8月15日，《市场周刊》指出，尽管标普500指数创下历史新高，引发了关于“竭尽式上涨”（blow-off top）的投机性讨论，但本周整体仍是一个平静的夏季周。然而，主要关注点在于“长期债券”，其收益率“表现不佳”，持续无情地上涨至约5.25%。 鉴于近期经济数据，这种糟糕的表现尤其令人担忧。上周的通胀数据大体温和：消费者物价指数（CPI）符合预期，环比“相当温和”（上月为0%），而生产者物价指数（PPI）则低于预期。基于这些数据，克利夫兰联储估计个人消费支出物价指数（PCE，美联储偏爱的通胀指标）同比约为3.5%，这虽然高于目标，但并未恶化。通常，此类通胀消息会导致收益率下降，它们确实短暂下跌了，但很快就“反弹走高”。 同样，零售销售数据也显示出经济疲软，远低于预期。尽管提到了亚马逊Prime会员日日期调整等特殊因素，但潜在的疲软态势是显而易见的。收益率再次短暂下跌，随后反弹。甚至上月非农就业报告中“令人震惊的失业”（loss of jobs）数据——这表明劳动力市场走弱——也导致收益率条件反射式下跌，但同样立即逆转。这种模式——即便数据表明相反趋势，收益率仍迅速反弹——表明“收益率基本面倾向于走高”。 一个促成因素似乎是全球影响。周五美国长期收益率的显著上涨，很大程度上“受海外事件主导”，尤其是在“欧元区”，那里的涨幅更为显著。发言人推测，这与伊朗战争及其对能源价格的影响有关。尽管原油价格“表现良好”（well behaved），但炼油产能下降正在推高柴油、汽油和航空燃料等精炼产品的成本。这种“持续的能源冲击”不成比例地影响着欧洲和亚洲，这些地区的央行严格以通胀为目标，这给其债券投资者带来了担忧，并蔓延到美国市场。 发言人随后审视了其他普遍的解释。一种分析视角将收益率分解为实际和名义组成部分。从这个角度看，市场不一定是在担忧通胀，因为30年期通胀预期保持稳定。相反，这表明“实际收益率的上升”，长期债券投资者要求更高的实际补偿（例如，30年期通胀保值债券TIPS提供的实际收益率约为3%）。 另一种观点侧重于“期限溢价”，这反映了美联储政策预期路径的不确定性。由于美联储（被称作“Kevin”）对未来反应不透明，甚至暗示可能改变通胀目标，投资者要求更高的回报，以弥补这种额外的长期不确定性。 “巨量债券供应”将淹没市场的论点在很大程度上被驳斥。发言人指出，如果情况果真如此，掉期利差将变得越来越负，但它们一直保持稳定。尽管美国财政部已暗示可能削减长期债券发行（此前在日本出现过类似举动），但目前供应不被视为主要驱动因素。 债券收益率的持续上升对股市和实体经济构成威胁，尤其是住房市场，那里的抵押贷款利率正在攀升。发言人认为，债券市场若要找到“喘息之机”，可能需要“股市出现裂缝”。当股市最终因“人工智能泡沫”可能破裂、地缘政治冲突或过度杠杆等因素而动摇时，将会发生“避险行为”。这将导致市场消化更多美联储降息预期和更疲软的经济增长，最终“提振债券”。当前高回报科技股（如人工智能）的吸引力使债券吸引力下降，直到股票回报率趋于温和。发言人最后对股市持谨慎展望，承认可能出现竭尽式上涨，但建议保持谨慎。

On August 15th, "Markets Weekly" noted a quiet summer week, despite the S&P 500 reaching a new all-time high, suggesting speculative calls for a "blow-off top." However, the primary focus was the "long bond," whose yields have been behaving "very poorly," relentlessly marching higher to approximately 5.25%. This poor performance is particularly concerning given recent economic data. Last week's inflation figures were largely benign: CPI was as expected and "pretty tame" month-over-month (0% last month), and the Producer Price Index (PPI) came in lower than anticipated. Based on these, the Cleveland Fed estimates PCE (the Fed's preferred inflation gauge) at around 3.5% year-over-year, which, while above target, isn't worsening. Typically, such inflation news would cause yields to fall, and they did momentarily, but immediately "retraced higher." Similarly, retail sales data indicated economic weakness, falling significantly below expectations. While idiosyncratic factors like Amazon Prime Day shifts were mentioned, the underlying softness was clear. Yields again saw a brief dip before retracing. Even the "shocking loss of jobs" in last month's NARFARM's payrolls, suggesting a weaker labor market, led to a knee-jerk lower in yields that also immediately reversed. This pattern, where yields quickly rebound despite data suggesting otherwise, indicates that "yields basically want to go higher." A contributing factor appears to be global influences. A notable jump in U.S. long-end yields on Friday was largely "led by what happened abroad," particularly in "Euroland," where increases were more pronounced. The speaker speculates this is tied to the war in Iran and its impact on energy prices. While crude oil prices have been "well behaved," reduced refinery capacity is driving up the cost of distilled products like diesel, gasoline, and jet fuel. This "persisting energy shock" disproportionately affects Europe and Asia, whose central banks are strictly inflation-targeted, creating concern for their bond investors that spills over into U.S. markets. The speaker then examines other popular explanations. One lens decomposes the yield into real and nominal components. From this perspective, the market isn't necessarily fearing inflation, as 30-year inflation expectations remain stable. Instead, it suggests an "increase in real yields," with long bond investors demanding higher real compensation (e.g., 30-year TIPS offer about a 3% real yield). Another perspective focuses on "term premium," reflecting uncertainty in the expected path of Fed policy. With the Fed (referred to as "Kevin") being opaque about future reactions and even suggesting changes to the inflation target, investors demand higher returns to compensate for this added long-term uncertainty. The argument of a "tremendous supply of bonds" overwhelming the market is largely refuted. The speaker notes that if this were the case, swap spreads would become increasingly negative, but they have remained stable. While the Treasury has hinted at potentially cutting long bond issuance (a move previously seen in Japan), supply isn't seen as the primary driver at present. The continued rise in bond yields poses a threat to the stock market and the real economy, especially housing, where mortgage rates are climbing. The speaker believes that for the bond market to find "respite," there will likely need to be "cracks in the equity market." When the stock market eventually falters due to factors like the potential bursting of an "AI bubble," geopolitical conflicts, or excessive leverage, a "flight to safety" will occur. This will lead to market pricing in more Fed cuts and weaker economic growth, ultimately giving a "bid to bonds." The current attractiveness of high-return tech stocks (like AI) makes bonds less appealing until equity returns moderate. The speaker concludes with a cautious outlook on equities, acknowledging the possibility of a blow-off top but advising caution.