Inflation & The Coming Gold, Silver, & Commodities Bull Run? w/ Tavi Costa (TIP553)

发布时间 2023-05-18 23:45:01 来源

摘要

💰Click here to download your FREE guide to Stop Worrying About Your Finances In 4 Simple Steps: https://www.theinvestorspodcast.com/subscribe-youtube/ 🎧 Listen to our episodes here: https://link.chtbl.com/WSB Clay brings back Tavi Costa to chat about the beginning of a commodity supercycle. Tavi gives a masterclass in why we are just in the beginning phases of a bull market for gold, silver, and hard assets like commodities. ▶️ RELATED EPISODES: - How to Make Life-Changing Returns in Commodities, Cyclicals, & Spinoffs | Gautam Baid: https://youtu.be/Xtahs2Gdyw8 IN THIS EPISODE YOU’LL LEARN: - Why Tavi believes we’re just at the beginning phases of a bull market for gold, silver, and hard assets like commodities. - What the 4 pillars of inflation are, and why they all point to structurally higher inflation going forward. - When the next wave of inflation may strike. - Why the S&P 500’s earnings are likely to roll over and decline in the near term. - Why yield curve inversions are bullish for gold relative to equities. - Why foreign countries are selling US treasuries to buy gold. - Where Tavi sees asymmetric opportunities in the gold mining industry. - Why Tavi is bullish on Brazil and sees Brazil much differently than the others BRICS nations. 🔐 Help companies protect customer privacy in the face of endlessly growing data breaches by investing in Atakama today: http://invest.atakama.com/wsb 🖊️ Access the transcript and learn more about the guest here: https://www.theinvestorspodcast.com/episodes/why-hard-assets-are-positioned-to-outperform-w-tavi-costa/ 💡 OTHER RESOURCES - Seeking Alpha is a crowd-sourced content service for financial markets. Take control of your financial future — Use our link here for a special $140 discount: https://bit.ly/3WG6WU3 ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ABOUT OUR SHOW 🎙 On We Study Billionaires, we interview and study famous financial billionaires including Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and Ray Dalio. We teach you what we learn and how you can apply their investment strategies in the stock market. 🌍 Website: https://www.theinvestorspodcast.com/we-study-billionaires/ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ 📚OUR FREE INVESTING COURSES/RESOURCES https://www.theinvestorspodcast.com/tip-academy/ 📊TRY OUR STOCK INVESTING TOOL: TIP FINANCE https://www.theinvestorspodcast.com/tip-finance/ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ⏤ ❗ DISCLAIMER: This show is for entertainment purposes only. Before making any decisions consult a professional. This show is copyrighted by The Investor’s Podcast Network. Written permission must be granted before syndication or rebroadcasting.

GPT-4正在为你翻译摘要中......

中英文字稿

Well, I back tested a lot of asset classes, Treasuries, Oil, Gold, the S&P 500. They all have different performances, especially in different macro regimes. But what you find is that the Gold to S&P 500 ratio is by far the best portfolio position after the 70% handle is triggered.

嗯，我回测了很多资产类别，包括国债、石油、黄金和标普500指数。它们在不同宏观环境下表现各不相同。但你会发现，在触发了70%的水平后，黄金对标普500指数的比率是迄今为止最佳的投资组合位置。

Welcome to the Investors Podcast. I'm your host, Clay Fink, and I am absolutely thrilled to bring you today's guest, Tavi Costa. Tavi, welcome back to the show. Thanks for having me, Clay. Looking forward to this conversation.

欢迎来到《投资者播客》。我是你的主持人Clay Fink，非常高兴为大家带来今天的嘉宾Tavi Costa。Tavi，在节目中欢迎回来。谢谢邀请我，Clay。期待这次的对话。

We had you on the podcast back in October of 2021 to cover precious metals. And since I discovered your work, then I've just been blown away by some of the charts that you've been posting to help shed light on what's playing out in the markets. And since you've been sharing these great charts, I figured it would make a ton of sense to pull some of these charts for those watching on video on YouTube.

2021年10月，我们请您参加了我们的播客节目，讨论了贵金属。自从我发现了您的作品以来，您发布的一些图表令我十分惊叹，帮助解释市场上正在发生的情况。鉴于您一直在分享这些精彩的图表，我认为为那些在YouTube上观看视频的人们提供这些图表将非常有意义。

But for those listening on the audio, we'll be sure to chat through sort of what's happening on the screen here and tie it into the questions.

对于那些通过音频收听的人，我们会确保通过讨论屏幕上的情况，并将其与问题联系起来。

So to help set the stage for our conversation, let's start with what you called the most important macro chart of this decade. For those listening, the commodities to equity ratio has been in a decline since the great financial crisis, and it's well below its historical average. And it looks to potentially be on the upswing and maybe have a shift in momentum here to the upside. And what's amazing to me is just how far commodities have fallen on this chart relative to equities given how much commodities seem to have been under invested in.

为了帮助我们开展对话，让我们从你所称之为这十年最重要的宏观图表开始。对于那些在听的人来说，商品与股票的比率自从大规模金融危机以来一直在下降，并且远低于其历史平均水平。现在看起来可能会有上升的迹象，也许有望出现势头转变向上的趋势。而令我惊讶的是，在这张图表中，相对于股票，商品价格下跌了如此之多，尽管似乎投资在商品市场方面相对较少。

So maybe, Tavi, we can start with your thesis on why you believe we're just at the beginning of this uptrend for the commodity to equity ratio.

所以或许，Tavi，我们可以从你对于你为什么相信商品与股本比率处于上升趋势刚刚开始的论点开始。

Well, to start with, I would say that this chart reflects, I would think most of at least my views in the macro environment. And it's it is a reflection as well of how cheap tangible assets are relative to financial assets. For many reasons, we've had 30 years or so of declining interest rates. Discount rates have been declining as a result. Cost of capital has been declining as well over the last 20 to 30 years. And therefore, that all had an impact on inflating prices of financial assets. So you have equity markets near record levels in terms of price relative to fundamentals. The same thing is happening with the bond market. Despite the fact that in 2022, we've had a decline in both asset classes.

嗯，开始的时候，我要说这张图表反映了宏观环境中至少我的观点。它也反映了有形资产相对于金融资产是多么便宜。由于许多原因，我们过去30年或如此的利率一直在下降。折现率也随之下降。过去20至30年，资本成本也在下降。因此，这一切都对金融资产价格产生了影响。所以你可以看到股票市场相对于基本面价值位于接近记录水平。债券市场也有同样的情况。尽管2022年这两类资产都出现了下降。

And the other side of this, which is absolutely important and critical for investors has to do with the tangible asset side. We're seeing how commodities have been under allocated by investors. Also, we've had a chronic period of under investments in the space. And so a lot of those commodities have been they need new reserves, they need new discoveries. They have been lacking the level of capital's expenditure that we've had over the other times in history, especially when you are really looking at that data relative to GDP levels, because $10 million spent on the ground today certainly isn't the same as we saw back during the global financial crisis period or so. And so this chart showing how depressed commodity to equity ratios are, it is a reflection of those views. And it's also a reflection of the views about inflation.

而另一方面，对于投资者来说，与有形资产相关的一面至关重要和关键。我们正在看到投资者对大宗商品的配置不足。此外，我们在这个领域一直存在投资不足的长期问题。因此，许多大宗商品需要新的储备，需要新的发现。它们在过去的历史时期，尤其是在与GDP水平相对的数据上，缺乏资本支出的水平，因为今天在地面上投入的1000万美元当然不同于我们在全球金融危机时期或其他时期所见到的情况。因此，这张图显示的压低的大宗商品对股票的比率，反映了这些观点。它也反映了对通胀的看法。

Inflation is something that we've had in other decades, the 1910s, the 1940s, and the 1970s. Although in this chart, it only goes back 50 years. So we're not seeing the 40s in the 1910s. But you can see clearly that in the 70s, the fact that we did had inflation, in other words, the cost of consumer prices, or I should say the price of consumer goods and services was rising during that period.

通胀是我们在其他几十年里经历过的情况，比如1910年代、1940年代和1970年代。尽管在这个图表中，只追溯了50年的数据，所以我们无法看到1940年代和1910年代的情况。但是可以清楚地看到，70年代我们确实经历了通胀，换句话说，消费品和服务的价格在那个时期是在上涨的。

And also, we've had the break of the gold, Stender, and other issues that cause these most investors to flock into into most of the tangible assets. Housing market did well better than the stock market. I would say the tangible assets in general, including commodities mostly from copper to gold to silver to energy in general, agricultural, all perform better than stocks and bonds.

而且，我们已经经历了金融市场的崩溃、斯滕德尔等其他问题，导致大多数投资者纷纷转向实物资产。住房市场表现好于股市。总的来说，我认为包括大宗商品在内的实物资产，从铜到金再到银、能源、农业等都比股票和债券表现得更好。

And I think that correlation shift, it is a little bit understated today by most investors that believe that we are always going to see equity markets outperforming other asset classes. But also, bonds will serve as a haven asset for most portfolios. And all that is, again, is indicated in this chart as what I think that is going to be a paradigm shift for investing, where commodities are going to go back and become a large allocation of investors. And also, it's not only commodities, commodity businesses that are part of this as well.

我认为相关性的转变在今天被大多数认为股票市场表现优于其他资产类别的投资者低估了一点。但是，债券也将为大多数投资组合提供避风港资产。这一切都在这张图中得到了体现，我认为这将是一个投资范式转变的指示，商品将重新成为投资者大量配置的一部分。而且，不仅仅是商品本身，商品相关企业也是其中的一部分。

And so, I think this chart is just simplistically telling us how cheap those assets are relative to financial assets. But there's a lot of ways to express that view in the markets. Some folks will think a certain commodity will do better than others. Let's say myself, I have a very strong focus in gold and precious metals. Some others have the same view on energy and so forth.

因此，我认为这个图表只是简单地告诉我们相对于金融资产，这些资产有多便宜。但在市场上表达这种观点的方式有很多种。有些人认为某种商品会比其他商品表现更好。比如，我个人非常关注黄金和贵金属。还有其他人对能源等方面持有相同观点。

I happen to think there is a way to express that view today, similar to how people capitalize in the early 90s with creating the creation of private equities and venture capital approach of investing in many startups back in the 90s of the technology sector, which was the beginning of the internet and so forth, and did very well. The difference here is that this space of natural resource industries is perhaps one of the oldest industries in history. And one other thing that is related to this is that is a lack of folks that understand this space very well. I mean, we have not only an issue of prices imbalances between equities and commodities, but also a problem of labor markets that are not being able to fulfill the interest from companies that need geologists, so geosciences, undergrads, and graduate students in terms of the number of folks that are graduating in those fields has been also in a secular decline. All of those trends shown in this chart are secular trends. Their long-term trends tend to occur for over a decade or so.

我碰巧认为，今天有一种表达这种观点的方式，类似于上世纪90年代人们通过私募股权和风险投资的方式投资于许多初创公司，那时正值技术行业的起步阶段，互联网等等，且取得了很好的成绩。这里的不同之处在于，自然资源产业可能是历史上最古老的行业之一。还有与此相关的一点是，人们对这个领域的了解非常有限。我的意思是，我们不仅存在股票和大宗商品价格不平衡的问题，还有劳动力市场无法满足需要地质学家、地球科学本科生和研究生的公司的需求。同时，这些领域毕业生的人数也呈现出长期下降的趋势。图表中显示的所有趋势都是长期趋势，通常持续十年左右。

And I think that we're entering another one of those. We've had the beginning of that recently. It's the gray value to growth transition, the beginning of folks' really understanding profitability, higher cost of capital. So it's a lot to unpack on this chart. I can really talk about this chart for hours perhaps. But I think it's right at the core of why I believe commodities are under value and why I think that financial assets are yet to suffer a lot further from what we've seen so far, especially between multiples and prices relative to fundamentals that I think need to compress significantly from here.

我认为我们正在进入另一个时期。我们最近已经见证了这一时期的开端。这是从灰色价值到增长转变的过渡阶段，人们开始真正理解盈利能力和更高的资本成本。所以这张图上有很多内容需要解读。或许我可以花几个小时讨论这张图。但我认为这正是我认为大宗商品被低估的核心原因，也是我认为金融资产尚未经过迄今为止所见的许多困境的原因，尤其是多元化和价格相对基本面需要大幅收缩的原因。

Let's touch on the inflation piece. I know you're a student of history and history tells us that when inflation strikes, oftentimes it comes in waves. So after inflation may appear to be tamed, it can come back with the vengeance at some point in time later. So the recent inflation started in early 2021 and it peaked out in mid 2022, around 9.1% CPI here in the US. And then the most recent reading was 5.0% as of March 2023. So could you talk about what history tells us about when that second wave of inflation might be coming?

让我们来谈谈通胀问题。我知道你是历史的学生，而历史告诉我们，通常情况下通胀会以波动形式出现。因此，尽管通胀可能会暂时被遏制，但在某个时间点后它可能会强势回归。因此，最近的通胀始于2021年初，并在2022年中达到高峰，美国的消费者物价指数在此时达到了9.1%。而截至2023年3月，最新的数据显示通胀率为5.0%。那么你能否谈谈历史告诉我们第二波通胀可能何时到来的问题？

Well, I think we're getting very close to that for many reasons. First of all, we've had a liquidity issue recently with the banking situation, which was immediately mapped by a Federal Reserve in intervention, which is in a way a liquidity injection in the system to avoid a liquidity gap otherwise. And so that goes to show how the Federal Reserve and especially policymakers of developed economies have one job, which is to maintain the stability of the financial system. And that requires liquidity injections and liquidity injections in an environment that requires as well, financial repression ultimately. And so it is hard to believe that we're not entering just from that perspective, a period of inflation running higher than historical standards.

