themselves from the country over its invasion of Ukraine.

Speaking to CNBC, the German bank’s chief financial officer defended the decision, saying it hinged on its duty of care to clients that still operate in the country.

It comes as other major banks make moves to pull out of Russia. In Wall Street’s first departure, Goldman Sachs said Thursday that it was winding down its business in the country, while HSBC on Monday told staff to begin ceasing their dealings with Russian banks.

“We’re there to support our clients. And so, for practical purposes, that isn’t an option that’s available to us. Nor would it be the right thing to do in terms of managing those client relationships and helping them to manage their situation,” James von Moltke said.

Von Moltke added that the bank would be willing to reconsider its position should the political situation escalate further and its clients in Russia — mostly multinationals — cease their operations in the country.

“Of course, we’ll need to look at how this situation evolves and consider our footprint in Russia as we gain some greater clarity as to the direction of travel here,” he said.

“As that [client presence] diminishes, so too will our presence in Moscow.”

Von Moltke did not name any of the bank’s clients in Russia.

It comes as the list of Western companies closing or pausing their Russian operations grows.

PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, McDonald’s and Starbucks all said on Tuesday that they would suspend business in the country, joining a league of brands that have exited the country following Russia President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Sanctions on a number of Russian banks and other businesses, meanwhile, have made it harder for companies to operate within the pariah state.

                         Russian exposure ‘very limited’.

Shares of European banks have gyrated dramatically since Russia’s invasion, with markets seeking to quantify their exposure to the conflict and resulting Western sanctions.

Deutsche Bank, for its part, has sought to reassure investors that its exposure to Russia is “very limited.”

In an announcement released Wednesday, the bank said that included gross loan exposure to Russia of $1.4 billion euros ($1.55 billion), or 0.3% of its total loan book.

Von Moltke said the bank had managed the market risk “quite successfully” in the war’s early days, and noted that it was working closely with clients to manage their response.

He added that the bank’s capital in its Moscow subsidiary had been “fully hedged” to manage currency risks.

“The market will always react to a crisis and the scenarios that unfold and look at the downside scenarios first. I think then, over time, we’re able to provide more information, we’re able to talk about our trajectory,” he said.

Later, in 2017, it entered settlements in the U.K. and the U.S. over so-called mirror trades, which saw the bank move $10 billion of Russian client money out of the country.

Mercati. Sempre più preoccupati della inflazione. Le tre Erinni.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-03-09.

«many American workers are finding it harder to put food on the table, even with the low 3.8% unemployment rate»

«The market is increasingly suggesting that the Fed will be unable to constrain inflation without tipping the economy into a recession»

* * * * * * *

«Despite a jobs report that showed a much-better-than-expected addition of 678,000 nonfarm jobs last month — bringing the nation ever closer to pre-pandemic levels — there were no fireworks on Wall Street Friday morning»

«The S&P 500 Index fell for the fourth time in the past five days, and the bond market continued to signal a growing risk of recession»

«Meanwhile, many American workers are finding it harder to put food on the table, even with the low 3.8% unemployment rate»

«That’s because the dominant economic issue in America is inflation and what will happen as policy makers try to deal with it»

«expect consumer prices to rise at a 7.9% annual pace in next week’s consumer price index report»

«supply chain bottlenecks have persisted; and demand for many types of consumer goods has outstripped inventories»

«All of this, of course, is of particular concern to American workers, who are already paying the price for this inflation»

«The market is increasingly suggesting that the Fed will be unable to constrain inflation without tipping the economy into a recession»

«But markets clearly think the probably of a downturn is growing»

* * * * * * *

Se sicuramente i dati macroeconomici ufficiali siano della massima importanza quali predittori, ancor più sicuramente sarebbe importante il fatto che sempre più persone trovino grandi difficoltà a mettere del cibo in tavola.

Ci si ricordi come Sorella Inflazione si accompagni alla Cugina Miseria che viene sottobraccio di Comare Fame. Sono le tre Erinni.

* * * * * * *

---

Markets Care More About Inflation Than Job Gains

Despite a jobs report that showed a much-better-than-expected addition of 678,000 nonfarm jobs last month — bringing the nation ever closer to pre-pandemic levels — there were no fireworks on Wall Street Friday morning. In fact, the report, which showed the best gains since July, landed with a thud.

The S&P 500 Index fell for the fourth time in the past five days, and the bond market continued to signal a growing risk of recession. Meanwhile, many American workers are finding it harder to put food on the table, even with the low 3.8% unemployment rate.

That’s because the dominant economic issue in America is inflation and what will happen as policy makers try to deal with it. Economists surveyed by Bloomberg expect consumer prices to rise at a 7.9% annual pace in next week’s consumer price index report, a new 40-year high, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine drives up global energy prices and adds more fuel to the CPI fire. Housing prices have continued to soar; supply chain bottlenecks have persisted; and demand for many types of consumer goods has outstripped inventories. The playbook for inflation is no secret: The Federal Reserve will have to raise interest rates at a series of coming meetings, as Chair Jerome Powell supported doing in his testimony before Congress this week. The jobs report did nothing to give the central bank any pause.

All of this, of course, is of particular concern to American workers, who are already paying the price for this inflation. Average hourly earnings growth decelerated to a 5.1% annual pace — a strong clip in normal times but less impressive when compared with the accelerating 7.5% inflation rate. The specifics depend on the type of jobs people have and whether they own or rent their homes, but that’s a net loss for many of the U.S.’s most vulnerable residents.

But as policy makers ostensibly come to the rescue, Americans should be prepared for the possibility that their economic circumstances may get worse before they get better.

The market is increasingly suggesting that the Fed will be unable to constrain inflation without tipping the economy into a recession. The gap between two-year and 10-year Treasury yields — a rough proxy for the steepness of the so-called yield curve — narrowed further on Friday after shrinking about 0.33 percentage point in the past month. That’s often a sign, however imperfect, that traders are anticipating a recession.  The thinking is that short-term rates rise in reaction to the Fed’s policy, but markets worry that the central bank will overcorrect, sink the economy and eventually have to reverse course. Longer-term rates briefly dip below the short-term ones.

