Here's How Wall Street Defines "Stagflation" And Why "Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced"_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

Here's How Wall Street Defines "Stagflation" And Why "Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced"

zerohedge2021-10-11

It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...

网页链接

免责声明：本文观点仅代表作者个人观点，不构成本平台的投资建议，本平台不对文章信息准确性、完整性和及时性做出任何保证，亦不对因使用或信赖文章信息引发的任何损失承担责任。

142

koolgal
·2021-10-11
My image of stagflation is like wild horses riding out of control (which is inflation) yet there is hardly any growth. I hope it will not come to pass but forewarned is forearmed!👍😊🐎🐎🐎
回复
7
举报
收起
- 滚股怪:
  Good
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
- koolgal:
  Thanks 👍😊
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
kungpao
·2021-10-11
Great insight, thanks
回复
6
举报
jimmylaw
·2021-10-11
Like comment
回复
3
举报
JohnLoh00
·2021-10-11
Ok
回复
6
举报
收起
- JimmySiew:
  ok
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
Pepeflabs
·2021-10-11
Wonke
回复
6
举报
收起
- JohnLoh00:
  Ok
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
Geoz88
·2021-10-11
Like pls
回复
5
举报
收起
- Swifty:
  👍🏻
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
- Pepeflabs:
  lol
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
Kennyoscar
·2021-10-11
Wow
回复
6
举报
phantom74
·2021-10-11
Like
回复
4
举报
收起
- rhengheng:
  like
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
- Geoz88:
  OK
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
Al3x
·2021-10-11
Like
回复
3
举报
收起
- phantom74:
  like
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
Angelinegoh
·2021-10-11
Like plz
回复
4
举报
收起
- Newbie_me:
  Ok
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
Mclye
·2021-10-11
Like
回复
4
举报
nummiebuddy
·2021-10-11
Like and comment
回复
5
举报
收起
- nummiebuddy:
  okok
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
- Mclye:
  👍
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报
3937f510
·2021-10-11
Like please. Thanks
回复
5
举报
JLBW
·2021-10-11
Pls like
回复
5
举报
YQ123
·2021-10-11
Like and comment please
回复
5
举报
收起
- YQ123:
  thanks
  2021-11-13
  回复
  举报
- JLBW:
  Ok
  2021-10-11
  回复
  举报

