График взят тут.
Немного о наивном восприятии статистики.
Обычный приём в экономических исследованиях отображать изменения какой-то величины по группам во времени. Это эффектно подтверждает необходимый аргумент, но есть нюансы. Они кроются в упрощении подачи данных, а именно много-переменная система упрощается до одной переменной. Плюс скрытие абсолютных величин, за счёт относительных.
Что не отображает график?
- В 1989 году населения США 247 М. В 2025 ~345 М. Рост за обозреваемый период почти 100 М человек или 40%. Это много.
- Следовательно наполнение обозначенных групп тоже менялось, но мы не знаем как. Ожидать линейную зависимость от роста населения было бы наивно.
- В 1989 году общее благосостояние домохозяйств в США предположительно оценивалось в $49,4 Триллионов (в деньгах того времени). В 2025 $176-190 Т. Пирог увеличился более чем в 3 раза.
Внимание вопрос, что больше 39,2% от 49,4 или 32,6% от 176? Ответ очевиден.
Но откуда эти цифры? В категории топ 10% в 1989 году было 60,8% всего пирога. Следовательно, всем остальным (90% населения) досталось 39,2%. В 2025 доля топ 10% выросла до 67,4%, или 32,6% для остальных. В реальности, нужно ещё учитывать инфляцию. На такой дистанции её значения будет весомым.
График подтверждает любимый тезис левых популистов – богатые стали богаче. Но, на самом деле несмотря на то, что доля остальных сократилась, абсолютное благосостояние всё равно выросло.
Не играйте в игры с нулевой суммой.
#economics #AmericanDynamism #factoftheday
October 2025
U.S. government shuts down, but futures are only down 28 points at 9 AM. That's all there is to know about perceived importance and its impact. At least for now.
#politics #finance #AmericanDynamism
Разработка беспилотных авто одно из передовых направлений новейших технологий. Финиш уже совсем рядом. В некоторых городах США можно воспользоваться такси без водителя. Аналитики предсказывают огромные возможности для экономики с массовым внедрением таких систем в коммерческом и личном транспорте.
Но один немецкий стартап пошёл другим путём. Они реализуют дистанционно управляемое решение. Геймер сотрудник компании у себя в офисе, сидя перед монитором и держа руль, подгоняет вам машину. Когда она вам больше не нужна, машина сама вернётся в гараж, управляемая на расстоянии. Проекта уже запущен в Лас Вегасе.
Осмелюсь предположить такой подход будет конкурировать с беспилотными решениями. Он закрывает вопросы ответственности, этики и громадных инвестиций. Наверно узким местом будет связь. В горах, туннелях и удалённых локациях она прям не ахти.
Будем посмореть.
#tech #BraveNewWorld
September 2025
The mom-and-pop style of Real Estate investing is suboptimal at best. Comparative performance versus financial assets over a long term is overwhelmingly in favor of the latter.
False narratives, over-concentration, exorbitant transaction costs in both relative and absolute terms, inadequate capitalization, a lack of understanding of the tax code, unprofessional management, unfamiliarity with the theory and practice of opportunity cost, overoptimistic expectations regarding the regulatory environment, and depreciation. Amateur investors are commonly blind to these risks.
One element often ignored is behavioral or psychological. Aside from a great cocktail party talking point, RE has an allure of stability and predictability. Objectively speaking, RE investment is a levered fixed-income bet on the demographic and economic growth in a specific area. So why do so many immigrants (it's my pseudo-scientific observation) tend to be overly exposed to this theme?
The answer is in a zero-sum mentality. Large swaths of population for the majority of human history lived under flat conditions. Things really started to go exponentially with the Industrial Revolution. Even then, benefits were limited to small groups in selected countries. Wars, colonialism, autocratic and repressive political regimes meant that people lived poorly and without opportunities. Owning RE was practical, and often the only way, to improve the welfare of one's family. It was a beacon of stability in a turbulent world.
America was and is very different. A growthy win-win mindset drastically differentiates it from other cultures and economies. That's why immigrants come here in the first place. And yet, some of them bring generationally established "safe" patterns, resulting in the emotionally charged channeling of disproportionately large amounts of wealth into RE. I used to, and to some extend still is, biased this way. It's hard to switch to a growth oriented mindset. But that is precisely what our system delivers 90% of the time. That is how generational wealth is made.