Financial markets often appear illogical to outside observers: Good news is so often bad news, and vice versa. Some of that is because markets are supposed to assimilate the future in their imperfect way, and backward-looking data just doesn’t move the needle. Even still, sometimes good news is just good news, and maybe this is one of those cases.  The U.S. has recovered some 19.9 million jobs since April 2020, with only 2.1 million to go to get to the pre-pandemic peak. 

Recession isn’t the most likely outcome, and it’s important to remember that even as the world feels as if it’s on fire. Economists surveyed by Bloomberg think the U.S. economy will grow 3.7% this year, and analysts continue to project strong corporate earnings. But markets clearly think the probably of a downturn is growing regardless of the good news headline from the jobs report.

Usa. Gen22. Consumer Price Index +7.5%. Biden in Nome di Dio vattene.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-02-10.

                         In Sintesi.

«Over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 7.5 percent»

«The all items index rose 7.5 percent for the 12 months ending January, the largest 12-month increase since the period ending February 1982»

«The energy index rose 27.0 percent over the last year, and the food index increased 7.0 percent»

«The food index increased 0.9 percent in January»

«The index for cereals and bakery products increased the most, rising 1.8 percent over the month»

«The index for other food at home increased 1.6 percent in January»

«The food at home index rose 7.4 percent over the last 12 months»

«By far the largest increase was that of the index for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs, which rose 12.2 percent over the year»

«The index for limited service meals rose 8.0 percent over the last 12 months, and the index for full service meals rose 7.1 percent»

«The energy index rose 27.0 percent over the past 12 months with all major energy component indexes increasing»

«The gasoline index rose 40.0 percent over the last year»

«The index for natural gas rose 23.9 percent over the last 12 months»

«The index for electricity rose 10.7 percent»

«Major contributors to this increase include shelter (+4.4 percent) and used cars and trucks (+40.5 percent)»

* * * * * * *

Questo è semplicemente il risultato della incompetente gestione della Harris-Biden Administration e della Fed, che languno inerti incapaci di alcunché.

Questi rincari dei prezzi al consumo si ripercuoteranno su quelli alla produzione, generando così un malvagio circolo vizioso inflattivo. L’epidemia non ci entra proprio nulla.

Sarebbe anche l’ora che Joe Biden smettesse di giocare con i soldatini di piombo e pensasse maggiormente a sanare questa situazione da catastrofe.

Biden, in Nome di Dio, vattene!

* * * * * * *

---

US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index – January 2022

The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased 0.6 percent in January on a seasonally adjusted basis, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 7.5 percent before seasonal adjustment.

Increases in the indexes for food, electricity, and shelter were the largest contributors to the seasonally adjusted all items increase. The food index rose 0.9 percent in January following a 0.5-percent increase in December. The energy index also increased 0.9 percent over the month, with an increase in the electricity index being partially offset by declines in the gasoline index and the natural gas index.

The index for all items less food and energy rose 0.6 percent in January, the same increase as in December. This was the seventh time in the last 10 months it has increased at least 0.5 percent. Along with the index for shelter, the indexes for household furnishings and operations, used cars and trucks, medical care, and apparel were among many indexes that increased over the month. 

The all items index rose 7.5 percent for the 12 months ending January, the largest 12-month increase since the period ending February 1982. The all items less food and energy index rose 6.0 percent, the largest 12-month change since the period ending August 1982. The energy index rose 27.0 percent over the last year, and the food index increased 7.0 percent.

                         Food.

The food index increased 0.9 percent in January. The food at home index increased 1.0 percent over the month after rising 0.4 percent in December. Five of the six major grocery store food group indexes increased in January. The index for cereals and bakery products increased the most, rising 1.8 percent over the month. The index for other food at home increased 1.6 percent in January, while the index for dairy and related products rose 1.1 percent. The fruits and vegetables index rose 0.9 percent over the month, and the meats, poultry, fish, and eggs index increased 0.3 percent. The only grocery store group index not to increase in January was the index for nonalcoholic beverages, which was unchanged.

The food away from home index rose 0.7 percent in January following an increase of 0.6 percent in December. The index for full service meals and the index for limited service meals both also rose 0.7 percent over the month.

The food at home index rose 7.4 percent over the last 12 months. All of the six major grocery store food group indexes increased over the period. By far the largest increase was that of the index for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs, which rose 12.2 percent over the year. The index for dairy and related products increased 3.1 percent, the smallest 12-month increase among the groups. 

The index for food away from home rose 6.4 percent over the last year, the largest 12-month increase since January 1982. The index for limited service meals rose 8.0 percent over the last 12 months, and the index for full service meals rose 7.1 percent. The index for food at employee sites and schools, in contrast, declined 46.9 percent over the past 12 months, reflecting widespread free lunch programs.

                         Energy.

The energy index increased 0.9 percent in January. The electricity index rose sharply in January, increasing 4.2 percent. The gasoline index fell 0.8 percent in January after rising rapidly in the autumn of 2021. (Before seasonal adjustment, gasoline prices rose 0.1 percent in January.) The index for natural gas also declined in January, falling 0.5 percent after declining 0.3 percent in December.

The energy index rose 27.0 percent over the past 12 months with all major energy component indexes increasing. The gasoline index rose 40.0 percent over the last year, despite declining in January. The index for natural gas rose 23.9 percent over the last 12 months, and the index for electricity rose 10.7 percent.

                         All items less food and energy.

The index for all items less food and energy rose 0.6 percent in January, the same increase as December. The shelter index increased 0.3 percent in January as the rent index increased 0.5 percent and the owners’ equivalent rent index rose 0.4 percent. The index for household furnishings and operations rose 1.3 percent over the month following a 1.1-percent increase in December. The used cars and trucks index rose 1.5 percent in January, a deceleration from the 3.3-percent increase reported in December.