热议股票

7x24

全部

关于我们·老虎社区守则·老虎社区账号管理规范·老虎社区服务协议·老虎社区隐私政策

公司名称：北京至简风宜信息技术有限公司

违法和不良信息投诉：010-5681-3562（工作时间9:30-18:30）

邮箱：service@laohu8.com

营业执照：91110105MA01A4U55R

ICP备：京ICP备18016422号

网安备：京公网安备11010502036490

关注我们

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"1199183279","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","media":"zerohedge","content":"<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"lsy1583725640930","html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":".DJI","symbol_name":"道琼斯","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","article_id":"1199183279","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"sourceInfo":{"source_id":"lsy1583725640930","name":"Zerohedge"},"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"zerohedge.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"translate_title":"以下是华尔街如何定义“滞胀”，以及为什么“市场可能被严重错误定价”","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9},"content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","kind":null,"is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":null,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":1},"commentList":[{"id":828545119,"gmtCreate":1633928972992,"gmtModify":1633929657575,"author":{"id":"3559581955535845","authorId":"3559581955535845","name":"koolgal","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c05274d88ffc0434623e57350c52c70a","vip":2,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"My image of stagflation&nbsp;is like wild horses riding out of control (which is inflation) yet there is hardly any growth.&nbsp; I hope it will not come to pass but forewarned is forearmed!👍😊🐎🐎🐎","listText":"My image of stagflation&nbsp;is like wild horses riding out of control (which is inflation) yet there is hardly any growth.&nbsp; I hope it will not come to pass but forewarned is forearmed!👍😊🐎🐎🐎","text":"My image of stagflation is like wild horses riding out of control (which is inflation) yet there is hardly any growth. I hope it will not come to pass but forewarned is forearmed!👍😊🐎🐎🐎","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828545119","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6162198,"gmtCreate":1633951846372,"gmtModify":1634716181368,"authorId":4091089381144950,"author":{"id":4091089381144950,"authorId":4091089381144950,"name":"滚股怪","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b67621b4133ca0db91bff9766152a448","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828545119,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Good","text":"Good","html":"Good"},{"id":6162247,"gmtCreate":1633952170141,"gmtModify":1633952170141,"authorId":3559581955535845,"author":{"id":3559581955535845,"authorId":3559581955535845,"name":"koolgal","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c05274d88ffc0434623e57350c52c70a","vip":2,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828545119,"type":1,"supId":6162198,"prevId":0,"content":"Thanks 👍😊","text":"Thanks 👍😊","html":"Thanks 👍😊"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828549598,"gmtCreate":1633928292897,"gmtModify":1633928293066,"author":{"id":"3575091423649914","authorId":"3575091423649914","name":"kungpao","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f469169ddf2122a6445250fcaea5382c","vip":1,"crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Great insight, thanks","listText":"Great insight, thanks","text":"Great insight, thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828549598","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828534927,"gmtCreate":1633922980926,"gmtModify":1633922981078,"author":{"id":"3570772304712620","authorId":"3570772304712620","name":"jimmylaw","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f6c847ae11f03f4682632e6fa4016040","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like comment&nbsp;","listText":"Like comment&nbsp;","text":"Like comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828534927","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828250560,"gmtCreate":1633918243969,"gmtModify":1633918244063,"author":{"id":"3580436163482352","authorId":"3580436163482352","name":"JohnLoh00","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828250560","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6159119,"gmtCreate":1633922100128,"gmtModify":1634716420767,"authorId":3578176602660058,"author":{"id":3578176602660058,"authorId":3578176602660058,"name":"JimmySiew","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/865217a1248da3f0d11fd05e9280c2a7","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828250560,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828287426,"gmtCreate":1633916991642,"gmtModify":1633916995743,"author":{"id":"3573162818118967","authorId":"3573162818118967","name":"Pepeflabs","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bb2ce4a85b6af8ab6f45834a991797c6","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Wonke","listText":"Wonke","text":"Wonke","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828287426","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6158366,"gmtCreate":1633918239892,"gmtModify":1634716480358,"authorId":3580436163482352,"author":{"id":3580436163482352,"authorId":3580436163482352,"name":"JohnLoh00","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828287426,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Ok","text":"Ok","html":"Ok"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828217804,"gmtCreate":1633916232153,"gmtModify":1633916232260,"author":{"id":"3579002978614578","authorId":"3579002978614578","name":"Geoz88","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/40716588ae7919100620a5b5a9c48cac","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like pls&nbsp;","listText":"Like