嗯，我认为出于许多原因，我们正朝着这个方向迈进得越来越近。首先，最近银行业出现了流动性问题，联邦储备系统立即进行干预，以避免出现流动性缺口。这显示了联邦储备系统和特别是发达经济体的政策制定者的一项任务，那就是维持金融系统的稳定。这需要进行流动性注入，并且在某种程度上需要进行金融压制。因此，很难相信从这个角度来看，我们不会进入一个比历史标准更高的通胀时期。

And then you add to the fact, something that I've been talking a lot about, which is what I call the four pillars of inflation. To me, that's one of the most important ways of explaining how history has not only played out different roles in terms of the drivers of inflationary forces, but also how today this is so pronounced, meaning today we have the wages and salaries growth, the wage prices spiral that is very similar to what we saw in the 1970s.

然后你再考虑一个我一直在谈论的事实，我称之为通货膨胀的四个支柱。对我来说，这是解释历史在通货膨胀驱动力方面不仅扮演了不同角色，而且如今这一点非常明显的最重要方法之一。这意味着如今我们有了工资和薪水的增长，工资价格螺旋与我们在1970年代看到的非常相似。

And it starts with, first of all, cost of living, rising, which is an important aspect here, which we've seen rents and other things in terms of services and consumer goods prices have been not only they increase since the pandemic, but also we're not seeing a deflationary aspect of them. They're not coming down prices. We're actually seeing those prices as state elevated, which causes people to require higher wages and salaries.

首先，问题的起源是生活成本的上升，这是一个重要的方面。我们可以看到，自从疫情以来，租金和其他服务以及消费品价格不仅有所增加，而且并没有出现通货紧缩的特点。价格并没有下降，反而维持得较高，这导致人们需要更高的工资和薪水。

And so to another point here that is important to, I would say, elaborate regarding wages and salaries, salaries has to do with the fact that we're seeing the share of labor costs relative to profits of corporations being a historical loss. And so there is a secular trend as well, just there that we think that corporations are not going to be able to get away with paying such low levels of the press levels of wages and sellers relative to what they make. And so that pressure is coming. And I think we're just at the beginning of that.

所以，还有一个重要的问题需要阐明，那就是工资和薪水。薪水与劳动力成本占利润的比例之间存在一个历史性的损失。因此，我们认为，公司支付的工资和薪水相对于他们的利润水平太低的趋势是长期存在的。因此，这种压力正在增加。我认为我们只是刚刚开始面对这个问题。

And it fits into this wealth gap issue that we're seeing where most of the jobs that are likely to get higher wages are probably going to be the last skill types of jobs for folks that don't have a high school degree and so forth. And if you really explore that, we're probably going to see, and we're seeing that right now, the employment ratio across that part of the population in the US has never seen such a strong labor market throughout history, which means that even inside of the job openings and availability of jobs in general, we're seeing the need for those non-skilled jobs to be fulfilled. And so that is going to create, in my view, a higher demand for salaries to increase. And in a sense, it will play into this where the bottom 50% of the population financially speaking will probably be earning more money over time.

而且这也符合我们目前所见到的财富差距问题，因为那些可能获得更高工资的职位很可能是那些没有高中文凭的人以及其他人从事的最后一类技能型工作。如果你仔细探究就会发现，我们可能会看到，而且我们现在也正在看到，美国这一群体就业率在历史上从未如此强劲，这意味着即使在总体上就业机会和工作岗位的供应方面，我们也看到对那些非技能型工作的需求正在增加。因此，从我的观点来看，这将导致对提高工资的需求增加。从某种程度上说，这将导致财务上处于人口底层的50%的人口随着时间的推移可能会赚更多的钱。

And like it or not like it, there is a reason why folks who stay at the bottom 50% is because they tend to spend and allocate their capital when they earn it in ways that are less disciplinary than folks that are in the top 90% or so, in terms of financially speaking, within the population of the United States and other developed economies as well. So that is one pillar, very important one that is happening today. It has a lot of room for growth, especially if you look at the, again, the percentage of capital costs relative to profits from corporations.

不管喜欢与否，事实是，那些属于收入排名较低的人群之所以始终处于这一位置的原因是，他们在挣钱后在使用和分配资本方面比那些属于收入排名较高的人要缺乏纪律。从财务角度来看，在美国和其他发达经济体的人口中，这是一个非常重要的原因。因此，这是一个现今发生的非常重要的事情在，而且还有很大的增长空间，尤其是如果你看一下企业利润相对于资本成本的比例。

Number two, it has to do with what I just touched on initially in your first question, the chronic under investments in natural resource businesses. If there's anything that triggers a commodity bull market, that is looking at the aggregate capbacks of most of the commodity companies. And when you see that at the press levels, that tends to cause commodity prices to rise. And most of the reasons for that has to do with supply side being so constrained. I think we're in that environment today. And I know that for a fact is because of what's happening in terms of the need for those things to be developed over time.

第二点与你在第一个问题中刚提到的问题有关，即自然资源企业的长期投资不足。如果有什么能引发大宗商品牛市的原因，那就是看一下大部分大宗商品企业的总体减产。当你看到这种情况达到压力水平时，通常会导致大宗商品价格上涨。而这其中的大部分原因与供给一侧如此受限有关。我认为我们现在正处于这种环境中。我知道这是事实，是因为这些需求需要随着时间的推移而得到发展。

In other words, the need for metals and availability for resources in order to make the green revolution happen, even how oil has become such a strategic geopolitical asset over time. So all of this is sort of playing an important aspect of the need for those materials to be more available. But we don't have that and it will take a long time for us to see the comeback of those investments into natural resource industries to then translate into higher supply. I'm in the industry of investing in those things. So I'm very much aware of the time and effort that it takes to go from exploration to development, development phase and then producing phase of an asset within this space. And so I think that that's also a very secular trend. We've seen this throughout history as well in other other decades. But I think it's again very pronounced in today's environment.

换句话说，为了实现绿色革命，需要金属和资源的可获得性，甚至石油成为随着时间推移变得如此战略地理资产。因此，所有这些因素都在一定程度上对这些材料的可获得性起着重要作用。但我们没有这样的条件，需要很长时间才能看到对自然资源行业的投资回升，并转化为更高的供应。我从事这些领域的投资行业，所以非常清楚从勘探到开发再到生产整个资产过程需要的时间和精力。我认为这也是一个非常长期的趋势。在历史上的其他几十年中，我们也看到了这一点。但我认为在当今的环境中，这一趋势再次非常明显。

Number three, and I think it's important too, is the reckless or irresponsible amount of fiscal spending that we're seeing currently. Partially, that has to do with the cost of that. So cost of that is increasing. It's creating a need for budgets to be or I should say deficits should be larger than historical standards. And this is going to get worse over time.

第三个问题，我认为这也很重要，就是目前我们正在目睹的无节制或不负责任的财政支出量。部分原因是与此相关的成本正在增加。这导致预算需求或者说赤字要比历史标准更大。而且这个问题会随着时间的推移而恶化。

But the interest payment on the debt only explains about 50% of the deficit today. If you look at the deficit currently relative to history, in the 70s and 60s, there was at least a notion from policymakers that government spending creates inflation. I'm not sure today that you can apply the same idea.

但是，债务的利息支付只能解释如今赤字的大约50%。如果你看一下当前赤字与历史相对比，在70年代和60年代，决策者至少认为政府支出会导致通货膨胀。但如今我不确定是否可以应用同样的观点。

In fact, we just passed recently, not too long ago, the inflation act part of the budget, which was something that goes to show how, why in the world would you be spending more when you have an inflationary problem in the first place? And it's something that we're seeing in a large degree. If you actually adjust for inflationary numbers today in terms of the fiscal spending throughout history, you're going to find that today, by far, we're seeing something that is quite scary from that sense.

实际上，我们最近刚刚通过了预算中的通货膨胀措施，这显示了为什么在首先存在通货膨胀问题时你会增加开支。这是一种现象，在很大程度上我们正在目睹。如果你真正根据通货膨胀调整今天的财政支出数据，你会发现今天的情况相当令人担忧。

It's almost like the government is undoing what the Fed is attempting to do in terms of raising rates and tightening monetary conditions. And I am not sure this is the end of it. I think that the agenda on the fiscal side has never been so extensive. Why? Because you have that this inequality issue that forces governments to run a larger social program. Number two, you have, again, this issue with developed economies having to become more industrialized and go back to reinvesting in their manufacturing plants. And that is a problem that I think is, we will create demand for materials, for commodities, but also it is quite large in terms of the level of spending from the fiscal side. And so those things are very important.

这几乎像是政府在试图提高利率和紧缩货币条件的同时，正在撤销中央银行的努力。而且我不确定这是否已经结束。我认为，在财政方面的议程从未如此广泛。为什么？因为你有了不平等的问题，迫使政府开展更大规模的社会计划。其次，你还有发达经济体需要实现更多的工业化，并重新投资于他们的制造厂。我认为这是一个问题，我们将创造对原材料和大宗商品的需求，但也将在财政支出方面造成相当大的压力。因此，这些问题非常重要。

The Green Revolution is another one that it will fit into the agenda more and more over time and it will also be a large percentage of deficits, in my opinion, for the next decade or so. Military spending, it's hard to make a case that military spending is going to be falling, all rising in the following years, especially given what's happening with Russia and Ukraine, China and US, Middle East and US. And there's a lot of issues unfolding all at once and I find it hard to believe that military spending is not going to be a much larger percentage of GDP. And just to give people a sense, percentage of military spending or defense spending back in the 60s was about 9% of GDP. Today is less than 3%. So there's a lot of room for that to grow over time here. So those are three pillars.

绿色革命是另一个在未来一段时间内将逐渐融入议程，并且在我看来也将成为赤字的一大比例的领域。军费支出很难说会减少，尤其是考虑到俄罗斯和乌克兰、中国和美国、中东和美国之间的紧张局势。这些问题同时出现，我很难相信军费支出不会占据更大的GDP比例。仅仅给大家一个概念，60年代的军费开支约占GDP的9%，而今天则不到3%。所以在此方面还有很大的增长空间。这就是三个支柱。

The fourth pillar has to do with de-globalization. De-globalization is to me, one of the most, maybe you started back in 2016 when we've had Trump initiating the narrative to fight China and we've had this sort of discussions which took a while until even the Democratic Party began to really, you know, understand or maybe buy into that idea in general. And today I would say it's a very bipartisan idea in terms of the you know, having a very different policies that we've had over the last decade or so. And so de-globalization is a trend that tends to be also something that magnifies over time. It exacerbates this inflationary problem. It creates changes in terms of logistics and also the need again for developed economies to to reinvest what I call revitalization of their industrial parts in different places of the world.

第四个支柱与去全球化有关。对我来说，去全球化可能是最重要的一个因素，也许可以追溯到2016年，当时特朗普开始提出与中国斗争的叙事，一直到民主党开始真正理解或者接受这个想法，这种讨论都持续了一段时间。而今天我可以说，在很多方面都有很大的共识，包括过去十年来我们所采取的政策。因此，去全球化是一种趋势，随着时间的推移可能会变得越来越明显。它加剧了通货膨胀问题。它还带来了物流方面的变化，同时也需要发达经济体重新投资，我称之为在世界各地振兴他们的工业部门。

It will create different partnerships. I think Brazil, South America will play a big role into providing natural resources to some parts of the economy rather than Africa and other parts that have been blamed a role and have a bigger you know, connection with places like China, I think will create separations of countries that will do well because of their the all natural resources in other countries that don't. So all those things are playing a role into creating some sort of issues related to de-globalization. I think that the war between Ukraine and Russia is perhaps more of a consequence of all those those issues that we're seeing growing over time. And again, it's not like we're probably going to go to the world or three, although everything is from a probability perspective. I do think that the need for folks to rethink how their dependencies with other countries lie ahead and perhaps, you know, internally trying to reduce those dependencies and improve their domestic economy over time to not have to rely on other countries like China. And so this is all playing a big role into inflation.

这将导致不同的合作伙伴关系。我认为巴西和南美将在为经济的某些部分提供自然资源方面发挥重要作用，而不是非洲和其他被责怪的地区与中国等地有更大的联系。我认为这将导致国家之间的分离，有些国家因为它们拥有丰富的自然资源而做得很好，而其他国家则不然。因此，所有这些因素都在导致与去全球化有关的问题。我认为乌克兰和俄罗斯之间的战争可能更多地是所有这些问题的后果，这些问题随着时间的推移而不断增长。再说一次，并不是说我们一定会陷入第三次世界大战，虽然从概率角度看，一切皆有可能。我确实认为人们需要重新思考他们与其他国家的依赖关系，并且可能在内部努力减少这些依赖，并逐渐改善国内经济，以不必依赖其他国家如中国。因此，所有这些都在对通货膨胀起到重要作用。

My apologies for going long on this, but those are the four pillars of inflation, wages and salaries, the natural resources under investments, the reckless amount of fiscal spending and de-globalization are four things that are called the four pillars of inflation that will probably continue to play a role into creating what I think will be a secular inflationary period for the US and other developed economies.

非常抱歉冗长地表述，但通胀的四大支柱是工资和薪水、投资中的自然资源、过度的财政支出以及去全球化，这四个因素被称为通胀的四大支柱，可能会继续发挥作用，创造出我认为将会是美国和其他发达经济体的长期通胀时期。

So many great points here. I mean, so many to go through. It seems like all four pillars of inflation are working against us at this point in terms of trying to prevent it from happening. And this ties into profitability and earnings as you alluded to there. And you just recently published this chart here on the screen showing the basic and diluted earnings for share for the S&P 500 dating back to the 1950s. And you can see this secular uptrend in the basic earnings per share. And it looks like we've hit sort of that extended point probably in 2021 and it's starting to roll over. I'm curious what your take is on this chart.