The medical care index rose 0.7 percent in January. The index for hospital services increased 0.5 percent and the index for prescription drugs rose 1.3 percent, while the index for physicians’ services declined 0.1 percent. Other indexes that rose in January include recreation (+0.9 percent), apparel (+1.1 percent), personal care (+1.0 percent), airline fares (+2.3 percent), and education (+0.2 percent).

Only a few indexes decreased in January; among those that did were lodging away from home (-3.9 percent) and wireless telephone services (-0.1 percent). The index for new vehicles was unchanged over the month.

The index for all items less food and energy rose 6.0 percent over the past 12 months. Major contributors to this increase include shelter (+4.4 percent) and used cars and trucks (+40.5 percent). However, the increase is broad-based, with virtually all component indexes showing increases over the past 12 months.

                         Not seasonally adjusted CPI measures.

The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased 7.5 percent over the last 12 months to an index level of 281.148 (1982-84=100). For the month, the index increased 0.8 percent prior to seasonal adjustment. 

The Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) increased 8.2 percent over the last 12 months to an index level of 276.296 (1982-84=100). For the month, the index rose 0.9 percent prior to seasonal adjustment. 

The Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U) increased 7.1 percent over the last 12 months. For the month, the index increased 0.8 percent on a not seasonally adjusted basis. Please note that the indexes for the past 10 to 12 months are subject to revision.

* * * * * * *

---

Table 1. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U. S. city average, by expenditure category

Table 2. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U. S. city average, by detailed expenditure category

Table 3. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U. S. city average, special aggregate indexes

Table 4. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): Selected areas, all items index

Table 5. Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U) and the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U.S. city average, all items index

Table 6. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U.S. city average, by expenditure category, 1-month analysis table

Table 7. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U.S. city average, by expenditure category, 12-month analysis table

Mondo. Hedge Fund. 4 trilioni Usd in sofferenza. 3,500 hedge fund sono già falliti.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-02-09.

«An army of faceless suits is taking over the $4 trillion hedge fund world»

«The most successful idea in hedge funds is now simply strength in numbers»

«Investors are plowing money into funds that don’t rely on the next macro genius or star stockpicker, but instead offer an army of traders who invest in an array of strategies»

«These behemoths secured pretty much all of the new money in the hedge fund industry last year, cementing a tectonic shift that’s accelerated since the pandemic»

«Clients are increasingly willing to pay high fees — outsized even by hedge fund standards — to gain access to a whole universe of investments»

«With a shakeout underway in an industry that runs about $4 trillion, multi-strats are the only way to grow.»

«Behind their epic rise is consistent performance during periods of market chaos»

«A $1 million investment in Millennium’s multi-strategy pool at its launch in 1989 is worth about $67 million now»

«Citadel has turned a million dollars into about $236 million since its start in Nov. 1990»

«Meanwhile, more than 3,350 hedge funds have shut down in the past five years according to Hedge Fund Research Inc., some knocked out by market swings during the pandemic, highlighting how precarious single strategies can be»

«Glen Point Capital, which amassed $3.8 billion and the support of legendary investor George Soros in its early days, abandoned its independence last month after clients pulled their money»

«But picking top managers is a gamble in itself»

«With individual managers less visible to clients, those who start losing in high single digits or overextend their risk can have their assets cut at best, and at worst can be fired on the spot»

«Clients at multi-strat funds typically sign up for high and opaque charges called “pass through”. Such charges can reach 10% or more on top of incentive fees»

«Could you imagine the Fed allowing a $50 billion multi-strategy hedge fund to fail?»

«If for some reason liquidity just dried up for a long period of time, and maybe that could be caused by interest rates rising or some other condition, it certainly makes it harder»

«Onorino runs $10 million from Lugano in Switzerland and says raising capital is “almost mission impossible.”»

* * * * * * *

Ogni periodo economico e finanziario impone le proprie regole soppiantando le passate.

Non riuscire a cogliere il momento opportuno al cambio di mentalità operativa può essere fatale.

«more than 3,350 hedge funds have shut down in the past five years»

Buffett Indicator. Aveva dato indicazioni corrette della bolla in atto. Persi 6.6 trilioni.

Europa. Le Borse crollano. Eurostoxx -4.14%. E siamo solo agli inizi.

Inflazione e tassi di interesse. Le banche centrali latitano, ma i mercati fremono.

Nessuno sa come e quando le banche centrali cercheranno di arginare l’inflazione crescente aumentando i tassi di interesse ed iniziando il tapering.

Se però delle mere voci, pettegolezzi, hanno determinato un crollo borsistico con la perdita di 6,600 miliardi investito, non si osa pensare cosa potrebbe accadere quando e banche centrali aumenteranno i tassi di interesse ed inizieranno il tapering.

* * * * * * *

---

An Army of Faceless Suits Is Taking Over the $4 Trillion Hedge Fund World

(Bloomberg) — The most successful idea in hedge funds is now simply strength in numbers.

Investors are plowing money into funds that don’t rely on the next macro genius or star stockpicker, but instead offer an army of traders who invest in an array of strategies. These behemoths secured pretty much all of the new money in the hedge fund industry last year, cementing a tectonic shift that’s accelerated since the pandemic.

Clients are increasingly willing to pay high fees — outsized even by hedge fund standards — to gain access to a whole universe of investments, from U.S. stocks and precious metals to Asian currencies, executed by scores of traders who can be easily replaced if they stumble.

It’s a stark contrast to the old business model: Launch a fund, name it after yourself, call the shots, profit. A generation of managers are finding this new style more appealing — and in some cases have little choice since flashy trading stars aren’t in vogue with investors any more. With a shakeout underway in an industry that runs about $4 trillion, multi-strats are the only way to grow.

                         The Great Migration.