This perceived RE safety is a mirage. Insurance costs could skyrocket. Tenants may stop paying. Airbnb could increase its fees. Local laws may limit short-term rentals. A condo association could negatively impact the cost of carry and resale values. A state could force mandatory and expensive engineering assessments. An economic downturn will put a dent in discretionary spending, so cherished by short-term rental owners. A rise in interest rates will pressure prices down, and rents will follow. Prolonged periods of negative equity are not fun. Foreclosures are painful and costly. Stocks too have their risks, but they also have the upside.
One may say, But I'm not a stock market expert. I don't understand why do prices move. That might be true, but to suggest that this makes one a RE guru is a false and dangerous conclusion. Apparent ease of entrance is not a substitute for expertise. A few possess a deep knowledge of the inner workings of an automobile, yet most of us drive.
Over the last 25 years, innovations in finance and access to information have improved tremendously. It is almost criminal not to take advantage of that. Trading costs are practically zero. There are no minimums to invest. Heck, one can even invest in RE via stocks or ETFs.
Perhaps the root cause behind RE investing is the irrational fear of the unknown with outright dismissal of the objective reality?
#finance #twotypesofpeople #AmericanDynamism
September 2025
The shorting of MSTR premium relative to Bitcoin hasn't disappointed. Kudos to Jim Chanos. Sell MSTR and buy IBIT for an equal dollar amount. At the time of this writing, MSTR still has ~28% in premium. There is more room in the trade. We're witnessing the market's rejection of a fairy tale scripted by Michael Sailor. You know, the story about smart yielding strategies from the Bitcoin holding company. The market is waking up to all that nonsense and taking it for what it is - a levered bet on the price of BTC going higher in perpetuity.
When an investment thesis collapses, prices usually overshoot on the downside. This means that MSTR could see a discount to Bitcoin. If and when this happens, there could be a second-order force at play, accelerating the price correction in a nonlinear fashion. A margin call of sorts.
MicroStrategy has about $4.25 billion of debt outstanding. Without a Bloomberg terminal, it's not feasible to obtain exact numbers, so I'm relying on AI dwarves. There is a variety of bond vintages, but all of them are callable and pay 0 coupon. These are convertible bonds, with a conversion price of at least 130% of the stock price. When the price of MSTR was going up, it made sense to lend money to the company at 0% due to the conversion premium. This allows for a nice arb play. However, when the stock price changes course and starts going from the upper left corner to the lower right corner, beyond the initial assumptions, arbitrageurs have less desire to hold the bonds. The name of the game will be to redeem the bonds for shares and sell fast.
Against the maximum supply cap of 21M BTC, MicroStrategy holds approximately 3.0% of the total. However, the estimated number of forever lost Bitcoins is between 17-25%. There are other, albeit smaller companies, that jumped on the cryptocurrency treasury bandwagon. Less stable dominoes always fall further.
If you can't sell what you want, you sell what you can!
Human capital is by far the most important contributor to wealth creation and improved standards of living. There is plenty of historical evidence supporting this claim. Demographics is destiny. Immigration is a counterbalancing force to collapsing fertility rates. Unfortunately, this truism has fallen on the deaf ears of the MAGA crowd. An anti-immigration Luddism is a time-honored American tradition popular amongst recent arrivals and those with a victim mentality. A move to set H-1B visa fees to a stratospheric level is a step in the same direction.
Besides being largely symbolic, it'll be a long-term negative contributor to the economy. I say this as a probable beneficiary. Why is that?
Most of the applicants are in high-value-added service industries, such as IT. This field is the easiest one to outsource. Many big firms have established subsidiaries in places like India, where locals are hired as permanent employees of US-based firms. Numbers are difficult to come by, but this trend has gone parabolic over the last several years. These workers will happily remain where they are and earn a steady salary. They were never going to apply for a worker's visa in the first place. It's more economical for US companies, operating at a certain scale, to engage in this outsourcing rather than bring people onshore, incurring legal fees and higher labor costs. Yet it does make sense to bring some professionals here.
In 2023, there were around 450,000 H-1B approvals. Nearly 400,000 in 2024. In 2025, these workers had an average salary of $119,769 vs. $66,622 for the US as a whole. Almost double the national average for those keeping score. That's a lot of taxes and SSN contributions not collected. Second-order economic benefits and demographic growth not occurring. On margin, these highly skilled individuals will contribute to other countries' economic momentum, further closing the gap between the US and its rivals.
But hey, who cares about any of that when a guy running the country is focused on deciding who shouldn't be on our airwaves, while he's free from the heavy burden of researching Tylenol's impact on autism!