这里有很多很好的观点。我是说，需要经过很多的思考。现在看来，通胀的全部四个支柱似乎都在对我们阻止其发生方面发挥作用。这与利润和收益息息相关，正如你之前暗示的一样。你最近在屏幕上发布了这个图表，展示了标普500指数股票的基本和稀释每股收益，时间回溯到1950年代。你可以看到基本每股收益呈现出长期上升的趋势。而目前看来，可能在2021年达到了这个扩展点，并开始回落。我很好奇你对这个图表的看法。

And it seems to play into this inflationary thesis and wage growth hurting company profitability. Boy, this chart is another one that is very difficult to keep a short answer. And I hope you don't mind that I might go long on this one as well. But essentially, this we've been in a 70 year channel in earnings per share aggregate basis in S&P 500. Meaning there is a ban, upper ban and a lower ban in this chart that you can see very clearly that I pointed out with two lines. And basically, every time we hit the upper side of this ban, we see a critical juncture in terms of earnings that tend to be in a contraction mode for the next months or years. Depending on the situation.

而且，这似乎与通胀论和工资增长对公司盈利能力的伤害相吻合。嗯，这个图表又是一个很难用简短答案概括的。并且我希望你不介意我可能会在这个问题上做一个较长的回答。但本质上，这个图表显示，在标普500指数的每股收益方面，我们已经处于一个70年的价格区间中。这意味着图表中有一个上限和一个下限，你可以很清楚地看到我用两条线指出了这一点。而基本上，每当我们触及这一区间的上限边界时，我们会看到一个关键时刻，在接下来的几个月或几年里，公司盈利通常处于萎缩模式。这取决于具体情况。

And it's important to go back throughout history again and see, I like to do analysis on decades because it's a long term analysis to reduce noise from different macro events that may have occurred. And you can see more clearly macro regimes and different parts of history that played a role into the views that we have today. And in my opinion, what you can find in that research is that earnings, there are really two things that are important here. Well, first there's really two, the 2010s, which was the prior decade that we've had was by far the strongest real earnings growth that we've had in history. That is the first thing to put out. And the question is, can we see two decades of that in a role? And the answer for that is we've never seen this in history.

回顾历史是很重要的，我喜欢对十年进行分析，因为这是一种长期分析，可以减少可能出现的不同宏观事件的干扰。你可以更清晰地看到宏观制度和历史中扮演了一定角色的不同部分，这对我们今天的观点产生了影响。在我看来，在这项研究中你可以发现两件事情非常重要。首先，过去的十年（2010年代）是我们历史上实际盈利增长最强劲的十年。这是第一点需要指出的。问题是，我们能否连续看到两个十年的这种情况？答案是，我们在历史上从未见过这样的情况。

The other two times we've had such a robust growth in earnings of corporations happen in the 1920s, the roaring 20s, which was a time when we had the different inventions at the time was the television, the television created a communication piece for the world at that time. It created marketing in a different way commercials, movies and different things that you can extrapolate that as a thought of how the global economy was transformed by just that invention itself. Other things happened during that period. Supposedly, the roaring 20s was a time when we've had the capital or I should say, consumer spending to a degree that we haven't seen in the past. And the macro environment was very different than today, but it's an important to see how that period was a time when they kind of really prospect it. But also, corporations did very well despite the differences that we have with the current environment.

我们在过去的两次企业收益大幅增长中，发生在20世纪20年代的繁荣时期，那是一个有许多不同发明的时代，其中电视是一项重要发明，它为世界带来了沟通的方式。它以一种不同的方式创造了营销手段，如广告、电影等，你可以从中推断出全球经济是如何仅凭这项发明而转变的思维方式。在那个时期发生了其他一些事情。据说，繁荣的20年代是我们过去从未见过的一种资本或者说消费支出的程度。宏观环境与今天非常不同，但重要的是要看到那个时期是如何实现真正的繁荣的。尽管与当前环境存在差异，但企业表现得非常好。

The second decade that we did very well was in the 1990s, which was that the time when technology was during a revolutionary period when we had the beginnings of the internet. And a lot of businesses were created during that phase. It was a period where actually, believe it or not, corporations also did very well in terms of their earnings. Their bottom line was growing at a period at a state that we've only seen during those three decades, the 2010s and the 1920s. And if you think about those two decades specifically, the subsequent decade after those two were times when corporations struggled significantly to earn capital, meaning this was the 1930s, which was the Great Depression. And I would say the 1930s was a very, very difficult period as well. And corporations had a significant contraction in their earnings. The same happened in the 90s. After the late 90s, we've had the tech bust, corporations have struggled to make money again.

我们第二个表现出色的十年是上世纪九十年代。那时正是技术革命期间，互联网初具雏形。许多企业也在那个时期诞生。令人难以置信的是，那段时间企业的收益也表现出色。他们的底线增长速度在这三个十年中只有在二十一世纪的二十年代和二十世纪二十年代才有过。如果你具体思考这两个十年，你会发现在这两个十年之后的十年，企业在争取资本方面遇到了很大困难。这就是指上世纪三十年代的大萧条。我可以说上世纪三十年代也是一个非常艰难的时期。企业的收益大幅萎缩。九十年代也是如此。在九十年代末期后，我们经历了科技泡沫破灭，企业再次面临盈利困境。

And then right after that, at the end of the decade, we had the 08 experience as well, which was a decade that was one of the worst periods for growth in terms of corporate earnings that we've had in history. So that never happened throughout. We've never seen two, straight decades of strong earnings, especially when we have such a strong period like we've had recently. What would make that change? I mean, some folks believe that the changes that we're seeing today, technologically speaking, will create an environment that justifies the multiples that we have currently in equity markets. And maybe justifies the growth that we're seeing in corporate, in corporate earnings to maintain that over the next decade.

然后紧随其后，就在那个十年的末尾，我们又经历了08年的经验，这是一个在企业盈利增长方面最糟糕的十年，堪称历史上最差之一。这从未发生过。我们从未见过两个连续的十年都出现强劲盈利，尤其是像最近这样的强劲时期。是什么导致了这种变化呢？我的意思是，一些人认为我们现在所见到的技术变革将创造出一个能够证明当前股票市场价值倍增的环境。也许这能够证明企业盈利的增长在未来十年能够保持下去。

I don't think that will be the case. I think despite the fact that we're seeing those breakthroughs through AI and other incredible things that are being created recently, even in the biotechnology space as well, it's just hard to believe that the pillars of inflation are not going to play an important role into squeezing the margins of those companies at a time when cost of capital specifically is, I think, at a structural increase, meaning it's not going to be cyclical.

我认为情况不会是这样的。尽管我们目前看到了人工智能和其他令人难以置信的突破，甚至在生物技术领域也是如此，但很难相信通胀的支柱将不会在成本资本特别是结构性上升的同时发挥重要的挤压作用，这意味着它不会是周期性的。

It's going to be we're going to see cost of capital and specifically cost of debt being higher than historical standards. And at a time when what I said about wages and salaries is a real problem, operating expenses are likely to go much higher and cause operating margins to be squeezed significantly. This is the main reason why we've had such a, you know, a prospect period in terms of the times when corporations have been able to spend less capital paying for their wages and salaries relative to how much money they've been making. And I think that with the political agenda that we have recently, currently on top of the need for most of the population to start making more money to afford such a high cost of living environment that we have today, it will force those margins to be squeezed over time.

意味着我们未来将看到资本成本，尤其是债务成本将高于历史标准。而在工资问题严重的同时，经营成本可能会大幅上升，导致经营利润率受到严重挤压。这就是为什么企业在过去有更多的资本用于支付工资与薪水，与其所赚取的利润相比支出要少的原因。我认为，在当前政治议程的推动下，并且大多数人口需要赚更多的钱来应对如此高昂的生活成本，这将逐渐迫使利润率受到挤压。

I also have a strong bill by material cost because of this under investments that we've had over commodities and really into the natural resource industries, it is very unlikely that the availability for raw materials would be here in the next three to five years. So the cost of those things depending on what business you were related to are likely to be pressuring those margins to be squeezed. Margins are starting to decline currently. So we're now looking at earnings in this chart.

由于我们在大宗商品和自然资源行业的投资不足，我也有一个较高的原材料费用账单。在接下来的三到五年里，原材料的供应情况非常不确定。所以，根据您所从事的业务，这些成本可能会对利润率施加压力，导致利润空间被压缩。目前利润空间正在下降。因此，我们现在要关注的是这张图上的收益情况。

But if you look at margins themselves, first of all, they increased to all time highs. We've never seen margins this high recently with the COVID situation. And then after that, margins have declined to prior peaks, prior peaks that we've had before the global financial crisis, before the tech bust. Look, I think we're going to see a period where there is a earnings recession. I don't think we're immune to those issues. I do think there is a business cycle after all. And I do think we're likely to be experienced right now, the beginning of a downturn in terms of earnings of most corporations.

但是，如果你看一下利润率本身，首先，它们增长到创纪录的高位。我们从未见过近期疫情下如此高的利润率。然后，在此之后，利润率下降到先前的高峰，这是全球金融危机之前、科技泡沫破裂之前的高峰。看，我认为我们将会经历一个盈利衰退期。我认为我们并不免疫这些问题。毕竟，我认为存在着一个商业周期。而且，我认为我们现在很可能正在经历大多数公司盈利下滑的开始阶段。

And we have to extrapolate that thought again and think, well, if we do see a decline in earnings, if earnings are inflated, and despite the fact that earnings are inflated, multiples are record levels, meaning prices are high relative to inflated fundamentals. What happens if fundamentals fall 20%, 30% or so, what does that do to the current multiple that we have? It's such an important question. I do think we're going to see multiples get compressed. And again, when I go back to history, and I see, all right, well, I have a view about inflation. I think there's this is going to be secular, despite the fact that we may see the acceleration and acceleration, like you said, through waves, like we saw in the 70s and the 1910s and 1940s, all had their waves as well. But what is important to go back in history is to see that multiples of equity markets during inflationary periods, in average, compress significantly over 30% during those periods.

我们需要再次推断这一想法，并思考，如果我们确实看到了盈利下降，如果盈利被夸大了，而且尽管盈利被夸大了，倍数仍处于创纪录水平，意味着价格相对于夸大的基本面来说很高。如果基本面下降了20%、30%，那么这对我们目前的倍数有什么影响呢？这是一个非常重要的问题。我认为我们将看到倍数被压缩。而当我回顾历史时，我看到，好吧，我有一个关于通胀的观点。我认为这将是长期的，尽管我们可能会看到加速和加速，就像你说的那样，通过波浪，就像我们在70年代和1910年代以及1940年代看到的那样，它们也有它们的波动。但重要的是回顾历史，看到在通胀时期的股票市场倍数，在平均水平上在这些时期压缩了30%以上。

And so, I do think we're at the beginning of another area like that. But never throughout history, we started an inflationary decade with such a large degree of valuations that we have today. The valuations we have currently resembles periods like we've had in the tech bust or prior to the tech bust and during the tech bubble and prior to the Great Depression, so the late 1920s. Again, those are the two times that we also had strong earnings in the prior decade. And it's just normal to see this because we have strong growth in earnings. And then analysts, especially Wall Street analysts and other investors begin to extrapolate that we will continue to see that. And therefore, you get those large multiples that we're seeing today. But it's very, very difficult to maintain that same great growth rate that we're seeing that we've had in the last decade.

因此，我确实认为我们正处于另一个类似的时期的开始阶段。然而，从历史上来看，我们从未以如今这样高的估值开始通胀的十年。我们当前的估值类似于我们在科技泡沫破裂之前或者是大萧条时期之前的时段。同样，这两个时期我们也有过强劲的收益。能够看到这种情况是很正常的，因为我们的盈利增长强劲。然后分析师，尤其是华尔街分析师和其他投资者开始推测我们将会继续看到这种增长。因此，我们看到的那些大幅度的倍数就形成了。但是要保持我们过去十年所看到的这种高增长率非常非常困难。

So, I think this chart is important. I think it tells us that we're, again, at this critical juncture that we're probably going to see a declining earnings for all the reasons I mentioned here. And if that's the case, it really questions, again, the valuation of financial assets, which we all tend to have a positive and more bullish view, especially the younger generations that have only lived through periods where the Biden dip mentality has worked. And I think it will work again at some point, but we do need to see the dip.

所以，我认为这个图表很重要。我认为它告诉我们，我们又一次处在一个关键时刻，我们可能会看到收益下降，原因在于我在这里提到的所有原因。如果是这样的话，这确实对金融资产的估值提出了质疑，我们大家倾向于持有积极和更看涨的观点，特别是那些只经历了拜登衰退心态起作用的年轻一代。我认为它某个时候会再次起作用，但我们确实需要看到低谷。

We haven't seen the real dip in markets yet. And so, I think we're overdue for that. And it's just hard for me to think that this excessive allocation of most large portfolios will continue to be excessive in equity markets and in bond markets. I think we're going to see a much more, the most popular portfolio locations in 10 years from now will look very different.

我们还没有看到市场真正的下降。所以，我认为我们已经超过了那个时候了。而且，很难让我相信这种对大多数大型投资组合过度配置在股票市场和债券市场上的情况将会持续下去。我认为，10年后最受欢迎的投资组合配置将会有很大的变化。

Gold is probably going to play a role. Commodities will probably play a role. And all this is linked to this idea that earnings are probably going to be compressing as well. So, started to go long on this, but that's really what's in my mind when I think about this chart. I just cannot get out of my head. The Howard Marks kind of line, the sea change that has come upon us and Trey Lockerbie just had Howard Marks on our show. And he talks all about interest rates aren't at zero anymore. And you can't just assume that great times are going to continue in that what worked in the previous decade is going to work in this decade.