Behind their epic rise is consistent performance during periods of market chaos. Take two of the oldest and largest multi-strat houses in the world: Millennium Management and Citadel. They pool investor money into huge funds, before parceling it out in various trading strategies — all under one roof, with layers of risk management to avoid trading accidents.

A $1 million investment in Millennium’s multi-strategy pool at its launch in 1989 is worth about $67 million now. Citadel has turned a million dollars into about $236 million since its start in Nov. 1990. By contrast, $1m invested in the HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index at the start of 1990, when the benchmark started, would be worth $18m.

Millennium has suffered one annual loss over three decades of trading, dropping 3% in 2008. Citadel has had two, falling by about 4% in 1994 and a whopping 55% in 2008, according to investor updates seen by Bloomberg. Meanwhile, more than 3,350 hedge funds have shut down in the past five years according to Hedge Fund Research Inc., some knocked out by market swings during the pandemic, highlighting how precarious single strategies can be.

Multi-manager platforms “have in effect become the most efficient allocators of capital,” said Caron Bastianpillai, who invests in a number of such funds at Switzerland-based NS Partners.

This dominance can crowd out new entrants. Abhijeet Gaikwad returned to Millennium, which runs $52 billion, this month after failed attempts to raise capital for his own fund. Industry veterans Colin Lancaster and Mitesh Parikh, who were on track to start their fund with $1 billion, last year took their business instead to multi-strategy firm Schonfeld Strategic Advisors. They’ve just been allocated $5 billion to run a macro trading unit.

Ryan Tolkin, chief investment officer of Schonfeld, said that for Lancaster, “in the eyes of both himself, as well as investors, he would be able to attract and recruit better talent by partnering with Schonfeld than trying to do it on his own.”

It’s also leading to takeovers, a true rarity in the world of hedge funds. Glen Point Capital, which amassed $3.8 billion and the support of legendary investor George Soros in its early days, abandoned its independence last month after clients pulled their money. Eisler Capital, a multi-strategy hedge fund, bought the business.

“Joining a multi-strat on Monday and having $500 million to punt around on Tuesday is a hell of lot more appealing than scrounging for $50 million of seed capital to start your own firm,” Andrew Beer, founder of New York-based Dynamic Beta Investments, said.

To be sure, other forms of fund still control most of the assets under management in hedge funds, at least for now. And talented individual traders can still do well, cashing in handsomely when their specialized trading tactic is in vogue. But picking top managers is a gamble in itself. Billionaire Chris Rokos’s record gains in 2020 were followed by his fund’s worst ever loss of 26% last year. Alphadyne, the New York-based hedge fund that had never lost money since its debut in 2006, finished last year down 21% after its bond market bets imploded.

Single-minded funds can also struggle with success, as growth spurts potentially make it more cumbersome to trade in the strategy that made their name. Any attempts to force change on a star trader could spook investors.

Multi-strats, meanwhile, have a low tolerance for underperformance. With individual managers less visible to clients, those who start losing in high single digits or overextend their risk can have their assets cut at best, and at worst can be fired on the spot.

This emphasis on rigor appeals to pension funds, foundations and endowments that have gravitated toward hedge funds, often without the resources to closely track what each manager’s doing. When the rest of the investment community opts for diversified multi-strats, why get on the rollercoaster with a rockstar?

The obvious downside is the price tag: expensive, but worth it, for the investors that continue to flock to these funds.

Clients at multi-strat funds typically sign up for high and opaque charges called “pass through”. Such charges can reach 10% or more on top of incentive fees, in sharp contrast with the standard hedge fund model of paying a 2% management fee and 20% of profit, with even these prices falling recently. The pass-through fee covers everything from boosting employee pay (and firing struggling traders) to covering office rent and even entertainment.

Some clients are also signing away their money for years. Millennium told investors in November that it had raised a record $10 billion for a fund that takes five years to exit fully. At least four other large multi-manager funds have changed their terms or started new share classes recently, all extending the time it takes for investors to get out.

 “The idea that institutions willingly lock up their money for years then pay annual performance fees is the Frankenstein monster of incentive structures,” said Beer of Dynamic Beta, which tries to replicate hedge fund returns through cheaper strategies. “Imagine if VCs took profits when WeWork hit a $47 billion valuation.”

                         Too Big to Fail.

Still, multi-manager funds are pretty much the only part of the hedge funds industry still attracting new money. Hedge funds collectively have drawn no new money since 2008, with all of their growth fueled exclusively by performance, according to a Bloomberg analysis of Hedge Fund Research Inc. data.

By contrast, a sample of twenty multi-manager funds collectively boosted assets by 510% to $222 billion over the past decade, data compiled by Julius Baer shows. Thirteen of them are now closed to new money.

These funds, of course, come with their own set of risks. While multi-strats are more cushioned than rivals against moves in one particular market, critics are worried about the concentration of assets, made worse by eager banks offering them enormous leverage to juice up their bets.

“Could you imagine the Fed allowing a $50 billion multi-strategy hedge fund to fail? I can’t. Think about the pain that Archegos caused and that was tiny in comparison,” said Will Potts, who is trying to start a multi-strategy fund by crowdsourcing investment ideas. “The damage that would be done to the prime brokers would cause financial distortions, it would be LTCM on speed.”

With echoes of the Long Term Capital Management rescue in 1998, the Federal Reserve pledged an unprecedented $5 trillion to keep markets running smoothly in March 2020 when an enormously leveraged bet called the Treasury basis trade froze — an intervention that veteran macro trader Paul Tudor Jones described as “a nuclear bomb.”

Sean McGould, who runs Lighthouse Investment Partners, isn’t concerned about a single event bringing down a multi-strategy fund, given their diffused risk-taking. He’s more worried about liquidity risk that may prevent leveraged hedge funds from turning bets. “If for some reason liquidity just dried up for a long period of time, and maybe that could be caused by interest rates rising or some other condition, it certainly makes it harder,” he said.