#politics #economics
September 2025
Options are fantastic financial instruments. From just two basic components, an investor can construct an endless array of positions designed to profit from all imaginable scenarios. Want to make 2x when a stock moves up? No problem. Profit from a down move or a range-bound action. Not sure if an underlying will go up or down, so long as it moves. These are just a few possible scenarios to speculate on.
Options embed risk/reward asymmetries for respective buyers and sellers. Profits are usually capped for option sellers(there are exceptions where profits will exceed the original credit received) and unlimited for buyers. There is a mathematical elegance with respect to probabilities. If a position has the potential to double your investment, then it carries a 50% chance of success. To achieve a 90% win probability, be prepared to wager $100 to earn $10. Public options markets are super efficient. Arbitrage opportunities are distant memories. Seek free lunches elsewhere.
However, there's a steep learning curve. Most trading platforms in the retail brokerage industry are cumbersome and suboptimal. One needs to dedicate a decent amount of time and discipline to achieve any hope of sustainable long-term results. So what does one do when a defined outcome strategy is desired, but structured products are prohibitively expensive and inefficient, especially from a tax perspective?
Meet www.innovatoretfs.com. They created and manage a plethora of ETFs designed to deliver well-defined investment outcomes. Scenarios such as buffering, dual direction, and different forms of protection over a range of indices and time frames. What does any of this have to do with options, one might ask? These products are internally implemented using them. This means no counterparty or credit risk, which is whether you realize it or not, is there when similar products are purchased from a specific provider. In addition, an ETF structure is substantially more tax-efficient and requires no ceremony to acquire. Management fees are on the high side relative to simple index ETFs, but these products are more complex and more demanding on the execution side, so it's understandable. Anyone who dealt with pushy salespeople offering annuities or defined outcome investment products from insurance companies will definitely appreciate the humanless nature of these products. All aspects are well organized and presented for you to learn at your own pace, without pressure.
This is not financial advice, nor an advertisement. Invest at your own risk.
#finance
September 2025
A picture is worth a thousand words.
from https://ritholtz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/poor-fed.png
#finance #economics
Where you stand depends on where you sit.
Точка зрения определяется местом сидения.
The CEOs of Nvidia and AMD are indeed related. Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, and Lisa Su, CEO of AMD, are distant cousins—specifically, they are first cousins once removed. Their family connection comes through Huang's mother's side, where Huang's mother is a sister to Su's grandfather. Despite this relationship, they did not grow up together and only met later in their careers, as they are described as "really distant" relatives. This interesting family tie is a coincidence considering both lead major competing chip companies in the tech industry.
Картинка лучше тысячи слов.
#finance #history #factoftheday
В нулевых, воплощением власти Wall St были Goldman Sachs. Молва приписывала им мировое господство, полный контроль над всем и вся, и далеe по конспирологическому списку. Теперь на это почётное место записали Black Rock и его основателя.
Я уже разбирал одну статейку по теме. Теперь Файб сделал длинный ролик об этой компании и её руководителе Larry Fink. Однако мотивы и выводы те же. Подача красочная, дерзкая, с оригинальными аналогиями и юмором,
но…
- Фактчекинг ужасный.
- Термин "Assets Under Management" (AUM) был формально озвучен, но по сути, весь нарратив указывает именно на владение. Это ключевое и грубейшее искажение демонстрирует непонимание автором устоявшихся норм и правил инструмента ETF, а также допущение того, что остальные инвесторы идиоты.
- Интерпретации порой за гранью фантазий.
- Взгляд и оценка исторических событий через призму современных знаний (historian’s fallacy).
- Cherry picking. Фокусирование на действиях одного человека/компании в отрыве от норм времени и действий других игроков. Как следствие сильно искаженная картинка. Немногочисленные исключения крайне ограничены в охвате.
- Погоня за популяризацией среди ширнармас за счёт сильного упрощения контента.
- Автор демонстрирует крайне поверхностное понимание политического устройства США и отдельных институтов.
Полный разбор неверных фактов очень трудоемкое занятие, вот неполный список:
- BlackRock не завладел дюжиной триллионов долларов. Рыночная капитализация компании $180.5 лярдов. Это карлик в сравнении с Nvidia, Apple или Microsoft.
- Аббревиатура “NINJA” означает No Income No Job No Assets. Стёбное описание сегмента заёмщиков, а не название кредита.
- Безработица во время рецессии 1981-82 годов не превышала 11%.