黄金可能会发挥一定的作用。大宗商品也可能会发挥一定的作用。所有这些都与收益可能会收缩的想法有关。所以，我开始对此抱有乐观态度，但这真的是我脑海中所想的当我看到这张图时。我就是无法忘怀霍华德·马克思的那句话，我们所面临的巨变，特雷·洛克比刚刚在我们的节目中采访了霍华德·马克思。他谈到利率不再是零。你不能仅仅认为好时代会持续下去，之前十年中有效的策略会在这个十年中起作用。

I wanted to transition to an asset that you definitely specialize in, which is gold. And I have another chart pulled up here. It outlines the performance of gold relative to stocks specifically after yield-curven versions. As those watching on YouTube can see, gold tends to outperform stocks over the 24 months after a yield-curven version. And on a relative basis, it actually outperformed the S&P 500 by 147% after the 1973-74 version. And on average, on a relative basis, it's increased by 72% after other inversions here as shown on the chart. So could you walk us through why yield-curven versions are such a key indicator to watch for gold specifically? Maybe expand on why it leads to this relative outperformance. I'm sure a lot of it ties into what we've been talking about so far.

我想要转投资于您确实专门从事的一种资产，即黄金。这里我还有另一个图表，它概述了黄金相对于股票，尤其是预测收益率曲线的走势。正在YouTube上观看的人可以看到，黄金在经历预测收益率曲线倒挂后的24个月内往往表现出色于股票。根据1973-1974年倒挂的情况来看，从相对的角度来看，黄金实际上超过了标普500指数为147%。而根据图表显示，平均而言，在其他倒挂情况下，相对来说黄金增长了72%。所以您能给我们解释一下为什么倒挂预测收益率曲线对于黄金来说是一个如此关键的指示器吗？或许您可以进一步阐述一下为什么它会导致相对的优势。我相信其中很大一部分与我们到目前为止所讨论的内容有关。

Hey, everyone, it's Clay Fink here. Are you looking for an investment opportunity in a $2 trillion market? Look no further than Audakama, the cybersecurity industry's latest game changer. Audakama has opened its doors to US accredited and international investors alike, already attracting over 5,000 investors in $6.5 million in capital. Audakama's recurring revenue model saw 10x revenue expansion in 2022 alone. They have patented technology in large contracts secured, including one with the US Department of Defense. This is a limited time opportunity to get in on the ground floor of a rapidly growing cybersecurity startup. To learn more, simply visit invest.audakama.com.com. That is invest.audakama. ATA. K-A-M-A.com.com.com.com. Full disclosure, I have personally invested in Audakama's equity crowdfunding round at a $29 million valuation. Please keep in mind that investments in early stage companies do contain risk. As with any investment, crowdfunding investments do offer attractive potential upside, but they cannot offer any guarantees of a future return.

大家好，我是克雷·芬克。你们是否正在寻找一个2万亿美元市场的投资机会？那就毫不犹豫地选择奥达卡玛吧，这是网络安全行业的最新变革者。奥达卡玛已经向美国认可的投资者和国际投资者敞开大门，已经吸引了超过5000名投资者，筹集了650万美元的资金。仅在2022年，奥达卡玛的循环收入模式就实现了10倍的增长。他们已经获得了大型合同中的专利技术，包括与美国国防部的合同。这是一个有限时间内的机会，可以在一个迅速增长的网络安全初创企业的起步阶段参与其中。要了解更多信息，请访问invest.audakama.com.com。即invest.audakama.ATA.K-A-M-A.com.com.com.com。充分披露，我个人已在以2,900万美元估值进行的奥达卡玛股权众筹轮中进行了投资。请记住，早期阶段的公司投资存在风险。与任何投资一样，众筹投资具有有吸引力的潜在增长空间，但不能保证未来的回报。

To be frank, I think this is almost like a different topic that at the end of it will relate to what we've been talking about. It's back in just to give some history. In 2018-2019, I was really trying to analyze the yield curve signals because we were we managed a macro fund and yield-curving versions are beginning to emerge at the time. There was a risk of a recession and we wanted to understand portfolio positioning when you have yield-curving versions.

坦率地说，我认为这几乎就像是一个不同的话题，最后与我们一直在讨论的相关起来。回顾一下历史背景，2018年至2019年期间，我一直在努力分析收益曲线信号，因为我们管理着一只宏观基金，当时开始出现了收益曲线反转的迹象。当时存在着经济衰退的风险，我们希望能理解在收益曲线反转时如何进行投资组合定位。

At that time, what I was able to understand was that there were a little popular spreads that were people like to look at like the two-year versus the 10-year yield or looking at the three-month versus the 10-year yield as well. Some folks, Professor Campbell actually got a Nobel Prize for the research on this. There's a lot of talks on how to really analyze a yield curve, but I do think that the signals that you receive from that are very different. For portfolio positioning purposes, it's not very helpful because the two-versus stands inverted about two years before the downturn during the global financial crisis. If you look back in the tech bust that spread is specifically inverted right at the time when you're supposed to be positioning to the downturn. While majority of people like to look at yield-curving versions fighting the less war, meaning just looking at OA and claiming that that's really what happens throughout history, that's not true. In the 70s, we've had times when yield-curving versions coincide with declines in others that precedes a decline. To me, this research needed more meat to understand how to really invest in periods when you have that. That was the beginning of something I call the percentage of yield-curving versions.

当时，我所能理解的是，有一些受欢迎的传播现象，人们喜欢看，例如两年期收益率与十年期收益率之间的比较，或者三个月期收益率与十年期收益率之间的比较。一些人，比如坎贝尔教授，因为对此进行的研究而获得了诺贝尔奖。对于如何真正分析收益率曲线，人们有很多讨论，但我认为从中获得的信号是非常不同的。对于投资组合定位来说，这并不是很有帮助，因为两者之间的倒置发生在全球金融危机之前大约两年。如果回顾一下科技泡沫破裂时，这种差距在你应该准备下行时恰好倒置。虽然大多数人喜欢看待收益率曲线版本，认为这就是历史的真实写照，但事实并非如此。在70年代，我们曾经遇到过收益率曲线版本与下降同时发生，而其他时间则是下降之前。对我来说，这项研究需要更多实质性的内容，以了解在这种情况下如何真正进行投资。这是我所称之为收益率曲线版本百分比的一种开始。

I created this metric recently. I actually did a presentation on the IMF explaining why this metric is so relevant for markets. The idea of it is instead of looking at one or two yield-curved spreads, let's look at all the possible spreads in the treasury curve, meaning there's about 45 or really 45 mathematical spreads, possible spreads in the yield curve and the entire yield curve.

我最近创建了这个指标。实际上，我在国际货币基金组织做了一个关于为何这个指标对市场如此相关的演讲。它的理念是不再只关注一个或两个收益曲线差异，而是观察国债曲线上所有可能的差异，也就是说，国债收益曲线中有大约45个或者确切地说是45个数学差异和整个收益曲线。

What you find is rather than looking at one or two specifically, let's see how many of those inversions are happening throughout the curve. How many of those spreads are actually inverting are actually negative. What I figured out is that every time you go above the 70 percent handle, when 70 percent of the yield spreads are inverted, there is a recession. Recession, meaning there's a downturn in a business cycle where a lot of things can happen. That also is not very helpful because recessions, when you signal a recession itself, usually that tends to be the case that you're actually at the bottom of the market. When people are talking about the recession, everything, especially the government, the downturn already occurred.

你所发现的是不只是具体看一两个数据点，而是看看整个曲线上有多少个倒置。有多少个利差实际上是倒置的，是负值的。我发现每当你超过70%的水平时，当70%的收益差距出现倒置时，就会出现经济衰退。经济衰退意味着商业周期中的经济下滑，可能发生很多事情。这也并不是非常有帮助，因为当你预示经济衰退时，通常情况下已经到了市场底部。当人们谈论经济衰退时，特别是政府，经济下滑已经发生了。

For portfolio positioning, what I found is, every time we got the 70 percent, we have a hard lending. There are even some periods where equity markets rally after the 70 percent handle.

对于投资组合定位而言，我发现每当我们达到70%的时候，我们就会面临困难。甚至有一些时期是在达到70%阈值后股票市场会大幅上涨。

How do I manage money after this? I back tested a lot of asset classes, treasuries, oil, gold, the S&P 500. They all have different performances, especially in different macro regimes. What you find is that the gold to S&P 500 ratio is by far the best portfolio position after the 70 percent handle is triggered.

在此之后，我应该如何管理资金？我进行了很多不同资产类别的回测，包括国债、石油、黄金和标普500指数。它们在不同的宏观环境下表现各有不同。通过回测，我们发现当黄金与标普500指数的比例达到70%时，这是最佳的投资组合位置。

To be fair, we've had this indicator going above 70 percent in November of 2022. The gold to S&P 500 ratio has been going up. In fact, it has been trekking almost perfectly its average performance all the way back to 50 years of history.

说实话，2022年11月，我们已经看到这一指标超过了70%。黄金对标普500指数的比率一直在上升。事实上，它几乎完美地跟随了其平均表现，追溯至50年的历史。

In other words, the gold to S&P 500 ratio has been rising recently, about 20 percent or so. It averaged after two years from that 70 percent inversion. The average performance is about 72 percent, which is what it's shown in this chart. Again, there are times when gold goes up and S&P 500 actually goes up as well. There are times when gold declines, but the equity markets decline further. The ratio rises.

换句话说，最近黄金对标普500的比率有所上升，大约上涨了20%左右。从那次70%逆转后的两年平均值为72%。这个图表中显示的就是平均表现。同样地，有时候黄金上涨，标普500也同时上涨。有时候黄金下跌，但股市下跌更加严重。比率就会上升。

There are times in history when both flags of the trade work together, meaning gold rises with equity markets falling. This is such an important point because if you again go back and study which ones are those periods where both flags of this trade work very well. Guess what? One of them was during the stagflationary period in that 1973-74 and the other one was during the tech bust.

在历史上有时候，贸易的双重标志同时起作用，意味着黄金上涨而股市下跌。这一点非常重要，因为如果你再回头研究一下那些期间两种贸易标志都运作得非常好的情况是哪些。猜猜看？其中一个是在1973-1974年的滞胀期间，另一个是在科技泡沫破裂期间。

Both periods, if you go back to the commodities to equity ratio chart, you're going to see that both periods also align with the times when commodities are depressed relative to overall equities. Does that sound familiar?

两个时期，如果你回顾商品与股票比率图表，你会发现这两个时期也与商品对整体股票市场表现低迷的时间相吻合。这听起来熟悉吗？

And so I do think there is a very, very strong case to be made of why precious metals in general could perform very well relative to equity markets. And those two cases specifically, it wasn't just gold. Silver did well. The miners did very well. Other commodity producers did very well.

我认为有非常非常充分的理由可以说明为什么相对于股票市场而言贵金属总体上表现良好。而且这两种情况特别明显，不仅仅是黄金，银也表现出色，矿工们也做得非常好，其他大宗商品生产商也表现良好。

So we, I think as investors, need to stop looking at old ways as the only timing history that will replicate what likely will happen here because of potential for a recession or a downturn in the economy and need to go back further and see what asset correlations we may have given the structural changes that we're seeing in the macro drivers, especially during inflationary periods like the 70s and seeing what those market correlations look like during those downturns.

因为可能出现经济衰退或衰退的潜力，我们作为投资者需要停止只看待过去的方式作为唯一的时间历史，来复制在这里可能发生的事情。我们需要追溯更久远，看看在宏观驱动力发生结构性变化的情况下，我们可能具有的资产相关性，特别是在像70年代这样的通胀时期，看看在这些经济衰退期间的市场相关性是怎样的。

And Treasuries did not serve as a haven as gold did very well. And so if that's the case and institutions begin to really understand that gold is going to play a role as a defensive asset for most portfolios. And we're at the beginning of those institutions realizing that and they will be allocating capital towards this. And remember central banks lead the way what institutions are likely to do. Central banks are already in process of what I call this period of improving the quality of their international reserves. I don't want to digress and we can probably talk about this in the next questions.

而国债并没有像黄金一样成为避险的资产。因此，如果情况是这样的，而机构开始真正理解黄金将在多数投资组合中扮演防御性资产的角色。我们正处于机构逐渐意识到这一点，并将资本投向黄金的初期阶段。请记住，中央银行引领机构的行动。中央银行已经在改善其国际储备的质量的过程中，这是我所说的一段时期。我不想岔开话题，在下一个问题中我们可以讨论这个。

But really what's happening is that central banks are buying gold. And so I do think that the 6040 portfolios that we have today, their most popular portfolio positioning that we've had over the last 20 to 30 years are not going to be popular 10 years from now. And it doesn't mean equity and bonds are not going to play a big role into portfolios. But it means that they need to make room for things like gold and other commodities to be part of those portfolios.

但实际上正在发生的是央行正在购买黄金。因此，我认为我们目前拥有的60股40债的投资组合，即过去20到30年来最受欢迎的投资组合定位，在未来10年将不再受欢迎。这并不意味着股票和债券不会在投资组合中发挥重要作用。但这意味着它们需要为黄金和其他商品腾出位置，成为这些投资组合的一部分。

And if you just look at the downside volatility of the treasury market today relative to the downside volatility of owning gold, especially in the last 20 months or so, what you're going to find is that by far, treasuries throughout history, you've never seen the spread between the two where treasuries are much riskier than gold from a downside perspective than we've seen in the last 30 years or so. Which in my view, as people will start to see those types of researches pieces going around, we'll start realizing that gold does play a role as a defensive asset for most portfolios.

如果您只看一下今天的国债市场相对于持有黄金的下行波动性，尤其是过去大约20个月以来，您将发现迄今为止，国债从下行角度比金价要冒更大风险，而这是在过去30年左右从未见过的。在我看来，当人们开始看到这些研究报告时，会开始意识到黄金在大多数投资组合中确实扮演了防御资产的角色。

I think the biggest pushback you get across this is when you see treasury yields rising because treasuries are falling over time. At some point you start seeing the fact that you're actually able to get some yield and gold doesn't yield anything. And so why would you own gold when treasury yields are higher? Well, the reason for that is because the risk perceived in the markets by owning treasuries starts to change.