Over at Citadel, the biggest worry is making sure that the $43 billion firm remains in a position to respond to changes and keep attracting talent. “The key is maintaining Citadel’s culture of meritocracy, focus on talent and not becoming complacent so that whatever the risk — be it market, credit, liquidity or pandemic — our culture puts us in a position to adapt,” Zia Ahmed, a spokesman for Citadel said.

A spokesman for Millennium declined to comment.

                         The Lure.

For now, multi-strategy funds are continuing to lure talent and money at a furious pace.

Danilo Onorino is feeling the pain of their success. He founded Dogma Capital in 2014 after a brief stint with Millennium, where he found risk limits too stringent and required him to alter his trading style. “My strategy is not wild. I left because it was not a place for me,” he said. Onorino runs $10 million from Lugano in Switzerland and says raising capital is “almost mission impossible.”

It’s more of an opportunity for Richard Schimel, who launched Cinctive Capital Management in 2019 and has reviewed over 4,000 resumes, met with over 900 candidates and hired 53 traders. The equity-focused firm added risk arbitrage trading recently and plans to expand to macro and credit strategies, becoming home to scores of managers who’d rather not strike out on their own.

“You’re seeing a lot of those people who try and I give them credit for trying and hanging their shingle,” said Schimel. “In some cases, they’re going to get paid more being in a place like this than even starting their own businesses.”

Europa. Le Borse crollano. Eurostoxx -4.14%. E siamo solo agli inizi.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-01-24.

Sono bastate le voci che la Fed stia per varare il tapering ed alzi i tassi di interesse per fare scoppiare quella immane bolla delle borse occidentali

Ma nessuno, proprio nessuno si illuda: siamo solo agli inizi.

Il gioco a monopoli sembrerebbe essere terminato.

* * * * * * *

---

Borse, lunedì ad alta tensione tra Fed e Ucraina. Milano (-4%) la peggiore in attesa del Quirinale

Attesa per le decisioni della Banca centrale Usa. Timori di un intervento militare russo a Kiev: giù rublo e Borsa di Mosca. Spread in rialzo mentre inizia il voto per l’elezione del presidente della Repubblica.

(Il Sole 24 Ore Radiocor) – Le tensioni geopolitiche sul fronte ucraino e l’attesa sempre più nervosa per le indicazioni della Fed sui tassi d’interesse hanno piegato le Borse europee che, fin da inizio giornata colpite da un’ondata di vendite, hanno chiuso in profondo rosso, anche se sopra i minimi di seduta, in scia a Wall Street, ancora in calo dopo la settimana peggiore da marzo 2020. Il FTSE MIB -4,02% di Milano è stato il peggiore, complice anche l’incertezza sull’elezione del futuro presidente della Repubblica, arrivando a perdere il 4,5% e scendendo anche sotto 26.000 punti, ai livelli di fine novembre scorso. Non è andata meglio alle altre piazze continentali, con il CAC 40 -3,97% di Parigi, il DAX 40 -3,79% di Francoforte, l’IBEX 35 -3,06% di Madrid, il Ftse 100 di Londra e l’AEX -3,27% di Amsterdam in profondo rosso. La Borsa di Mosca in caduta libera (-8% l’indice Rts) e il rublo ha perso nettamente posizioni verso il dollaro e l’euro.

Gli indici hanno allungato così la serie negativa iniziata la settimana scorsa tra l’attesa degli annunci della Federal Reserve e le preoccupazioni per l’escalation di tensione sulla crisi Ucraina, con il presidente americano Joe Biden che sta valutando la possibilità di inviare diverse migliaia di soldati americani, oltre a navi da guerra e aerei, da dislocare nei paesi dell’Europa orientale e dei paesi baltici membri della Nato. Ad ogni modo, la due giorni di riunione del Fomc, il braccio operativo della Fed, in calendario il 25 e 26 gennaio tiene banco. Gli analisti ritengono che l’istituto centrale opterà per lo status quo, ma dovrebbe fornire indicazioni sulle mosse di marzo, quando il costo del denaro dovrebbe essere ritoccato al rialzo, forse anche di 50 punti base.

                         In calo anche Wall Street.

Andamento in netto ribasso a Wall Street, dopo i pesanti cali della scorsa settimana. Il Nasdaq cede circa 2 punti, dopo avere perso il 7,6% nella precedente ottava, registrando la peggiore settimana dal marzo 2020 (la quarta consecutiva in calo), e sta vivendo il peggior inizio d’anno dal 2008 (-12% a gennaio). La scorsa settimana è anche finito in correzione, ovvero in calo di oltre il 10% dal recente record del 19 novembre. Dow Jones e S&P 500 hanno concluso la terza settimana consecutiva in calo, la peggiore dal 2020, con cali rispettivamente del 4,6% e del 5,7%.

                         A Milano tutti i titoli in calo, auto fanalino di coda.

A Piazza Affari le vendite non hanno risparmiato nessuno dei titoli principali, a partite dal settore auto della “galassia” Agnelli-Elkann: a Milano Stellantis -7,39% , Exor -6,39% ,Cnh Industrial -6,58% e Iveco Group -7,12% hanno registrato le perdite più consistenti. Inoltre, giorno di stacco degli acconti sul dividendo per Enel -3,47% l e Snam -2,73% . Enel staccherà 19 centesimi per azione (per un rendimento del 2,7% sul prezzo di chiusura di venerdì 21), Snam di 0,1048 (2,05%). Attenzione su Eni -3,20% , dopo l’annuncio che la controllata Var Energi AS sarà quotata alla Borsa di Oslo. L’operazione rientra nella strategia di Eni di valorizzazione dei propri asset al fine di liberare nuove risorse da allocare per l’accelerazione della strategia di transizione energetica. Occhi su Telecom Italia -2,48% , dopo che nei giorni scorsi Pietro Labriola è stato nominato amministratore delegato e nell’attesa che Iliad sveli il proprio ingresso nel fisso e nella fibra. Ma il settore tlc è sotto i riflettori soprattutto per le indiscrezioni relative alla possibile combinazione delle attività italiane proprio da parte di Iliad e di Vodafone. Infine, male Diasorin -5,70% nel giorno in cui l’a.d. Carlo Rosa è stato rinviato a giudizio per l’ipotesi di reato di insider trading.

