Liquidation Incident Reflects Risks in US Financial Market

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 2 April 2021
by Xu Weihong (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Liza Roberts. Edited by Olivia Parker.
Wall Street’s recent hedge fund liquidation incident has drawn the attention of global investors. A hedge fund called Archegos was forced to close its positions because of its attempts to leverage borrowed money to inflate stocks, which impacted the multinational banks that financed it. The resulting loss of tens of billions of dollars incited panic in the global market. Chinese investors are paying particular attention to this matter, and a major reason for this is that a large part of the hedge fund’s gamble is made up of so-called China Concepts Stock. This creates an image in the minds of many: Did rumors about China Concepts Stock cause this liquidation?

What must be explained first is that hedge funds are just one type of institutional investor in the stock market; moreover, not all hedge funds are speculators accustomed to borrowing money, employing leverage and gambling. Looking at the problem from a professional perspective and paying attention to the health of the United States financial system, one must question the multinational banks that have lent money to such gamblers and have suffered huge losses: Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, UBS and Credit Suisse of Switzerland and Japan’s Nomura. Clearly, it is a problem of risk mitigation in the U.S. banking industry that has enabled financial gamblers to gain enough bargaining chips to give gambling a go. Even more concerning is that the U.S. financial market has already been overvalued. The surface-level design of derivatives has become more sophisticated, but hidden financial leverage continues to grow as well. This reality both provides more precise tools for financial gamblers and increases the difficulty for regulators to penetrate assets and funds.

It is precisely because of the gambling nature of some hedge funds and the negative influence of the derivatives market that, following the subprime mortgage crisis, the U.S. government tried to tighten the supervision of household lending and hedge funds through the Dodd-Frank Act. However, the implementation of this bill was constrained by many financial interest groups. The U.S. regulators also “inadvertently” cut corners in order to improve market liquidity, which directly led to this liquidation incident.

Banks that finance gamblers are also to blame. Everyone should still remember when during the Spring Festival, GameStop, a junk bond, was repeatedly hyped up by speculators in the U.S. stock market. There was no lack of financial institutions behind both sides of the “bull and bear'' market transactions.

Demonic stock speculation and fund liquidation are all sources of chaos in the stock market. From the perspective of the central bank, the U.S. Federal Reserve’s super quantitative and loose policy has made the capital cost for major banks nearly zero, and financing for stock speculation institutions has become a high-yield business. It is not difficult to understand that big banks conduct risk assessment with one eye closed in order to gain leverage and attract high-quality clients.

It is evident that the ultra-loose monetary policy in the U.S. and the regulatory bills that have not been strictly implemented have created systemic risks in the financial market, which eventually led to this liquidation incident. Obviously this “pot” should not be backed by China Concepts Stock. After all, the regulatory issue over the accounting standards of China Concepts Stock is no longer news. Whether a listed company or a regulatory agency in China or the U.S., both are actively coordinating to reduce the impact of technical issues of accounting standards on market valuations. In recent years, the number of new Chinese concept stock IPOs facing slander from ill-willed U.S. politicians each year has not fallen but actually increased. This simply shows the reason and wisdom of the business communities in these two countries.

As for political and business speculators who argue about China-U.S. relations and fan the flames in the financial markets and among public opinion, they are driven mostly by ulterior motives. Technically speaking, in 2021 the U.S. is facing rising inflation pressures, and the financial market’s response in asset values creates a risk of bursting the bubble. In the past two months, the risk of prices falling for China Concepts Stock is much lower than that of many U.S. stocks that were hotly speculated last year. An example is the famous large-cap star stock Tesla, which fell from its highest price of $900 per share in early February of this year to $540 per share just a month later.

In summary, the recent chaos in the U.S. financial market is not for the sake of financing Chinese high-tech companies. On the contrary, the U.S. real economy has long been unable to provide the stock market enough IPO investment targets. In the past two to three decades, Chinese assets with growth potential went public on the U.S. market for financing, which greatly eased the asset shortage of U.S. financial investments and consolidated the U.S. capital market’s position as a global leader. This is a winning instance of China-U.S. funding, assets and capital cooperation.

With the construction of China’s multi-level capital market, especially the accumulation of China’s private capital, the Chinese people have money in their hands and many high-quality companies no longer have to travel to the U.S for financing. Therefore, as far as the risks associated with China-U.S. financial cooperation, the American financial system is should be the focus of most concern. Only by continuously maintaining a properly regulated market environment, supplemented by a normalized monetary policy, can the U.S. capital market remain attractive to global high-quality assets and maintain Wall Street’s global financial status.

For China, on one hand it must learn the lessons of the U.S. stock market. These include strictly controlling commercial banks’ financing of speculative activities, strictly controlling the leverage ratio of various investment funds in the stock market, implementing risk control rules for financial security companies’ margin trading and securities lending and appropriately developing the derivative OTC market. We must not allow deposits in commercial banks to flow to the stock market for use in speculation.

On the other hand, the best way to resolve the disputes over China Concepts Stock and curb the fraudulent subsidies of blind speculation technology is to encourage multi-level capital markets to closely serve technology companies and use modern financial service inventions to transform and serve the real economy. This specifically means actively encouraging already-listed traditional industrial enterprises to transform their business models through high-tech targets and upgrade via mergers and acquisitions. In recent years, facilitating the issuance of additional stocks, the creation of the science and technology innovation board and the reform of the registration system are all important manifestations of the steady progress being made on the supply-side structural reform of the stock market.


