I'm really convinced of the current A shares.
Open financial news on weekends. All kinds of just, sudden, latest, a meeting, a bureau, a division, a line, heavy voices, resolute deployment, major benefits.
Then the latest research and judgment of the chief of the brokerage and the ** manager urgently interpreted.
Finally, wait for A-shares to open on Monday and continue**.
After the paragraph is finished, enter the main text. If you want to spray, pull directly to the comment area at the end of the article.
In the past, investors sprayed restricted stocks every day that they could borrow and sell them. This time, the policy loophole was finally plugged, and as a result, the market fell even harder.
Therefore, securities lending is not the core issue of the market at all.
If you want me to say, investment should be a matter of returning to the basics, which is also the first principle that Musk said.
Investing in a** is essentially equivalent to us buying part of the equity of a company. Our final earnings should be the sum of the future cash flows of this portion of the equity.
Many people have never done business, so let's think of buying a house.
In the past, we dared to close our eyes and speculate in real estate, but now we don't dare. If you want to invest in real estate now, then we will most likely analyze a lot of things in a family meeting. If we only consider the ** factor, we will definitely discuss the following two issues.
First, if this house is used for rent, how much is the annual rent? Or what is the annualized rate of return?
Second, when selling in the future, let's assume that in 20 years, how much will this house be worth?
That's just the sum of the future cash flow that investing in the property can bring you. Therefore, the sum of future cash flows is a very simple investment thinking, and it is also a kind ofCommon sense in investing.
In the past, everything went up, and everyone often only looked at the second point, that is, how high the house could sell in the future. Investing in ** is also, many people *** aim to sell at a higher **. As for how much cash flow the ** itself can bring, many people don't pay attention.
But now we will find out,Selling** is important, but cash flow seems to be even more important.
To take a very simple example, the annualized rate of return of the property market in China's first- and second-tier cities is generally around 1% to 2%.
But you find a house with a rental yield of around 5% per annum. A house of 1 million can receive a rent of 50,000 yuan per year.
This is most likely a good investment. Even if it is not sold in the future, the rent received just every year will exceed bank deposits, wealth management and debt base.
The point is, this ultra-high cash flow return can even determine the future property**.
After all, a house with an annual rental yield of 5% is likely to be sold in the future, and it can also be sold higher.
Of course, smart investors should be skeptical at this point. The simplest logic is why the rental yield of other houses is only 1% 2% per annum. And this house is as high as 5%.
There may be many reasons for this, such as the house is too old, it needs to be repaired later, or the house has a crime or murder, or the property rights of the house are flawed, etc.
What can these possible causes be collectively called? The answer appeared 3 years ago, because the same story happened in A-shares.
At that time, growth stocks generally had an annual dividend yield of 05% to 1%, while value stocks have an annual dividend yield of 4% to 5%.
Many investors are dismissive of the high dividends of value stocks, and the reasons they give are simple and crude, just four words:Value traps
But is there really a value trap? In fact, most people do not have an in-depth analysis. Their core logic is still based on the stock price.
You see, growth stocks and active ** can rise by 30% to 50% a year, and your value stocks and dividends** can rise by less than 10% a year, and the valuation has been very low, which shows that there is a value trap.
They will also take out the ** picture of PetroChina and tell you the consequences of buying 48 yuan PetroChina that year. But completely ignoring the 07 years, PetroChina, which was 48 yuan, was actually a growth stock, and PE reached 50 times.
Therefore,At the time of the bull market in 2020, the so-called value trap explanation was more of an excuse, an excuse to chase growth stocks and **proactively**. As for whether there is really a value trap, no one cares at all.
It's like the 5% rental yield property mentioned earlier, not because there is anything wrong with the house itself, but because the surrounding properties with a 1% yield have risen more fiercely.
Obviously,In this case, the value trap is most likely fake, but the opportunity is.
However, the probability of this phenomenon in the property market is extremely small. Because buying a house is a big deal, many people are very cautious, and it takes months or even a year or two to complete the transaction. So the whole market is relatively balanced.
And the *** market is different, this is the craziest and most emotional market, there is no one. Some people invest 200,000 yuan** or ** time-consuming, which is not even as long as the time it takes him to order a 20 yuan takeaway. That's the reality.
Back to the present. No one is talking about the value traps of high-dividend companies anymore, and investors are more about whether they can continue to get on the bus.
After all, a lot of the time, the stock price is the truth. I have a large number of bonuses** in my hands, and the yield is generally 70%+. So what is there to question?
As I've said a long time ago, high-dividend companies are most likely not at risk at the moment. And I'm talking about a bigger question:
Is it possible,The A-shares, which are now much disliked, are a big, so-called, imaginary value trap
As for the reason, it's still the mindset of looking at pictures and talking.
You see, the surrounding ** is rising, and A-shares have been falling. The valuation of A-shares has been low, which shows that there is a value trap.
They will also take out the ** picture of A shares, and bitterly tell the story of 3,000 points in 10 years. But completely ignoring the fact that 3000 points in 07 is the absolute high of A shares, PE is as high as 40 times, and now 3000 points is the low level of A shares, and PE is only more than 10 times.
As for whether there is really a value trap, remove the ** and men's football team, how is China, but fewer and fewer people care about it. Because everyone has gone to buy overseas **.
Chinese Internet technology companies 10 15 times PE, repurchase + dividend of more than 6%, but because it has been falling, no one believes it; U.S. Internet technology companies are more than 30 times PE, repurchase + dividend of 2%, but because it has been rising, it is worth chasing.
In their eyes, the stock price explains everything. But whether this is really the case, perhaps there is a question mark at this point.
Finally, the next grid refers to 262。If you have any questions, please feel free to discuss and exchange in the message area.