BlackRock. Gli assets superano i dieci trilioni di dollari americani.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-01-17.

BlackRock. Lancia in Cina un fondo andato a ruba in pochi giorni. Dura condanna di Soros.

BlackRock. Gli assets hanno passato i 9.5 trilioni di dollari. Da quando è in Cina.

Fink, Ceo di BlackRock, ‘this is going to be a pretty big shock’. – Bloomberg

Blackrock. Mr Fink, il vero padrone del mondo.

BlackRock anticipa l’apertura cinese alla finanza occidentale. 3.4 trilioni in tre anni.

BlackRock (7.81tn Usd) continua ad espandersi in Cina, e vi porta i denari occidentali.

Cina. I capitali internazionali acquistano bond cinesi in yuan.

BlackRock rafforza il controllo della Exxon Mobil Corp.

I tre giganti. I nuovi discreti padroni dell’Occidente. Nomi quasi ignoti.

BlackRock (7.81tn Usd) continua ad espandersi in Cina, e vi porta i denari occidentali.

BlackRock, Temasek Set Up China Asset-Management Joint Venture.

* * * * * * *

BlackRock’s China Blunder

«BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, has begun a major initiative in China. On Aug. 30 it launched a set of mutual funds and other investment products for Chinese consumers. The New York-based firm is the first foreign-owned company allowed to do so. The launch came just weeks after BlackRock recommended that investors triple their allocations in Chinese assets. This will push billions of dollars into China. “The Chinese market represents a significant opportunity to help meet the long-term goals of investors in China and internationally,” BlackRock Chairman Larry Fink wrote in a letter to shareholders.»

* * * * * * *

«BlackRock Inc. became the first public asset manager to hit $10 trillion in assets, propelled by a surge in fourth-quarter flows into its exchange-traded funds»

«Investors poured a net $104 billion into ETFs in the three months ended Dec. 31»

«The world’s largest asset manager also benefited from a rally in markets, with the S&P 500 climbing 11% in the latest quarter and 27% in 2021»

«Investors added a net $169 billion to BlackRock’s long-term investment vehicles, including ETFs and mutual funds, in the final three months of the year.»

«Actively-managed funds, a style that includes ETFs and mutual funds, saw a net $101 billion in flows»

«Employee compensation and benefits increased $218 million from the fourth quarter of 2020, reflecting the firm’s move to increase staff pay as inflation surged in the U.S. Starting in September, base salaries rose 8% for all staff at the director level and below»

* * * * * * *

Larry Fink è davvero l’uomo più ricco e potente al mondo.

* * * * * * *

---

BlackRock Hits Record $10 Trillion in Assets

(Bloomberg) — BlackRock Inc. became the first public asset manager to hit $10 trillion in assets, propelled by a surge in fourth-quarter flows into its exchange-traded funds.

Investors poured a net $104 billion into ETFs in the three months ended Dec. 31, the firm said Friday in a statement — a record for the company.

The world’s largest asset manager also benefited from a rally in markets, with the S&P 500 climbing 11% in the latest quarter and 27% in 2021. Investors added a net $169 billion to BlackRock’s long-term investment vehicles, including ETFs and mutual funds, in the final three months of the year.

“Our business is more diversified than ever before,” Chief Executive Officer Larry Fink said in the statement. “Active strategies, including alternatives, contributed over 60% of 2021 organic base fee growth.”

The results reinforce BlackRock’s position atop the industry, with assets under management rebounding from a dip at the end of the third quarter. The earnings come ahead of an annual letter that Fink, 69, sends to corporate leaders, laying out priorities on everything from boardroom diversity to climate change.

Actively-managed funds, a style that includes ETFs and mutual funds, saw a net $101 billion in flows. BlackRock now manages $2.6 trillion in such assets. The firm’s alternatives business, which includes hedge funds, saw $5.5 billion of inflows, taking total assets to $265 billion.

Employee compensation and benefits increased $218 million from the fourth quarter of 2020, reflecting the firm’s move to increase staff pay as inflation surged in the U.S. Starting in September, base salaries rose 8% for all staff at the director level and below.

New York-based BlackRock saw adjusted earnings per share of $10.42, beating the $10.15 average estimate of analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. Revenue in the quarter was $5.11 billion, missing the $5.16 billion average estimate.

BlackRock fell short on revenue due to a decline in performance fees, according to Kyle Sanders, an analyst with Edward Jones. The shares fell 1.7% at 9:45 a.m. in New York trading to $852.50.

(Adds shares in final paragraph. An earlier version of this story corrected the ETF record and the amount in the first deck headline.)

Inflazione e mercato cinese. Due fenomeni destinati a perdurare. – Bloomberg.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2022-01-02.

Lo scorso anno 2021 ha portato due scomode sorprese: l’inflazione e la crisi del mercato cinese.