华尔街的对冲基金爆仓事件近日引发全球投资者的关注。一家名为Archegos的对冲基金,因为放杠杆“借钱炒股”被迫平仓,连累了给他融资的跨国大银行,上百亿美元的损失造成全球市场的恐慌。而中国投资者格外关注此事,很大原因是这家对冲基金此次“豪赌”的标的,有相当大一部分是所谓中概股,进而让很多人脑补出来一个画面:是不是中概股传言造成了此次爆仓?

需要首先说明的是,对冲基金只是股票市场上的一类机构投资者;而且,并非所有对冲基金都是习惯于“借钱、放杠杆、豪赌”的投机客。专业角度看问题,关注美国金融体系健康,必然要质疑借钱给“赌徒”、又遭遇巨大损失的跨国银行:高盛、摩根士丹利、富国、瑞士的瑞银和瑞信,以及日本的野村。显然,是美国银行业风险控制的问题,造就了金融赌徒能够拿到足够的筹码放手一搏。更可怕的是,美国金融市场已经过度虚拟化,衍生品表面看设计越来越精细,隐藏的金融杠杆却越来越高,恰恰为金融赌徒提供了工具,也增加了监管机构“穿透”资产和资金的难度。

正是看到部分对冲基金的天生赌性和衍生品市场的负面影响,次贷危机后,美国政府试图通过“多德-弗兰克法案”收紧对家族信托、对冲基金的监管。但是,法案在执行中受到很多金融既得利益集团的掣肘。美国监管机构也为了提高市场流动性“不经意”地偷工减料,直接酿成此次爆仓事件。


为赌徒融资的银行也难辞其咎。大家应该还有印象,春节期间美国股市的一支“垃圾妖股”游戏驿站,被投机客反复炒作,交易“多头、空头”双方背后都不乏融资机构的身影。

妖股炒作、基金爆仓,都是股票市场乱象。从央行角度,美联储超级量化宽松政策,让大银行资金成本几乎为零,而为股票投机机构贷款融资,又是高收益的业务,各大银行为了抢夺高杠杆的对冲基金“优质客户”,在内部风险控制上睁一只眼闭一只眼,也就不难理解了。

可见,美国超宽松的货币政策、未被严格执行的监管法案,造就金融市场的系统性风险,最终酿成此次爆仓事件。这个“锅”显然不应该由中概股背。毕竟,中概股会计准则的监管问题,早就不是什么新闻。无论是上市公司,还是中美两国的监管机构,都在积极协调,降低会计准则的技术问题对市场估值的冲击。这几年,遭到美国不怀好意政客诋毁,每年新增的中概股IPO数量不降反增,恰恰说明了两国企业界的理智和智慧。

至于政商投机客拿中美关系说事,在金融市场和舆论场上煽风点火,更多是别有用心。从技术上,2021年美国面临通货膨胀抬头的压力,金融市场对应资产价格的泡沫破裂风险。近两个月,中概股的价格下跌风险,远低于去年被爆炒的很多美股板块,例如著名的大市值明星股票特斯拉,一度从今年二月初最高价格900美元每股,短短一个月就跌到了每股540美元。

归根到底,近期美国金融市场的乱象,并非是为中国的高科技企业融资。相反,美国实体经济早就不能给股票市场足够的IPO投资标的。过去二三十年,有增长潜力的中国资产赴美国上市融资,大大缓解了美国金融投资的资产荒,巩固了美国资本市场全球领头羊的位置,对中美两国是一个双赢的“资金、资产、资本”合作。

随着中国多层次资本市场的建设,特别是中国民间资本的积累,中国老百姓手里有钱了,很多优质企业再不用大老远跑到美国融资。因此,对于中美金融领域的合作风险,更应该担忧的,恰恰是美国金融体系。只有持续维护一个适度监管的市场环境,辅以正常化的货币政策,才能保持美国资本市场对全球优质资产的吸引力,保住华尔街的全球金融地位。

对中国而言,一方面要吸取美国股票市场的教训,严格控制商业银行为股市投机行为融资,严格控制各类投资基金的股市杠杆率,贯彻证券公司融资融券的风险控制细则,适度发展衍生品OTC(柜台交易)市场,坚决不能让商业银行的储户资金流向股市投机。

另一方面,化解中概股争论、遏制跟风投机科技“骗补贴”的最好办法,就是鼓励多层次资本市场紧密服务科技企业,用现代金融服务发明成果转化、服务实体经济。特别是积极鼓励已上市的传统产业企业通过并购高科技标的,实现业务模式转型升级。这几年,便利化股票增发、科创板创立、注册制改革,都是这方面股票市场供给侧结构性改革稳步推进的重大体现。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Spain: Trump, Xi and the Art of Immortality

Japan: US Signing of Japan Tariffs: Reject Self-Righteousness and Fulfill Agreement

Israel: Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias: Congress Opens Investigation into Wikipedia

Sri Lanka: Qatar under Attack: Is US Still a Reliable Ally?

Singapore: Several US Trade ‘Deals’ Later, There Are Still More Questions than Answers

Topics

Malaysia: The Tariff Trap: Why America’s Protectionist Gambit Only Tightens China’s Grip on Global Manufacturing

Singapore: Several US Trade ‘Deals’ Later, There Are Still More Questions than Answers

Venezuela: Charlie Kirk and the 2nd Amendment

Spain: Charlie Kirk and the Awful People Celebrating His Death

Germany: Trump Declares War on Cities

Japan: US Signing of Japan Tariffs: Reject Self-Righteousness and Fulfill Agreement

Russia: Trump the Multipolarist*

Turkey: Blood and Fury: Killing of Charlie Kirk, Escalating US Political Violence

Related Articles

Malaysia: The Tariff Trap: Why America’s Protectionist Gambit Only Tightens China’s Grip on Global Manufacturing

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?