pls&nbsp;","text":"Like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828217804","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6158043,"gmtCreate":1633916924325,"gmtModify":1634716509810,"authorId":3573686260747225,"author":{"id":3573686260747225,"authorId":3573686260747225,"name":"Swifty","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/25bc2f32857ae0c620f1d9eee6447454","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828217804,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"👍🏻","text":"👍🏻","html":"👍🏻"},{"id":6158051,"gmtCreate":1633916981223,"gmtModify":1634716509050,"authorId":3573162818118967,"author":{"id":3573162818118967,"authorId":3573162818118967,"name":"Pepeflabs","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bb2ce4a85b6af8ab6f45834a991797c6","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828217804,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"lol","text":"lol","html":"lol"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828217391,"gmtCreate":1633916207603,"gmtModify":1633916207776,"author":{"id":"3575882730419858","authorId":"3575882730419858","name":"Kennyoscar","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7ae5bbd70eee00b69de3be27b8862938","vip":1,"crmLevel":9,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828217391","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828210412,"gmtCreate":1633915615607,"gmtModify":1633915615848,"author":{"id":"3570342809089528","authorId":"3570342809089528","name":"phantom74","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c87ef2af41b8696be86cceafb5b5723d","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828210412","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6157737,"gmtCreate":1633915820113,"gmtModify":1634716536572,"authorId":3577612953569737,"author":{"id":3577612953569737,"authorId":3577612953569737,"name":"rhengheng","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/58bf6b16a89ff371c6c0942ad99039ea","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828210412,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>like</u>","text":"<u>like</u>","html":"<u>like</u>"},{"id":6157881,"gmtCreate":1633916240265,"gmtModify":1634716524384,"authorId":3579002978614578,"author":{"id":3579002978614578,"authorId":3579002978614578,"name":"Geoz88","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/40716588ae7919100620a5b5a9c48cac","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828210412,"type":1,"supId":6157737,"prevId":0,"content":"OK","text":"OK","html":"OK"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828237599,"gmtCreate":1633915576541,"gmtModify":1633915576640,"author":{"id":"4088815138354210","authorId":"4088815138354210","name":"Al3x","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76537eea7f5e56814a3866c383a688d2","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828237599","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6157679,"gmtCreate":1633915623022,"gmtModify":1634716542022,"authorId":3570342809089528,"author":{"id":3570342809089528,"authorId":3570342809089528,"name":"phantom74","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c87ef2af41b8696be86cceafb5b5723d","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828237599,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>like</u>","text":"<u>like</u>","html":"<u>like</u>"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828236309,"gmtCreate":1633915368489,"gmtModify":1633915368659,"author":{"id":"3583225886946401","authorId":"3583225886946401","name":"Angelinegoh","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like plz","listText":"Like plz","text":"Like plz","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828236309","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6157612,"gmtCreate":1633915384085,"gmtModify":1634716548106,"authorId":3578907722938431,"author":{"id":3578907722938431,"authorId":3578907722938431,"name":"Newbie_me","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8b4a1f99e8c51a51e93bfd003334327","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828236309,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Ok","text":"Ok","html":"Ok"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828238272,"gmtCreate":1633915322904,"gmtModify":1633915323085,"author":{"id":"3586592942167883","authorId":"3586592942167883","name":"Mclye","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7d6caff4ccbb93636f7b7b974299e6c","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828238272","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828238695,"gmtCreate":1633915322763,"gmtModify":1633915323000,"author":{"id":"3548631862118033","authorId":"3548631862118033","name":"nummiebuddy","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cd82325c82cc22414a36390e243a5cf5","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like and comment","listText":"Like and comment","text":"Like and comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828238695","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6157602,"gmtCreate":1633915328775,"gmtModify":1634716548973,"authorId":3548631862118033,"author":{"id":3548631862118033,"authorId":3548631862118033,"name":"nummiebuddy","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cd82325c82cc22414a36390e243a5cf5","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828238695,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>okok</u>","text":"<u>okok</u>","html":"<u>okok</u>"},{"id":6157603,"gmtCreate":1633915330864,"gmtModify":1634716548865,"authorId":3586592942167883,"author":{"id":3586592942167883,"authorId":3586592942167883,"name":"Mclye","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7d6caff4ccbb93636f7b7b974299e6c","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828238695,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"👍","text":"👍","html":"👍"}],"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828238352,"gmtCreate":1633915286289,"gmtModify":1633915286482,"author":{"id":"3581591934594146","authorId":"3581591934594146","name":"3937f510","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like please. Thanks","listText":"Like please. Thanks","text":"Like please. Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828238352","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828233829,"gmtCreate":1633915150055,"gmtModify":1633915150182,"author":{"id":"4088639231266520","authorId":"4088639231266520","name":"JLBW","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Pls like","listText":"Pls like","text":"Pls like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828233829","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":828233031,"gmtCreate":1633915126139,"gmtModify":1633915126199,"author":{"id":"3567460444685804","authorId":"3567460444685804","name":"YQ123","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/83da4b718f672aaeec68339de1b408d1","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0},"htmlText":"Like and comment please","listText":"Like and comment please","text":"Like and comment please","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/828233031","repostId":1199183279,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199183279","pubTimestamp":1633914792,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1199183279?