* * * * * * *

«Inflation and China failed to rattle markets. 2022 might be different»

«A year ago, most economists expected that the Covid-19 pandemic would continue to weigh heavily on the global marketplace, and that the recovery process would be far from smooth»

«But two changes to the landscape — rapid inflation, and questions about the viability of investing in China — caught nearly everyone off-guard»

«And we probably wouldn’t have guessed that markets would by and large take the news in stride»

«I know of no forecaster who came close to projecting a nearly 7% U.S. inflation rate for the end of this year»

«Today, unusually high and persistent inflation has become the consensus call»

«The surge in inflation is even more striking given that, unlike what textbooks and prior experience would suggest, its impact on markets has been muted»

«Yields on government bonds, for example, have been relatively subdued, with 10-year U.S. Treasury notes still trading around 1.50%»

«What makes this even more interesting is that it comes with significant political and institutional stakes»

«From the ability of Democrats to retain control of Congress to the damaged credibility of the Federal Reserve, the 2021 inflation surprise will reverberate throughout 2022»

«Yet to the surprise of many, emerging market equities have underperformed once again»

«Even more unexpectedly, Chinese stocks have been hit hard this year»

«At the most basic level, it isn’t yet clear whether more intervention by Beijing is in the cards or whether the recent default by real estate developer Evergrande will open the way for profitable investing, much as the Russian government’s seizure of oil giant Yukos nearly two decades ago ultimately marked a turning point for investors in that country»

«Amplifying the surprise around China’s investment climate is the lack of any meaningful spread to other emerging markets»

«What occurred in China has remained in China; and what occurred there was far from the “Lehman moment” that some predicted at midyear»

«The evolution of inflation and China’s investability constituted big surprises in 2021, as did their lack of spillover into other areas»

* * * * * * *

Questo tema affrontato da Bloomberg è di notevole interesse culturale e pratico: si è in presenza di due fenomeni inattesi quanto importanti, non affrontabili con i passati schemi mentali.

Tra le molte ed importanti considerazioni una sembrerebbe essere di maggiore interesse generale.

Le borse valori, che erano nate come luogo di incontro tra capitale in cerca di investimenti ed attività produttive in cerca di capitali, hanno perso gran parte della loro funzione originaria. Il valore delle quotazioni azionarie non è più correlato allo stato di salute economica delle società: in passato queste salivano al salire della produttività, adesso invece sotto la azione della speculazione.

Un gruppetto di old friends uniti come ‘latrones scelerum foedere inter se‘ fa artatamente salire le quotazioni: raggiunto un massimo locale vende repentinamente per poi ricomprare a più basse quotazioni. Il tutto con i denari generosamente messi a disposizione delle banche centrali.

Impossibile prevedere quanto a lungo questo sistema possa campare, ma su questa terra nulla è eterno.

* * * * * * *

---

Inflation and China Failed to Rattle Markets. 2022 Might Be Different.

A year ago, most economists expected that the Covid-19 pandemic would continue to weigh heavily on the global marketplace, and that the recovery process would be far from smooth. But two changes to the landscape — rapid inflation, and questions about the viability of investing in China — caught nearly everyone off-guard.

Even if we had foreseen these developments, it is unlikely that we would have gotten right their broader implications. And we probably wouldn’t have guessed that markets would by and large take the news in stride. That bears remembering as we attempt to make projections for the coming year while still dogged by the pandemic and other uncertainties. 

The Inflation Surprise

I know of no forecaster who came close to projecting a nearly 7% U.S. inflation rate for the end of this year, and that includes those of us who pushed back as early as six months ago against the notion that this bout of inflation would prove to be transitory during 2021.

Today, unusually high and persistent inflation has become the consensus call. Yet even now, there is an under-appreciation of the current inflation dynamics, including supply-chain disruptions and worker shortages associated with the new Covid variant, omicron.

The surge in inflation is even more striking given that, unlike what textbooks and prior experience would suggest, its impact on markets has been muted.

Yields on government bonds, for example, have been relatively subdued, with 10-year U.S. Treasury notes still trading around 1.50%. Indeed, if anything, yields adjusted for inflation have fallen deeper into negative territory. Meanwhile, stocks have gone from one record high to another, reaching a total of 70 for the S&P 500 Index this year.

This makes the new year an uncertain proposition for the economy, for markets and for public policy. 

Will inflation derail economic growth while also worsening inequality? How long will it take for the Federal Reserve to catch up to inflation realities, and which policy measures will it deploy?

How quickly will a tightening of market financial conditions follow the pivot to fewer stimulus policies from central banks? How big will the economic and financial impact be, in the U.S. and across the world?

Will yields rise as bond investors look to limit the erosion in the real value of their investment? If so, how will stocks react?

Which countries and sectors are particularly sensitive to higher market volatility?

What makes this even more interesting is that it comes with significant political and institutional stakes. From the ability of Democrats to retain control of Congress to the damaged credibility of the Federal Reserve, the 2021 inflation surprise will reverberate throughout 2022.

The China Investability Surprise

A year ago, many (not me) were advocating that investors make a significant portfolio shift from the U.S. to emerging markets, with a heavy emphasis on China. After all, foreign stocks had again lagged behind their U.S. counterparts, adding to the apparent relative valuation advantage with which they had started the year. Meanwhile, China’s attractiveness to investors had increased. The country’s economy became the first to recover from the pandemic, adding to the promise of a continuation of an impressive multi-decade rise.

Yet to the surprise of many, emerging market equities have underperformed once again. Even more unexpectedly, Chinese stocks have been hit hard this year as, in a move that surprised many investors, the government began reining in private enterprise in tech, real estate and other  industries.

As Beijing tightened its grip, conventional assessments of economic and business fundamentals had to take a back seat to political debates about the intensity of the Chinese government’s crackdown in the name of “common prosperity.”

This is taking place even as China’s zero-Covid policy is challenged by rising infection numbers. The inclination toward a different treatment of domestic and foreign investors further complicates the investment outlook for the world’s second most powerful economy. 

At the most basic level, it isn’t yet clear whether more intervention by Beijing is in the cards or whether the recent default by real estate developer Evergrande will open the way for profitable investing, much as the Russian government’s seizure of oil giant Yukos nearly two decades ago ultimately marked a turning point for investors in that country.

Amplifying the surprise around China’s investment climate is the lack of any meaningful spread to other emerging markets. What occurred in China has remained in China; and what occurred there was far from the “Lehman moment” that some predicted at midyear.