我认为，当你看到国债收益率上升时，你会遇到最大的抵制，因为国债在一段时间内会下降。在某些时候，你会开始注意到实际上可以获得一些收益，而黄金并不产生任何收益。那么当国债收益率较高时，为什么还要持有黄金呢？原因是，拥有国债在市场中所感知的风险开始发生变化。

Today, you can separate the risk of owning treasuries by three things. It's a default risk, there's inflation risk, there's interest rate risk. In the last 30 years, we didn't have any of those factors really playing an important aspect here of pricing those instruments. In the 70s, we did see that. We had interest rate risk rising, we've had the fact that we had inflation rising and the fault risk wasn't really high. Today, we kind of have the three kind of working as I would say, strong counter arguments for owning US treasuries as a defensive sector, defensive asset.

今天，您可以通过三个方面来区分持有国债的风险。这是默认风险，通胀风险和利率风险。在过去30年中，这些因素都没有真正成为定价这些工具的重要因素。在70年代，我们确实看到了这一点。我们面临了上升的利率风险，通胀水平上升以及风险并不是非常高。今天，我可以说，我们有三个强有力的反对美国国债作为防御性行业、防御性资产的论点。

And so I do think that there's going to be some pressure in US treasuries in the following years. And this is going to be driven by the large amount of supply of treasuries that we may see given the fact that we're running large deficits. And we're also seeing less demand from large central banks and institutions given of what I just said of this shift towards making more room for gold and commodities relative to what they currently have of fixed income and equity allocation. And all that is going to play a role into driving gold prices higher. So we can touch on this later.

因此，我认为未来几年美国国债可能会受到一些压力。这将由于我们面临巨额国债供应，因为我们正面临巨大的赤字。同时，由于大型中央银行和机构正将更多资金用于黄金和大宗商品，相对于他们目前投资于固定收益和股权，对国债的需求也在减少。所有这些因素将起到推动金价上涨的作用。我们可以稍后详细讨论这个问题。

But to me, when I saw this research, it may be such a bull in gold prices for the next five to 10 years that I wanted to understand how do I find the most asymmetric ways to express that view that gold prices are going to go higher, not lower 10 years from now. And I don't think the answer to me was to own gold. Gold is sort of a boring asset. And it's not news for anyone. Gold is not something you're going to get rich by buying that. It is it is truly a defensive asset. It's truly something that has history and credibility in terms of being having to track record of being a defensive asset during periods when you need that that protection. And so especially at times during secular inflationary forces, higher cost of capital and things like the nature that we're seeing today.

但对我来说，当我看到这项研究时，黄金价格在未来五到十年可能会有如此大的涨幅，以至于我想了解如何以最不对称的方式表达这个观点，即黄金价格未来十年将会上涨，而不是下跌。但我认为答案不是持有黄金。黄金是一种无聊的资产。对任何人来说都不是新闻。买黄金并不能让你发财。它确实是一种防御性资产。在需要保护的时期，它确实有历史和可信度。尤其是在长期通货膨胀力量、较高成本和类似今天所看到的情况下。

So I do think that it is one of the most important questions that I ask myself. I have a lot of potential answers of how to express that view in the markets after 30 years thinking about this. We've created even a fund to invest in, you know, I think there's a niche in the industry itself of a lack of discoveries. And I think there's a lot of inefficiencies not in the mining industry overall, but really first and foremost in smaller businesses, which there's a lack of people that understand the space very well. Again, this is all linked to the idea of why commodities are so cheap and equities are so expensive and why I think that we're probably going to see a hard landing a recession and also a contraction of earnings over time.

所以我确实认为这是我自己问自己的最重要的问题之一。在思考了30年之后，我有很多潜在的答案来表达我对市场的看法。我们甚至创建了一个基金来进行投资，因为我认为行业本身存在发现不足的空缺。而且我认为在整个采矿行业中存在很多低效率，但真正首要的是在较小的企业中，缺乏人们对这个领域的深刻理解。再次强调，这都与大宗商品如此便宜和股票如此昂贵的想法相关，以及我认为我们可能会看到一个严重的经济衰退，以及随着时间推移收益的收缩。

And one of the most important macro indicators to look at is the percentage of yield curving versions in my opinion. And we've had that signal in November. So don't be surprised if the goal doesn't be 500 ratio rises for the next call it, you know, 18 months or so.

在我看来，其中一个最重要的宏观指标是收益率曲线版本的百分比。而在去年11月份我们已经看到了这个信号。所以如果在接下来的18个月左右，目标的500比率不会上升，就不要感到惊讶了。

Before we get to some of those asymmetric plays to discuss, I thought it was a really interesting dynamic how you posted this chart of China's US Treasury holdings. Back in 2013, it was over $1.3 trillion in US Treasury holdings. And today it's approaching 900 billion. So that's about a $400 billion drop. And that's interesting with rising interest rates, as you mentioned, leads to falling US Treasury values, meaning that if foreign entities want to strengthen their balance sheets, then they better look for something that potentially stores its value a bit better.

在我们讨论一些不对称的交易策略之前，我认为你发布了中国持有美国国债图表是一个非常有趣的动态。回到2013年，中国持有超过1.3万亿美元的美国国债。而今天已接近9000亿美元。这意味着下降了大约4000亿美元。随着你提到的利率上升，这一点非常有趣，因为它导致美国国债价值下降，这意味着如果外国实体想要加强其资产负债表，他们最好寻找一些能够更好地保值的东西。

So how does the foreign Treasury holdings play into this thesis and your research? I think if we go back to the 70s again and understand what the composition of central bank assets will look like back then versus today is maybe very relevant to answer your question. Initially, when I looked at that, what first thing you find is that gold as a percentage of international reserves by central banks, well, first of all, let's understand what central banks do before we answered that question. Central banks, they usually run a monetary system. So you have in case you're not a central bank, but a currency system, the euro in this case or European currencies, you've got the US dollar, the Canadian dollar, the Japanese yen, the euro really started in the 90s. So there are obviously there's changes in terms of that in those monetary systems.

那么外国国债持有量如何与这个论题和你的研究有关呢？我认为如果我们回顾20世纪70年代并了解当时和现在央行资产结构可能会对你的问题有很大帮助。当我刚开始研究时，你会发现国际储备的黄金比例在央行中的情况，首先，让我们了解一下央行的职责再回答这个问题。央行通常运行货币体系。所以，如果你不是央行，而是一个货币体系，比如欧元或欧洲货币，比如美元，加拿大元，日元，欧元实际上是在90年代才开始的。因此，这些货币体系在这方面肯定有变化。

Every monetary system requires high quality assets to back those currencies. That topic became a thing recently because of Bitcoin, which was a, I would say, a normal argument across the global, the gold community, but it became, I would say, a lot more popular of an argument of questioning what really backs the US dollar and other fiat currencies today after we've had this Bitcoin and crypto movement across the younger generations first and foremost. And what is important to note is that back in the 70s, gold was about 70% of those international reserves. Those are the quality assets that central banks used to own in order to support their own currency systems.

每一种货币体系都需要高质量的资产来支撑这些货币。最近，由于比特币的出现，这个话题成为了全球范围内一个正常的讨论，特别是在黄金界。然而，在年轻一代亲身经历比特币和加密货币运动之后，对于美元和其他法定货币背后到底支撑着什么的质疑问题变得更加普遍。需要注意的是，在70年代，黄金约占国际储备的70%。这些就是中央银行过去拥有来支持自己货币体系的高质量资产。

Well, after the 70s, we in the 80s or so, we peaked in that ratio of gold relative to other international reserves. And we've been in a decline, which has been almost a 30-year decline really. And the most credible central banks in the world were the ones that bought treasuries, were the ones that actually accumulated US treasuries over time. And it's very, like it or not like it, this was certainly what occurred. And on top of it, we've had also the 60-40 portfolios happening at the same time, which also helped to fulfill that demand that was required to create such a bull market that we've had in treasuries over the last 30 years.

好吧，在七十年代后，大约八十年代，黄金相对于其他国际储备的比例达到了顶峰。然后我们进入了一个几乎为期30年的下降期。而世界上最有信誉的中央银行是那些购买国债、随着时间积累了美国国债的银行。不管你喜不喜欢，这是确实发生的。另外，与此同时我们还有60-40投资组合，也帮助满足了对债券市场的需求，这促使了过去30年的牛市。

More recently, given the fact of their de-globalization trends, the inflation issue, the default issue starting to rise. The questions about interest rates to cost of capital needs to be higher over time. Can they maintain those interest rates to be as low as they were back in 20, 30 years ago? Do we need to see higher historical standards for cost of capital? All those questions are becoming more, I would say, relevant over time. And I think what's happening is clearly with the de-globalization trends of most central banks now thinking about, should I own debt from another indebted economy, like owning US treasuries? Or should I own a neutral asset like gold that has very long history of a track record of being that asset that creates the quality of international reserves that a central bank requires in order to completely lose value of their fiat currencies and create some level of credibility?

最近，考虑到他们逆全球化的趋势、通货膨胀问题以及违约问题日益增多。对于利率和资本成本的问题需要随着时间的推移逐渐提高。他们能否维持低于20年或30年前的利率水平？我们是否需要看到更高的历史标准来计算资本成本？所有这些问题随着时间的推移变得更加重要。我认为目前的情况明显是大多数中央银行正在考虑逆全球化趋势，他们是否应该持有另一个负债国家的债券，比如持有美国国债？还是应该持有类似黄金这样的中立资产，因为黄金在很长时间内一直被视为国际储备的重要财产，可以在中央银行完全失去他们的法定货币价值并建立某种可信度时起到作用。

So we're at the beginning of this process of central banks having to improve the quality of their international reserves. This is why we're seeing gold being purchased by most central banks recently, at record levels, really. And it's something that drives entire gold cycle at the end of the day. And so I think it's important to go back to the 40s, because today, despite the fact that we like to go back to decades that we had inflation like the 1970s, that that problem today is a lot more severe than what we've had during that decade. And in 1940s is a good example of a time when leverage was an issue as well. It was a different reason back then. The reason back then was how to do with the war. The war drove leverage in the government side to levels that we have currently.

因此，我们正处于央行不得不提高其国际储备质量的进程的初期阶段。这就是为什么最近大多数央行购买黄金，而且购买规模创下了纪录。这也是驱动整个黄金周期的一种因素。所以我认为回顾上世纪40年代很重要，因为尽管我们喜欢回顾像上世纪70年代那样通货膨胀的十年，但是今天的问题比那个十年更加严重。上世纪40年代是一个很好的例子，当时杠杆比率也是一个问题。当时的原因与现在不同。那时的原因是战争。战争导致政府方面的杠杆水平达到了我们目前的水平。

And who financed that debt at that time? Well, there's a lot of things that happened during that period. Number one, we've had, and I think that was one of the most important things, was really the individuals are buying war bonds. So individuals in the US were actually financing the war, number one, but financing that debt that we've had during that period that buildup of that debt. And that was a significant portion of the demand driven by treasuries at that time.

那时候是谁为那笔债务提供融资的呢？好的，在那个时期发生了很多事情。首先，我们有一件非常重要的事情，就是个人购买战争债券。所以美国的个人实际上是为战争提供了融资，第一，同时也为我们在那段时间产生的债务提供了融资。那时候这部分需求的主要来源就是国债市场。

The second thing that happened was that the fattings struck the banks to buy US treasuries too. And so that created another demand for treasuries that it's not the case as much today. And then we also re-instituted this yield curve control that is also really popular topic today, the potential for that happening, and I think will happen at some point inevitably. But it's important to go back to the need for financial repression, given the fact that you have such a high levels of debt. Also, we'll play into this inflationary problem. But ultimately, yields had to move higher. And we've had a move up in yields all the way to the 70s and 80s that then peaked in the 80s, and then we've had a 30-year period of declining interest rates. So I don't know how bad things are going to be, but today I would say that those issues with treasuries are probably one of the we've seen in history.

之后发生的第二件事就是肥胖者开始购买美国国债。因此，这为国债创造了另一种需求，虽然现在不那么明显。我们还恢复了收益率曲线控制，这是当今非常流行的话题，这种可能性将不可避免地发生。但是考虑到债务水平如此之高，回到金融压制的需求是很重要的。此外，这将进一步加剧通胀问题。但最终，收益率必须上升。我们的收益率一直上升到70年代和80年代，然后在80年代达到峰值，之后我们经历了30年的降息期。所以我不知道情况会有多糟糕，但是今天我可以说国债面临的问题可能是历史上最严重的之一。

Number one, we haven't even seen the same degree of or the same need for deficits to be running as high as there was in the 40s. It was a war happening, a world war happening unfolding at that time. Today, that could happen. And we would start that war already at very record-lavage ratios in terms of the government side, which was very scary in general. But this is the case with every developed economy, including China, which you may say it's not a developed, it's an emerging market, or maybe it's in between and so forth.

首先，我们甚至没有见证过像40年代那样需要或者出现差不多程度的财政赤字。当时正值一场全球战争爆发，情况非常严峻。如今，这种情况仍有可能发生。如果发生，我们将会从政府方面开始这场战争，而我们已经处于非常高的负债比率中，这本身就非常可怕。然而，这是包括中国在内的所有发达经济体的情况。你可能会说中国并非发达经济体，而是新兴市场，或者处于两者之间等等。

But the biggest issue with treasuries today to your question has to do with the amount of treasury issuances that are happening in the market. Recently, we've had something called the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling has been basically irrelevant for markets. Every time someone claims that this is going to be relevant, it's not relevant. And the markets don't care about it, markets go higher on the back of the debt ceiling situation. This time, however, it's not that debt ceiling itself that matters. It's not the agreement between the Republicans and Democrats if they need to extend the debt situation or not. That has to happen like it or not like it. We may see it technical default or something like that. But that's not really relevant because they will ultimately extend the debt limit because otherwise everything is going to be collapsing and imploding in the US.