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 09:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199183279","media":"zerohedge","summary":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi gl","content":"<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/168c3070fdc609f96adddbe87fc8da99\" tg-width=\"1738\" tg-height=\"866\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.</p>\n<p>As a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"</p>\n<p>Yet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"</p>\n<p>So to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"</p>\n<p>Here's what the survey found:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”</b></li>\n <li><b>25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”</b></li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c1106e13503d4a8be89bb96fc1957fe\" tg-width=\"1312\" tg-height=\"640\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>As Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.<b>\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.</b>So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"</p>\n<p>Reid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.<b>It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.</b></p>\n<p>Surprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.</p>\n<p>What this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"<b>markets could be massively mis-priced</b>\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"</p>\n<p>The next few months will prove if he is right.</p>","source":"lsy1583725640930","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's How Wall Street Defines \"Stagflation\" And Why \"Markets Could Be Massively Mispriced\"\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-11 09:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/heres-how-wall-street-defines-stagflation-and-why-markets-could-be-massively-mispriced?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199183279","content_text":"It is easy to understand why Wall Street is increasingly worried about Stagflation: with the Citi global inflation surprise index surging to the highest level ever (granted, it only captures the period since 1999 so it's unclear how it compares to the 1970s or early 1980s inflation shock periods)..\n\n... Citi's economic surprise index has turned negative and slumped to levels which historically have indicated an economic slowdown if not outright recession.\nAs a result, it's also easy to understand why some of Wall Street's strategists have taken it upon themselves to ease investor concerns that another 1970s stagflationary shock may be coming, most notably Morgan Stanley earlier today, which admits that \"it’s not hard to see why one term seems to come up again and again in conversations with investors: stagflation\" but counters that in its view the surge in energy prices is temporary, and that the most comparable period to the current stagflationary scare is more comparable to 2005 when \"CPI hit 3.5%Y while the US manufacturing PMI had fallen to 52. 'Stagflation' graced the cover of The Economist. These fears eventually passed as growth rebounded and inflation moderated, but we think that 2005 may provide a useful reference point for a scare that comes far short of the 1970s. Equity multiples de-rated throughout 2004-05, consistent with the current forecasts for my colleague Mike Wilson and our US equity strategy team.\"\nYet as Morgan Stanley also admits, while the \"market is focused on stagflation, it just hasn’t quite decided what that term really means.\"\nSo to help shed some light on what most Wall Street professionals think when they hear the term \"Stagflation\", today we publish a second post on the topic of stagflation, in which we point readers to the latest monthly survey conducted by Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid who asked just this question and agrees with Morgan Stanley that \"one of the problems that the survey throws up is how we define “Stagflation”. It also shows the perceived elevated risks of it.\"\nHere's what the survey found:\n\n43% define Stagflation as “growth around zero or negative and inflation well above target”\n30% define Stagflation as “growth below trend and inflation comfortably above target”\n25% define Stagflation as “a strong slowdown in growth and strong pickup in inflation”\n\n\nAs Reid notes, although the top most negative definition is the most popular, there is a relatively even split of definitions out there.\"This is important because there’s a huge potential difference in the impact of these scenarios on global markets over the next 12-18 months.So when the term is used we have to be careful to understand the definition behind it.\"\nReid also admits that he was very surprised how strong the consensus is now that stagflation of some kind is more likely than not over the next 12 months: for the most aggressively negative definition, the very high or high risk is still “only” 22% and 33% for the US and Europe.It is a stunningly high 54% in the UK though.\nSurprisingly around 40% think the US is at risk of growth being below trend over the next year which given that consensus forecasts for GDP growth in 2022 is c.4%, feels quite aggressive.\nWhat this means in practical terms, is that if these numbers are proved correct, \"markets could be massively mis-priced\", according to the DB strategist. The silver lining to Reid, and here he is somewhat in agreement with Morgan Stanley, is that his \"gut feel\" is that while the risks are elevated, especially on the inflation side, \"the phrase “stagflation” is being used too aggressively at the moment.\"\nThe next few months will prove if he is right.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":6559361,"gmtCreate":1636773062594,"gmtModify":1636773062684,"authorId":3567460444685804,"author":{"id":3567460444685804,"authorId":3567460444685804,"name":"YQ123","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/83da4b718f672aaeec68339de1b408d1","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828233031,"type":1,"supId":6157566,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>thanks</u>","text":"<u>thanks</u>","html":"<u>thanks</u>"},{"id":6157566,"gmtCreate":1633915155928,"gmtModify":1634716552575,"authorId":4088639231266520,"author":{"id":4088639231266520,"authorId":4088639231266520,"name":"JLBW","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":828233031,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Ok","text":"Ok","html":"Ok"}],"langContent":"CN"}],"hasMoreComments":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":142,"commentSize":15,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false}}