- Larry Fink не изобретал секьюритизацию ипотечных кредитов и не создавал этого рынка. В качестве сотрудника банка First Boston, в начале 1980-х, он был пионером торговли на нём. Рынок — это всегда наличие других участников.
- Доля домовладельцев (homeownership rate) опускалась до 63% в 2016. Пик достигал 70% перед началом кризиса. Сейчас около 65%. Совсем не такая страшная картина как обрисовал автор. Показатель выше среднего среди развитых (OECD) стран.
- Молодые миллениалы и зумеры, хоть и попали под раздачу, но всё-таки получат/ют существенные активы в наследство.
- Никого не выкидывают на улицу из-за опоздания уплаты аренды. Договора обновляются за несколько месяцев до окончания срока. Права съёмщиков защищены, хоть и варьируются от штата к штату.
- Пример с голосованием акциями для смены руководства ExxonMobil это исключение. Таких примеров по пальцам можно сосчитать. Но даже в этих случаях BlackRock скорее выполнял свои фидуциарные обязанности перед инвесторами, согласно заранее установленным нормам, и с привлечением сторонних советников.
- BlackRock не изобретал ETF.
- BlackRock не изобретал, и не был промоутером инвестиционной концепции ESG. Они очень умело воспользовались спросом на этот тренд с середины 2010-х. Истоки подхода уходят в 1960-е и раньше. Термин был озвучен в докладе ООН в 2005.
Что имеем на выходе? Смешав полуправды с искажениями, обильно посыпав натяжками и залив передергиваниями, получаем эстетично поданный, но феерично протухший салат, от шефа, читающего лекции в ВШЭ.
Эстетизм - преобладание формы над содержанием.
#economics #finance #history
September 2025
Paul Krugman не мой герой в вопросах экономики. Как правило я придерживаюсь иных взглядов. Данная статья отличное исключение.
Предположу что новые косяки президента только сплотят оппозицию, хоть и принесут вред в моменте.
#politics
September 2025
I'm glad to see a happy ending to Jimmy Kimmel's saga. A few observations could be made.
- Those in power seeking to silence a comedian, or anyone else for that matter, look pathetic. Really.
- Fierce free speech supporters do a 180-degree reversal once they assume power. This lesson holds throughout human history. Jimmy points to that in the clip below.
- People are still capable of rallying behind a sacrosanct right defined in the 1st Amendment.
- Large corporations servicing consumers remain extremely sensitive to vox populi, more so than to the executive branch. That's how it should be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1tjh_ZO_tY&t=1182s
#AmericanDynamism #politics
September 2005
Более детальная статья в Barron's в этом же направлении.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/rare-earth-minerals-china-usa-investing-160bf1fc
#economics #AmericanDynamism
S - Stagflation.
An economic environment with sticky inflation and lower economic growth. Lower than what one might ask. Lower than what the economy is capable of. Stagnant growth means bond yields are likely to decrease. There is less demand for capital. Simple. Sort of.
Sticky inflation and, more importantly, elevated inflationary expectations mean yields are likely to rise. Investors demand higher compensation to assume prolonged inflation. This is a gross oversimplification, of course. In reality, deficits, new debt issuance, and interest rate differentials between countries are important factors. What the FED will do is paramount.
As of this writing, the market expects a 25bps cut. CME futures imply 94.7% probability. Polymarket handicaps the same event at 88%. The expectations are driven by the recent softening of labor data and downward revisions in the prior periods. On the other hand, inflationary series remain steady around 3% or grind higher. The FED reiterates a 2% target. Funny. That's a big differential. Something has to give.
In late 2024, the FED started to cut rates, but 10-year yields jumped 100bps from September lows. A similar dynamic occurred in other developed economies. That's how the market's rejection of monetary policy looks. I suspect we could see something similar soon. Rising rates will put pressure on capital-intensive businesses. Meantime, non-monetary causes of inflation (tariffs, onshoring, labor shortages due to restrictive immigration) are outside of the central bank's control. Federal deficits show no signs of a slowdown either. Thus, inflation will remain elevated, absent an exogenous shock.
And that's how we enter into a stagflationary period. On the bright side, don't expect a 1970s-style stagflation. Without population growth, perhaps the current economic pace will just be OK.
#finance #economics
September 2025
This image adds valuable stats to my initial conjecture. Notable source of wealth, not referenced, but implied, earlier - business interests.
#finance #twotypesofpeople