然而，与您的问题相关的国债最大问题在于市场上正在发生的国债发行数量。最近，我们有所谓的债务上限问题。债务上限对市场来说基本上是无关紧要的。每次有人声称这将会有影响时，却并没有影响。市场并不关心这个问题，市场在债务上限问题下走得更高。然而，这一次，问题并不在于债务上限本身。问题也不在于共和党和民主党是否需要延长债务情况的协议。无论喜欢与否，这种情况都必须发生。我们可能会见到技术性违约或类似情况，但这并不是真正相关的，因为他们最终将延长债务限额，否则美国的一切将会崩溃和崩溃。

So assuming that's going to happen at some point, the question now is how can the market absorb a large amount of treasury issuances once we do have that agreement in place? So the treasury cash balance today is running at one of its lowest levels in history. Today, it's at about 200 billion. Just to give you some perspective, in March, the amount of fiscal deficit that we're running was over 300 billion. So in one month, we could dry up the entire cash balance. That cash balance is basically used for day-to-day operations is basically what funds the treasury deficit that we have currently.

假设这种情况将在某个时间点发生，现在的问题是一旦达成协议后市场如何吸收大量的国债发行？目前国库现金余额处于历史最低水平之一，约为2000亿美元。为了让您有个参考，三月份我们的财政赤字超过了3000亿美元。所以一个月的时间就能将整个现金余额耗尽。这个现金余额主要用于日常运营，基本上是用来支持我们当前的国债赤字。

So once the agreement happens, and every time we've had a debt ceiling, basically, if you look at the amount of debt outstanding in the US, if you look at a chart of debt outstanding, you see a straight line which is caused by the debt ceiling. In other words, the government is not allowed to issue treasuries. Once that gets resolved, you see a jump in treasuries or a jump in treasuries outstanding. That means that they're issuing treasuries. We don't know if it's going to happen in long duration, short duration, meaning is that going to be two-year yield, treasuries going to be issued, pain year, 30 years. I don't know. I don't have an answer for that. I have a feeling it's going to be a mix, but I don't think we all have an answer for that just yet. But it will happen. It has to happen.

所以一旦达成协议，每次我们面临债务上限问题，基本上，如果你看一下美国未偿债务的数量，如果你看一下未偿债务的图表，你会看到一条直线，这是由债务上限引起的。换句话说，政府不允许发行国债。一旦这个问题解决了，你会看到国债数量出现飙升。这意味着他们正在发行国债。我们不知道这是否会出现长期、短期的债务情况，也就是说，会发行两年期的国债还是十年期、三十年期的国债，我不知道。对此我没有答案。我有一种感觉是会混合发行，但我认为我们还没有一个确切答案。但是这是一定会发生的。必须发生。

And so what does that mean? How will the market absorb this? It's a very, very important question because we just went through 2022, which was a total collapse of the 60-40 belief. Despite the fact that it was a big decline in prices too, it was really a break of belief in this portfolio location, which it's interesting that in the first quarter of 2023, we've had to come back with mega caps doing well, treasuries rallying, and that portfolio actually did very well. But to me, this is almost like a bear market rally of that portfolio positioning. We'll see if I'm right here in years from now.

那么这意味着什么呢？市场将如何吸收这个问题？这是一个非常非常重要的问题，因为我们刚刚经历了2022年，这是60-40信仰的完全崩溃。尽管价格也大幅下跌，但这实际上是对该投资组合定位的信仰的破裂，有趣的是，在2023年的第一季度，我们必须回到大盘股做得好、国债上涨并且该投资组合实际上做得很好的状态。但对我来说，这几乎就像是这种投资组合定位的熊市反弹。多年后我们会看是否我是对的。

But I do think that the age of the 60-40s is over. And if that's the case and you have on top of all this, the banking problem, which think about this, well, the banking problem was not caused, it was really caused by collateral prices falling that caused the mismarking of those assets in their balance sheets. And then the unintended consequences of the treasury market decline. What happens if we have a $500 billion to a trillion issuance of treasuries at a time when 60-40 portfolios believe is somewhat broken. You have central banks not buying those treasuries. And who is going to be the buyer individuals? Are they going to create, I don't know, green energy bonds and people would be buying them at record levels? I don't know. I don't think so. If I look at probabilities, I think there's a high chance that we may see some big issues in the treasury markets sometime, like similar to what we saw in the BOE, the Bank of England, last year. And the Fed is going to have to step in. It's the Fed's responsibility to try to avoid the instability of financial system.

但我确实认为60至40岁的年代已经过去了。如果是这样的话，再加上银行问题，想想看，银行问题并不是由于下跌的抵押品价格造成的，而是造成了他们资产负债表上项目定价的误差。然后是国库市场下滑的非预期后果。如果在60至40岁的资产配置理论已经有所崩溃的情况下，我们在发行5000亿至1万亿美元国债的时候会发生什么呢？中央银行不会购买这些国债。那么个体投资者会是购买者吗？他们会创造，我不知道，绿色能源债券，人们会以创纪录的水平购买它们吗？我不知道。从概率的角度看，我认为我们可能会在国债市场上看到一些严重问题，类似于去年在英格兰银行（BOE）所看到的情况。美联储将不得不介入。维护金融体系的稳定是美联储的责任。

And so the treasury market is linked to everything in the financial markets and causes that turmoil. Then the Fed is going to have to step in. And it's not something we haven't seen. What QE is exactly that is them buying those bonds, creating a demand for those bonds is essentially monetizing the debt. Now, just because I said that some people may have issues with the technicality of that and say it's not really monetizing the debt. Well, it is. The end of the day, it will be monetizing the debt. And I don't think there's really even if I was a policymaker, I get that question a lot, what would you do differently? I don't think there's a way to do anything different of me, or I think they're trapped. And so investors need to be thinking about that context and saying, how do I exploit those issues in order to capitalize on that? And I think there's a lot of trends that will be successful here. It probably won't be the sexy technology space or the treasury market or the 60-40 portfolios or the software companies or even maybe the overall crypto market. I don't think it will be. I think there will be other things that maybe will look more attractive for the future. Natural Resources is one example. Value companies going back to understanding fundamental analysis is going to be in demand. Understanding short sellers, how they do their craft, which would be very handy and high demand to understand the downside risk of markets. So everything is interconnected in a way. And the treasury market to me is fascinating. It basically holds the key for an entire stability of the financial sector and not sector with financial assets in general. And it's something that I'm paying very, very close attention.

因此，国库市场与金融市场中的一切都有关联，并引发了动荡。然后美联储将不得不介入。这并不是我们从未见过的情况。量化宽松（QE）的确就是他们购买这些债券，创造了对这些债券的需求，实质上是货币化债务。现在，即使我说了这个，有些人可能会因为技术性问题而有异议，说这并不是真正的货币化债务。然而，从长远来看，它将是货币化债务。而且，即使我是一个决策者，我经常遇到这个问题，你会做些什么不同的事情吗？我不认为有什么方法可以有所不同地行动，或者我认为他们陷入了困境。因此，投资者需要考虑这个背景，思考如何利用这些问题来获利。我认为这里将有很多成功的趋势。它可能不是性感的技术领域，也不是国库市场，也不是60-40投资组合，软件公司或甚至整个加密市场。我不认为会是这样。我认为可能会有其他更具吸引力的事物成为未来的热点。自然资源就是一个例子。价值投资公司回归对基本分析的理解将受到需求。理解做空者如何进行交易是非常有用和高需求的，以理解市场的下行风险。所以，一切都以某种方式相互关联。对我来说，国库市场非常有趣。它基本上决定了整个金融部门的稳定，而不仅仅是金融资产部门。这是我非常非常关注的一个问题。

Now, since you're in the investment business, you mentioned you're looking to make the most bang for your buck when you're allocating capital and you have the ceases around gold. And then you have things like gold miners, which offer more upside potential because they're a derivative of gold. So when gold moves up, say 10%, maybe these gold miners move up, call it 30% or something, depending on how well you choose your gold miners. So how do you think about allocating to gold miners and how that might apply to our audience as individual investors?

现在，既然你是从事投资业务的，你提到你在分配资金时希望获得最大的回报，并且你拥有一些与黄金相关的投资策略。然后你还有一些黄金矿企业，它们提供了更大的上涨潜力，因为它们是黄金的衍生品。所以当黄金上涨10％时，这些黄金矿商可能会上涨30％，或者根据你如何选择黄金矿商而定。那么你是如何考虑分配给黄金矿商的，以及如何将其应用于我们的听众作为个人投资者呢？

Okay, so I think in order to understand the gold space, you need to have some also historical context on the industry too. And recently, I talked to a lot of institutional investors that ask me questions about our strategy of investing in natural resource businesses and trying to exploit those inefficiencies. And what we find is the biggest question, the biggest question, most popular question we get is why they seek gold prices, making new highs. But you're not seeing the miners following suit.

好的，所以我认为要理解黄金市场，你也需要对该行业的历史背景有一些了解。最近，我与许多机构投资者进行了交谈，他们向我提问关于我们在自然资源企业投资策略和利用这些低效率的问题。我们发现最常见的问题是，为什么金价正在创新高，但矿业公司却没有跟随上涨。

It's such an important question because the majority of the indices that track gold miners are indices that use the composition of those indices are really driven by larger miners, the barracks and new mods, the king rosses of the world. And in my view, that does not reflect the opportunity in this decade in the space. Although they might, for other reasons, do very well. And if gold prices rise, I don't think that's ultimately where the large amounts of money will be made.

这是一个非常重要的问题，因为追踪金矿公司的大部分指数是使用那些指数的组成成分，而这些成分主要由较大的矿企、某些知名矿商和金矿王者等企业主导。在我的观点中，这并不能反映这个十年金矿领域的机会。尽管出于其他原因它们可能表现得很好，但我认为如果金价上涨，大量的财富最终不会在这些企业中获得。

So if you think about the biggest reason why we're seeing this chronic underperformance across the majors, it has to do with the fact of how they're running those businesses. If you looked at just a chart of gold prices relative to revenues of those companies, you're going to find a major divergence where gold prices rising and their revenues are not rising. Why? We can't even explain that by saying operating costs is higher because we're looking at top line. We're not even subtracting by operating costs whatsoever.

因此，如果你想到为什么我们看到这种主要专业表现持续不佳的最主要原因，它与他们经营业务的方式有关。如果你仅仅看一张黄金价格相对于这些公司收入的图表，你会发现一个重大的分歧，即黄金价格上涨而它们的收入没有上涨。为什么呢？我们甚至无法通过说运营成本更高来解释这一点，因为我们正在看整体收入。我们甚至没有从运营成本中进行任何减法。

So the main reason for that, it has to do with the fact that most of the major companies or all of the major companies have aging assets with deteriorating quality of those assets. And also, a total lack in vision for growth. There is no production growth happening across those firms. If you look at barracks production for gold over the last decade, you're going to see a secular decline. If you look at Kim Ross, you're going to see the same Anglo gold, the same idea. Newmont, same gold production since 16 years ago.

这其中的主要原因是因为大多数主要公司的资产日益老化且质量不断下降。此外，这些公司在增长方面缺乏远见。这些公司的生产增长完全停滞不前。如果你观察过去十年黄金采矿企业的生产情况，你会看到一种持续性下降趋势。同样，金瑞斯、安格洛黄金等公司也如此。纽蒙特自16年前以来黄金产量保持不变。

So why would an institution buy those assets? If all they're doing is retiring those assets over time, their own projects, there are producing assets. And then what they do with the capital, because of the pressure from some investors and even their own board members on cost saving, is that what they do is they take that capital, that profitability they're generating because gold prices are record levels. And then they return that capital back to shareholders are record levels, meaning they should be spending money on focusing on replenishing their existing reserves, improving the quality of those reserves, finding new discoveries, being bold at a time of the beginning of a gold cycle. Instead, they're just letting those assets run their course. And the average grades of those assets have been in the, also a multi-year decline.

所以，为什么机构会购买这些资产呢？如果他们所做的只是逐渐淘汰这些资产，将资金投入到自己的项目中，这些项目会产生收益。然后，由于一些投资者甚至是自己董事会成员对节约成本的压力，他们会如何处理这笔资金呢？他们会利用黄金价格创纪录的盈利能力，将这笔资金返还给股东，也就是说，他们本应该将资金用于补充现有的储量、提高储量质量、发现新的矿藏，大胆地应对黄金周期初期的挑战。然而，他们只是任由这些资产逐渐消耗殆尽。而且，这些资产的平均品位也在多年来持续下降。

So what's the vision here? It's creating, in my opinion, one of the best opportunities for an investor to be creative, to maybe build the next newmont, the next barrack of the cycle. That's what I'm trying to do.

那么，这里的愿景是什么？在我看来，这是为投资者提供最佳的创造性机会之一，也许可以打造下一个新蒙特或者下一个巴拉克（这两者皆为成功的投资案例）。这就是我想要做的。

So the way I think it's going to happen is you have producers, developers, and explorers. Majority of people, when they talk about miners, they're really talking about producers. If you're looking at GDX, the ETF, or the GDXJ, both the ETFs are basically all producers. So you're not seeing the real opportunity here.

我认为事情将会以以下方式发生：你会有生产商、开发商和探险家。当大多数人谈论矿工时，实际上他们是在谈论生产商。如果你看GDX或GDXJ这些ETF，它们都主要是由生产商构成。所以你并没有看到真正的机会。

I'm not here to claim that what we are trying to accomplish is easy. We are investing in very small cap names in that mining space. There's over 3,000 companies in this part of the industry. And what I would say is that 90 or 95% of them will fail. So the thing is, the quality companies and the bad run companies are basically being priced at the same level today.