It is particularly noteworthy that, at least so far, there has been no significant retreat of foreign capital from emerging markets as a whole. Instead, large investors have remained exposed to emerging markets, pushed there in search of higher returns by the low yields and high equity valuations in their home markets in advanced countries.

The evolution of inflation and China’s investability constituted big surprises in 2021, as did their lack of spillover into other areas. It remains to be seen how benign last year’s surprises will stay for the global economy and markets.

Inflazione. Analisi UBS delle 147 recessioni avvenute dal 1980. – Bloomberg.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-12-31.

«Inflation bites us all again after the economy roars back»

«It was the best of recoveries, it was the worst of recoveries»

«the coronavirus catapulted the world economy into its deepest recession on record, 2021 witnessed a much faster rebound than most had anticipated»

«An analysis of 147 recessions since 1980 by UBS suggests the pickup in investment and hiring has broken the mold, while consumer spending has also roared back»

«while global gross domestic product still undershoots where it would have been without Covid-19, it’s on course to make up the lost ground at some point next year»

«The US unemployment rate is now 4.2 percent compared with more than 14.8 percent at the nadir of 2020»

«Wages climbed in turn, with some companies facing skills shortages saying they would pay workers more than before the pandemic»

«The MSCI World Index of stocks is up about 20 percent from a year ago, and multiple housing markets have soared, some to records»

«→→ Still, not all have shared in the upswing, and the bigger picture obscures ongoing struggles ←←»

«Emerging markets, in particular, lagged their richer peers »

«The rapid recovery also left economies short of supplies and staff»

«→→ With that came an explosion in inflation, which is proving more stubborn than most economists predicted and is curbing the purchasing power of those on low wages ←←»

«However, the question captivating investors is how soon it will raise its key interest rate from near zero, the record low it reached at the height of the crisis»

«The dilemma for Powell and his counterparts is how to respond without curtailing the much-needed growth in the virus-hit economy»

* * * * * * *

Il problema si presenta essere molto complesso. Cercheremo di semplificare.

Precisiamo subito che l’aticolo riportato identifica l’enclave liberal occidentale con il ‘mondo’, ma ciò non corrisponde al vero.

Che l’occidente sia in ripresa è affermazione tutta da discutere.

Negli Stati Uniti il Producer Price Index, PPI, Indice dei prezzi alla produzione il 14 dicembre valeva 9.6%.

Nella eurozona il Producer Price Index, PPI, Indice dei prezzi alla produzione il 2 dicembre valeva 21.9%.

Questi sono i macrodati più attendibili dell’inflazione in essere.

Da ciò discende che qualsiasi incremento di valore di qualsiasi bene inferiore al livello inflattivo è pur sempre in perdita. I conti si fanno conteggiando sia le entrate sia le uscite.

Il comportamento delle banche centrali sembrerebbe essere molto chiaro.

Nell’enclave occidentale esse vogliono una inflazione sostenuta per bruciare le quantità di liquidi prima immessi nei sistemi economici e per tagliare il potere di acquisto dei debiti pubblici, che hanno raggiunto livelli insostenibili. Non a caso stanno mantendo tassi di interesse vicini allo zero se non negativi.

O inflazione oppure default: alterum non datur.

* * * * * * *

---

Inflation Bites Us All Again After the Economy Roars Back

It was the best of recoveries, it was the worst of recoveries. A year after the coronavirus catapulted the world economy into its deepest recession on record, 2021 witnessed a much faster rebound than most had anticipated. Yet, that too posed its challenges.

An analysis of 147 recessions since 1980 by UBS suggests the pickup in investment and hiring has broken the mold, while consumer spending has also roared back. The Swiss bank reckons that while global gross domestic product still undershoots where it would have been without Covid-19, it’s on course to make up the lost ground at some point next year. That’s sooner than was predicted earlier in the pandemic.

Behind the bounce was the successful provision of vaccinations and the ending of lockdowns that reengaged so much of the world economy. It was helped by massive stimulus from central banks, coupled with welfare programs, tax cuts and government spending that proved longer lasting than the slump triggered by the global financial crisis.

Labour markets tightened dramatically. The US unemployment rate is now 4.2 percent compared with more than 14.8 percent at the nadir of 2020. Wages climbed in turn, with some companies facing skills shortages saying they would pay workers more than before the pandemic. And employers are showing a willingness to allow a combination of working from home and at the office, not least as a way of retaining staff.

Those who own assets have also had reason to celebrate. 

The MSCI World Index of stocks is up about 20 percent from a year ago, and multiple housing markets have soared, some to records. Plus, there’s money saved up during lockdown by those who kept on working or were furloughed.

Still, not all have shared in the upswing, and the bigger picture obscures ongoing struggles. Some economists call the recovery K-shaped.

Emerging markets, in particular, lagged their richer peers, in part because access to vaccinations wasn’t as easy. The International Monetary Fund predicts that total output in the advanced world will exceed its pre-crisis growth path by 2024 — but the emerging world, apart from China, will undershoot that target by 5.5 percent.

The rapid recovery also left economies short of supplies and staff. Ports from Los Angeles to Shanghai became congested, while labour markets ran low on some skills and companies battled to get hold of vital materials such as semiconductors.

With that came an explosion in inflation, which is proving more stubborn than most economists predicted and is curbing the purchasing power of those on low wages. Central bankers are nervously eyeing the pickup in prices.

Some emerging market powerhouses, including Russia and Brazil, have already hiked interest rates.

As ever, all eyes are on the US Federal Reserve. It had begun to slow monthly bond purchases, but is now set to pick up the pace. However, the question captivating investors is how soon it will raise its key interest rate from near zero, the record low it reached at the height of the crisis. 

For most of 2020, Chair Jerome Powell argued that the inflation spike was “transitory.” Lately he has been acknowledging that the price pressures seem more enduring.

The dilemma for Powell and his counterparts is how to respond without curtailing the much-needed growth in the virus-hit economy. Raise rates now, or risk having to come down harder on inflation later? That will be the economic tale of 2022.