我在这里并不是要声称我们试图实现的目标很容易。我们正在投资于这个采矿领域的非常小规模的公司。在这个行业的这个部分，有超过3000家公司。我要说的是，其中90%或95%的公司将会失败。所以问题在于，优质公司和经营不善的公司现在基本上以相同的水平定价。

So you can find a company that trades a sub 20 million market cap that is very likely onto a major discovery of gold. Any investors don't care about, in fact, the price that, along with another company that most likely won't have anything in the following years as they follow up on those projects.

因此，你可以找到一家市值不到2千万的公司，很有可能正在进行一项重大的黄金发现。任何投资者对此并不关心，实际上，他们关心的是价格以及另一家公司，在接下来的几年里很可能不会有任何进展，因为他们要继续跟进这些项目。

So what we found is that there is a plan, oh, and by the way, majority of the billionaires in this industry, throughout history, have made their money on discoveries. Remember, producing, development, and also the explorers. Most of the capital made in this industry was actually made on exploration. Basically, there was a property that some of those billionaires acquired or invested in a company that owned the property, that then found a major discovery that became a company maker deposit. That's what we call, and there's something that is very economically viable, scalable, high grade, and successful over time, creates such a level of profitability during that speculation period of going from a very low value of owning a property or a mineral rights over that property to then finding a major discovery.

我们所发现的是，有一个计划，顺便说一句，历史上大部分在这个行业中的亿万富翁都是通过发现而致富的。记住，生产、开发以及勘探都是如此。这个行业中大部分的资本实际上是通过勘探获得的。基本上，有一些亿万富翁购买了某个物业或者投资了一家拥有该物业的公司，然后发现了一处重要的发现，这变成了公司制造者的矿床。这就是我们所说的，它非常经济可行、可扩展、高品位，并且长期以来取得了成功，创造了在这种推测期间从拥有一处物业或者该物业上的矿权的极低价值到发现一项重要发现的过程中产生了如此高的利润水平。

That increase of speculation, that creation of value that you build during that phase of the mining industry is what makes most of the billionaires in this industry.

在采矿行业的这个阶段，对于投机行为的增加，对于价值的创造，正是使得大部分矿业行业的亿万富翁的主要原因。

And when thinking about this, we thought, well, isn't this very similar to the technology space? Most of the billionaires made their money and startup companies that then became multi-billion-hour businesses. That's how they made most of their capital at that initial phase.

在思考这一点时，我们想到，这不就和技术行业非常相似吗？大部分亿万富翁都是通过创办初创公司赚到了财富，这些公司随后发展成为了价值数十亿的企业。这就是他们在最初阶段赚取大部分资本的方式。

The growth came from that startup phase part of the industry. What if we replicate the success of venture capital and the success of private acting general, which includes venture capital?

这种增长源于该行业的初创阶段。如果我们复制风险投资的成功以及包括风险投资在内的私人行为总体的成功，会怎样呢？

All of the investing in what I think it's the beginning of a trend, meaning natural resources in this case, specifically metals and mining, because that's where I would say our niche is and our knowledge is across the team and working with geologists and so forth. What we've built is in metals and mining.

我们投资于我认为是一个趋势开始的领域，特指自然资源，尤其是金属和矿业领域，因为那是我们团队的专长，我们与地质学家等合作。我们所建立的专业领域正是在金属和矿业领域。

What if we create a place where we can invest in maybe 100 companies or so, where all we need is one or two of those businesses to be very successful, meaning becoming unicorns or multi-billion-dollar companies on the back of major discoveries, knowing that the value of those businesses are today priced for failure already. There's a lack of understanding of that industry overall.

我们是否可以创建一个地方，我们可以在其中投资大约100家公司，而我们只需要其中一两家公司非常成功，也就是像独角兽或市值数十亿美元的公司那样，在重大发现的支持下迅速崛起，明白这些企业的价值在今天已经被定为失败。整个行业对此缺乏理解。

What if I come in with a more intellectual and institutional approach towards this rather than the current participants in this market and really exploit those inefficiencies and all the best quality assets I can find in exploration side of it and really build a business on top of that?

如果我采用比当前市场参与者更加理性和制度化的方法，充分利用探索方面的这些低效性，并且真正发掘到所有最高质量的资产，然后在此基础上建立一家企业，那会怎么样呢？

Just to be fair, this is the model that NUMON became NUMON, NUMON's the largest gold companies in the world and they started as a fund. They own a bunch of early stage projects that then became major discoveries or major or company maker types of projects. That on the back of that was the beginning of NUMON that started really in 1920s.

为了公平起见，这是NUMON成为世界上最大的黄金公司NUMON的模式，他们最初是一家基金。他们拥有一系列早期项目，这些项目后来成为重大发现或重大公司级项目。正是基于这一基础，NUMON于上世纪20年代真正起步。

It's not we're trying to replicate that specifically the same way. It's not like we are trying to turn Kreskett into a mining company or anything like that, although we like to keep the optionality open. The fact that NUMON is spending time and effort to go deep into intellectually deep into this space and then there's stand-level of opportunity we have.

我们并不是想要完全复制那样的方式。我们并不打算将Kreskett变成一家采矿公司或类似的企业，尽管我们希望保持选择的可能性。NUMON花费了时间和精力深入研究这个领域，这为我们提供了机会。

It's kind of funny how you have either I'm very wrong or I'm going to be very right because why would you see gold prices at record levels and a property that has very likely a major discovery of that metal and we have statistically very good ways to give us conviction that we do they are on to major discoveries.

这真的有点有趣，不管是我完全错误还是我将非常正确，因为你怎么会看到黄金价格达到创纪录水平，而且很有可能发现了一处拥有该金属的重大发现的财产，而我们在统计方面也有非常可靠的方法来确信我们的判断是正确的，他们正在进行重大发现。

One of the main reasons is because they drilled and they found gold very high grade gold and not just once they drilled in some cases, several hundred meters of those of those deposits have been drilled. So what you find there is that wow then why would they be priced in such a depressed level when gold prices are higher and to me it's sort of like a no-brainer.

其中一个主要原因是因为他们进行了钻探，发现了非常高品位的金矿，而且不仅仅是一次，有时他们还进行了数百米的钻探。因此，你会发现，哇，为什么在金价上涨时它们的价格被压低，对我来说这有点显而易见。

So that's why I after going deep into this and knowing that the major companies are in desperate need at some point will have pressure from investors to improve again the quality of their own reserves not central banks, just the fighters. They need to improve their own reserves, their existing reserves, the quality of those.

因此，这就是为什么我深入研究后得知，主要公司在某个阶段迫切需要承受来自投资者的压力，以再次提升其储备品质，而不是中央银行，只有那些战斗者。他们需要改善自己的储备品质，改善他们现有储备的品质。

If I am now the largest investor of a lot of those major discoveries that are high grade scalable and economically viable and I can provide that to the majors at some point and maybe we don't want to do that. I don't know. Those are all options that are I think one of the most important things for investors to be successful is to have optionality.

如果我现在是许多重要的高品位、可扩展和经济可行的发现的最大投资者，我可以在某些时候将其提供给主要公司，也许我们不想这样做。我不知道。这些都是选择，我认为对于投资者成功来说，拥有多种选择是最重要的事情之一。

I can think of a time when I can find more optionality than this. I think this is one of the best ways I find to really create wealth, generational wealth in an environment that not a lot of people care about.

我可以回忆起一个时间，那时我能够找到比现在更多的选择性。我觉得这是我找到真正创造财富、世代财富的最佳方式之一，而这个领域并不被很多人所关注。

I don't go to a restaurant or a bar and hear people talking about acquiring gold properties or copper related properties or a silver discovery or anything like that. I do hear people talking about technology and crypto. To me, this is one of the most contrarian and interesting ways of asymmetrically tackling an opportunity that I have very high conviction given my macro views.

我在餐厅或酒吧里并不听到人们谈论购买黄金或与铜相关的财产，或者银的发现，诸如此类的话题。我听到的是人们谈论科技和加密货币。对我来说，这是一种非常反向和有趣的方式，以非对称的方式应对一个机会，根据我的宏观观点，我对此非常有信心。

I think it requires a lot of understanding. I've been in this industry now for three to four years and I would say that the level of understanding of this continues in terms of the learning curve continues to be steeper and steeper. I continue to learn about this and our portfolio I think looks much better than it looked three years ago. I hope that's the case. Five years from now, we continue to improve that way.

我认为这需要很高的理解力。我已经在这个行业里工作了三到四年，我可以说在学习曲线方面，对这方面的理解水平不断加深。我仍然在不断地学习，我认为我们的产品组合比三年前看起来要好得多。我希望情况是这样的。五年后，我们会继续朝着这个方向改进。

I think that we'll be in demand as well this level of knowledge of the space with especially across institutions. At some point, they will realize in my opinion that that's really the opportunity. That's why we did what we did. That's why I'm so excited about, I've been talking about silver for so long, gold.

我认为，随着对空间相关知识的这一水平的掌握，在各机构间我们也会备受需求。我认为，到了某个时候，人们会意识到这真正是个机会。这就是我们所做的事情的原因。这也是我对白银和黄金如此兴奋的原因，我一直在谈论它们。

Guess what I did recently? We purchased the seventh largest silver mine in the world. Is there a better way to leverage up your trade than that? Well, we actually, this was a leverage buyout and so it's literally leveraging up a trade. I don't know of anything. Every dollar the silver goes higher, the free cash flow of this mine goes up by 15 to 20 million dollars.

你猜我最近做了什么？我们购买了世界上第七大的银矿。还有比这更好的方式来实现贸易杠杆效应吗？实际上，这是一笔杠杆收购交易，而且确实是实现贸易杠杆效应。我不知道还有什么比这更好的方式。每涨一美元，这座矿的自由现金流就会增加1500到2000万美元。

What if we see gold of silver prices and triple digits one day? I don't think that's out of reality. I mean, that's probably going to be the kid, probably going to go higher than 50 dollars, which was a prior peak. Then they'll wear off to the races and probably going to go much higher than that and make new highs and historical highs and probably head towards triple digits at some point. I am trying to think ahead of time here. I know that this is speaking out of terms and maybe difficult for people to see this opportunity. I love that factor, how contrarian this is. We'll see if this is going to be proven right or wrong. But hedge funds are paid to take risk and I think this is a high conviction risk that I like to take.

如果有一天我们看到黄金和白银的价格达到三位数，怎么办？我认为这并非不切实际。我的意思是，金价可能会上涨到超过之前的50美元的峰值，然后会大幅上涨并创造新的历史高点，很可能最终接近三位数。我在尝试提前思考。我明白这可能会与常规观点相左，对人们来说可能很难看到这个机会。我喜欢这种与众不同的因素。我们将看到这个观点最终是对还是错。但对冲基金是为承担风险而付费的，我认为这是我愿意承担的高风险。

Another highly contrarian play I think you've been talking about is getting exposure to Brazil. I believe your fund is invested in Brazil and you also shared a chart here of the Brazilian to US equity ratio. Is this thesis of Brazil? Is it highly in line with this commodity in gold thesis or are there more factors at play here with Brazil specifically? It is. I would say the biggest thing that really brought to our attention, this opportunity to invest in Brazil has to do with the fact of as we learn about this natural resource space better and better and as we really researched this through our history, what we found is the market is very small. It's a very thin market to spread your wings around, especially if you're a large institution looking to find significant exposures. Let's see, I'm right about 60-40s and now we're going to have a 20% location or 15% location towards commodities one day. You can only go so far if you're a patient fund managing billions and billions of dollars into that space.

我认为你一直在谈论的另一种高度逆向投资方式是获取巴西的投资机会。我相信你的基金已经在巴西投资，并且你也在这里分享了巴西对美国股票比率的图表。巴西的投资论点与大宗商品和黄金的投资论点是否高度一致？或是巴西还有其他因素在起作用？是的。我认为我们注意到这个巴西投资机会最重要的原因是随着我们对自然资源领域的了解越来越深入，以及经过我们对历史的深入研究，我们发现市场规模非常小。这是一个非常狭窄的市场，特别是对于寻找重要投资机会的大型机构而言。让我们看看，我认为60-40是正确的，现在我们将在某一天分配20%或15%的资金用于大宗商品。如果你是一个管理数十亿美元资金的慢性基金，你在这个领域只能走得这么远。

You can buy the companies that are in developed economies, you can buy energy companies, it's probably the easiest way to start getting to the metals and mining space and very rarely you're going to see someone trying to play where we're playing in terms of the microcap names in the space and even companies are not even private yet, not even a public cap. As you dive into the potential ways of expressing that low commodity view in the markets, what you find is at some point you're going to find look for countries that are likely to benefit from that environment. When I thought about that, I thought about emerging markets and I think emerging markets we immediately think about bricks.

你可以购买那些位于发达经济体的公司，你也可以购买能源公司，这可能是最简单的开始进入金属和矿业领域的方式。在这个领域里，几乎很少会看到有人想要玩微小市值的公司甚至连私人公司或非上市公司也不做。当你深入研究如何在市场上表达低商品观点的潜在方法时，你会发现你要寻找那些可能从这种环境中受益的国家。当我考虑到这点时，我想到了新兴市场，我认为新兴市场我们立刻会想到金砖四国。

And bricks could not be, I think that it's probably one of the worst ways to think about this as an opportunity because the bricks are so different from each other. It's not a block of economy, it's actually very segregated and very different in the nature of those countries of how they run. You got China that is an authoritarian regime that is a net importer of commodities, not an net exporter. You've got Russia, which is a net exporter of commodities, but a total geopolitical mass that I don't think any institutional large institutional capital will ever chase that in the next five to 10 years. You've got India, which is less of a geopolitical mass than the other two, doesn't have an authoritarian regime, but it's a net commodity importer. And a very large one, in fact, and then you have Brazil in this kind of different environment where has exposure to every commodity I can think of, large exposure to agriculture, metals and mining, energy, even water, everything is related to most of the Brazilian economy is related to natural resources. And so at the same time, it is almost like the Switzerland of the bricks in terms of geopolitically speaking, it's very neutral. It will sell things to China, will also sell things to the US. It will even sell things to Russia, really.

我认为把这个视为机遇可能是最糟糕的一种方式，因为这些国家之间的差异非常大，不是一个经济整体，实际上在这些国家中存在着很大的隔离和不同。中国是一个威权政权，是一个净进口国而不是净出口国。俄罗斯是一个净出口国，但是在地缘政治上是一个完全不符合机构大规模资本追求的国家，至少在未来五到十年内是这样的。印度在地缘政治上不如前两个国家那么重要，没有威权政权，但是是一个净进口商品的国家。事实上，它是一个非常大的净进口国，然后巴西处于一种不同的环境，在这个环境中巴西与我所能想到的每种商品都有关系，对农业、金属和矿业、能源甚至水资源都有很大的曝光度，几乎巴西经济的大部分都与自然资源相关。同时，从地缘政治角度来看，它几乎就是金砖国家的瑞士。它向中国销售商品，也向美国销售商品，甚至会向俄罗斯销售商品。

And it is very interesting that today, because of the political leadership in Brazil, and to be fair, I am from Brazil. I could have not been more skeptic about the political environment, but also the corruption scandal and corruption history of the country over the last 30 years. I'm not even talking about the last year or so. I'm talking about the last 30 years. And so it was very difficult for me to put away those biases and become bullish in space. So just so you understand the context a little bit of how it was difficult for me to become bullish in the whole country.

今天真的很有趣，因为巴西的政治领导层原因，公正地说，我来自巴西。对于政治环境，以及过去30年中这个国家的腐败丑闻和腐败历史，我一直持怀疑态度。我甚至不是在说过去一年左右的情况，而是过去30年。所以，对我来说，很难摒弃这些偏见，并对整个国家持乐观态度。因此，这样你就能稍微了解一下我对整个国家变得乐观是多么困难。

But understanding the commodity markets and the likelihood of the beginning of a commodity cycle, which, by the way, is triggering different ways. Sometimes in this case, it started with energy, and then it's a sort of a domino effect. And then it triggers agricultural commodities rise, and then we've had a pause in gold prices over the last two years, and our gold prices begin to rise all of a sudden. And so every time there's going to be one section of the commodity market, and you have to be, I think, diversified into the space.

但是要理解大宗商品市场和大宗商品周期即将开始的可能性，这触发了不同的方式。有时候，在这种情况下，它始于能源市场，然后产生一种像多米诺骨牌一样的效应。接着，它触发了农产品价格的上涨，然后我们在过去两年里暂停了黄金价格的上升，而现在黄金价格突然开始上涨。所以每当大宗商品市场的某个领域即将发展，你必须在这个领域进行多样化的投资。

And the Brazilian market attracts me not only for this backdrop that is positive for tangible assets, specifically commodities, but also because of how cheap and historically undervalued those assets are in Brazil. We'll give an example. If you look at the banks, which are not necessarily tying directly to the natural resource industries, although we all know if an economy is a commodity-led economy, you should think that indirectly a bank that is operating in Brazil should be impacted by a commodity bull market. And it is. If you look through all history, the banking industry does very well during those periods as well, where commodities do perform better than other periods. And what you're going to find there is that they're trading at one of the lowest multiples in terms of prices relative to fundamentals that we've seen throughout history.

巴西市场吸引我的不仅是有利于有形资产，尤其是大宗商品的背景，还因为这些资产在巴西的定价非常便宜且历史上被低估了。我们来举个例子。如果你看一下银行业，它们并不直接与自然资源行业相关，尽管我们都知道，如果一个经济以大宗商品为主导，巴西的银行会间接受到大宗商品牛市的影响。实际上就是这样。如果你回顾历史，你会发现银行业在这些时期表现非常出色，而这些时期的大宗商品表现较好。你会发现它们相对于基本面的价格是历史上最低的倍数之一。

And so I think it's an opportunity. I think the political risk is real. So it requires a change in terms of allocation of how you allocate those assets into your portfolio. I don't think it requires a very large percentage of your portfolio because if you're right, those things are so cheap. The potential for return could be, I think, could be exponential. And look, everything has a price. You don't just avoid risk at all costs. There's risk reward in everything. And in this case, the reward is very mispriced relative to the risk. I think the risk is completely priced into most of those equities. And I find that a very interesting opportunity.

所以我认为这是一个机会。我认为政治风险是真实存在的。因此，需要改变资产配置方式，将这些资产分配到你的投资组合中。我不认为需要在你的投资组合中分配一个很大的比例，因为如果你是正确的，这些东西是如此便宜。回报的潜力可能是指数级的。而且看吧，任何事物都是有价格的。你不能为了回避风险而不惜一切代价。在任何情况下，都存在风险和回报。而在这种情况下，相对于风险，回报被极度低估了。我认为风险已经完全从大部分股票中定价出来了。我觉得这是一个非常有趣的机会。

Then I looked at the commodity producers chart of in the index of looking at world commodity producers relative to the Brazilian equity market. What you're going to find is that there is a very strong correlation between the two positive correlation, which means, and recently we're seeing a gap on that since elections and so forth, Brazil has been sideways recently while commodity equity markets have been basically been moving a lot higher, especially driven by energy, which is a huge part of exposure in the Brazilian economy as well. So I think there's some really interesting opportunities in the Brazilian market.

然后，我观察了世界商品生产商相对于巴西股市的指数图表。你会发现两者之间有着非常强的正相关性，这意味着最近选举等原因导致巴西股市走势平稳，而商品股市则一直在大幅上涨，特别是能源驱动的上涨，而能源在巴西经济中占据了很大一部分。因此，我认为巴西市场有一些非常有趣的机会。

I think you can also again, extrapolate that as well into South America, not every South America is a place we invest. Now we recently increased an exposure to Bolivia, which I think is in the processes of opening up their economy. Very similar to what we saw with Peru back in the 90s, where it became a very hot market in the mining space is specifically driven by this openness to foreign investors to invest in the space. And I think Bolivia is basically not priced for that.

我认为你也可以再次将这个想法推广到南美，不是每个南美国家都是我们的投资目标。最近，我们增加了对玻利维亚的曝光度，我认为他们正在开放经济。这与我们在90年代看到的秘鲁情况非常相似，当时由于对外国投资者在矿业领域的开放度增加，市场变得非常火热。而我认为玻利维亚基本上没有这种定价。

I understand the risks of Brazil believe in all that, or at least I appreciate the fact that there are risks that maybe could be impacting how cheap those assets are. Now I think those assets in general are not, and broadly speaking are not, considering any improvements whatsoever on the political environment. And people think a lot about the political side of it, rather than an economical side of it. An economical side usually leads the way, meaning what happened with Venezuela, for instance, just to use it as an example here, was exacerbated by the fact that energy was in a collapse. And meaning the energy space was collapsing, oil prices were collapsing. That really created the narrative that you needed for the populism that you saw in Venezuela to create that situation. And then the political environment, worse than you'll have the inflationary pressure because their currency devalues. Everything is related. Then you have social unrest, and you have a populace that comes in and brings up this authoritarian agenda.

我理解巴西存在风险，相信所有这些，或者至少我认识到这些风险可能会影响到这些资产的便宜程度。现在我认为，总体而言，这些资产并没有在政治环境上有任何改善。人们更多地考虑的是政治方面，而不是经济方面。通常来说，经济方面会引领发展方向，就像委内瑞拉的情况，例如，能源危机加剧了该国的问题。意思是能源领域正在崩溃，石油价格正在崩溃。这真的为你在委内瑞拉看到的民粹主义创造了一个叙事。然后，由于货币贬值，政治环境恶化，你将面临通货膨胀压力。一切都相互关联。然后你会有社会动荡，然后一个民众会出现，提出这个威权主义议程。

I think we're not going to see that again in South America, given the fact that commodities are unlikely to go to a bust of another 10 years like we saw from the 1910s. Now, in fact, go back just just for an idea quickly to that the whole thought about how we've had the best earning season in 2010s was also a time when all commodities are basically falling during a period. That's not my view today, right?

我认为在南美地区我们不会再见到那种情况了，鉴于商品价格不太可能像我们在20世纪初所见到的那样再经历10年的低迷。实际上，如果我们快速回顾一下，我们会发现在2010年代，尽管所有商品价格都在下降，但我们同样经历了最佳的盈利季节。然而，现在我并不持有这样的观点，对吗？

So I think Brazil is likely to benefit tremendously from those commodity trends. I think you have to also consider commodity-led economies versus commodity importers. China on the other hand, if commodity prices rise drastically different than what everyone thinks, they have upper hand in the commodity markets, I don't think so at all. I think that could potentially see social unrest. That could potentially see major devaluation of the currency. That could potentially see a shift in the political environment. Those things are not pricing than the Chinese market today, in my opinion. So a much rather own Brazilian asset, South American assets, and it's a portion of a portfolio. It's not a huge portion of it, but it's a growing portion of a portfolio. And I can see growing over time. And I'm very bullish about Brazil. And I love the fact that opportunity has been masked by the political leadership right now, which a lot of people are bearish on. But it's important to remember that early 2000s when we had a commodity bull market, in fact, happened when Lula, the same president today, entered, became the leader of that time. And so I think there's a lot of similarities with that period, and especially given the fact of how cheap they are relative to equity markets, which is the chart that you brought in today.

所以我认为巴西很可能会从这些商品趋势中获益非常巨大。我认为你还需要考虑商品主导的经济体与商品进口国的区别。另一方面，如果商品价格出现大幅上涨，与每个人想象的不同，中国在商品市场上处于上风，我并不这样认为。我认为这可能会引发社会动荡。这可能会导致货币大幅贬值。这可能会导致政治环境发生变化。在我看来，这些事情在当前的中国市场中并没有定价。因此，我更愿意拥有巴西资产、南美资产，并将其作为投资组合的一部分。它并不占据很大比重，但它是一个正在增长的组合部分。我非常看好巴西。我喜欢目前的机会被政治领导层掩盖的事实，而很多人对此持悲观态度。但值得记住的是，早在2000年代初，当时的总统鲁拉就任职时，商品牛市实际上开始了。因此，我认为这个时期存在很多相似之处，尤其是考虑到它们相对于股票市场的便宜程度，这也是你今天带来的图表所显示的。

So I like to own Brazilian assets. And I think there's a lot of also asymmetric opportunities in the S space as well.

所以我喜欢拥有巴西资产。而且我认为S领域也有很多不对称的机会。

Well, Tavi, I do not want to take too much of your time. I really, really appreciate you joining me. I know I really just enjoyed this discussion. Before we close out the episode, as always, I want to give you the opportunity to give a hand off to where people can get connected with you and Crescat capital.

嗯，Tavi，我不想占用太多你的时间。非常非常感谢你加入我。我知道我真的很享受这次讨论。在结束本集之前，像往常一样，我想让你有机会介绍一下如何与你和Crescat Capital取得联系。

Well, thanks for having me near show. And my apologies for the long answers. I get really caught into my views. And I love sharing some of those as well. You can find my work on Twitter at Tavi Costa. I've been doing a new version of my posts recently, which I've been trying to elaborate a little more of my views. Let me know if you guys like that. But that's sort of a new thing that I've been working on as well. And you can also find our work. If you like more in-depth research that are long letters and ideas about how to maybe assess this macro environment, my views at least you can find it at crescat.net. Crescat is the company that I'm a partner and we run three funds, a global macro fund, a long short fund, and a precious metals focus fund. It will be launching a commodity institutional fund here soon, along with a macro institutional fund as well. It's actually one of the longest macro funds that have been successful over the years in the space. And we're very proud of it. And I think there's a lot of opportunities to be a macro investor today, and especially given all those big macro trends being unleashed in this environment. So I'm really excited about the future. And I hope I provided some good ideas for investors in general. Thanks for having me. Lots of great ideas. Really amazing work. I enjoy all the stuff you put out, especially all the free stuff. You're a great follow on Twitter and I've enjoyed following you the past couple of years. So thanks again for joining me, Tavi.

感谢让我参加这个节目。对于回答得有些长，我向大家道歉。我很容易被自己的看法所吸引，我也喜欢分享一些这些观点。你可以在我的Twitter上找到我的工作，账号是Tavi Costa。最近，我对我的帖子进行了改进，试图更详细地阐述我的观点。请告诉我你们是否喜欢这样。但这也是我最近正在努力改进的新事物。你也可以在crescat.net找到我们的工作。如果你喜欢更深入的研究，长篇的信件和关于如何评估宏观环境的想法，至少你可以在那里找到我的观点。Crescat是我合伙的公司，我们管理着三只基金，包括全球宏观基金、多空基金和贵金属重点基金。我们很快将推出一个商品机构基金，以及一个宏观机构基金。实际上，这是多年来成功的宏观基金之一。我们为此感到非常自豪。我认为，作为宏观投资者，今天有很多机会，尤其是在这种情况下释放了所有这些重大宏观趋势。所以我对未来感到非常兴奋。我希望我为投资者提供了一些好的想法。再次感谢邀请我。你提供了很多伟大的想法。你的工作真是太棒了。我喜欢你发布的所有东西，特别是你免费提供的所有内容。在过去的几年里我一直很享受关注你。所以再次感谢你的加入，Tavi。

Thank you.

谢谢你。

Work hard today to let good luck find you tomorrow. Opportunities in the stock market can spring to life on short notice. Take advantage of them. You must be prepared and ready to act. Make sure you properly allocate your time playing offense as well as defense.

今天努力工作，让好运明天来找你。股票市场的机会可能会突然出现，要善加利用。你必须做好准备，并随时准备行动。确保你合理分配时间来进行进攻和防守。