The nominal growth rate of the economy has passed, and the high yield of the bonds will be "on schedule", thus driving the bond yields into the downstream channel.

In this regard, we do not agree.

We believe that after 2013, there is a clear deviation between nominal economic growth and the yield of the 10 year treasury bonds. Even more than half of the time, there is a reverse trend between the two. The fundamentals may no longer be the core variables of the bond market. On the contrary, the central bank's monetary policy can be the core variable of the Chinese bond market. Therefore, by judging that the nominal economic growth rate has passed, it is not convincing to infer that the bond market returns have passed and the bond market interest rate has entered the downstream channel.

Many believe that China's economy will be the two bottom and take it as a reason to see many bond markets. We think it is totally wrong.

Admittedly, we do not deny that the possibility of "high and low before 2017" exists in the whole year of the economy. However, the "high, low and high volatility" of the economy is totally different from the "two bottom finding". The trend of China's economic stabilization has not changed, and there is no possibility of "two bottom finding".

In the short term, the view that "pessimism in the economy is expected to support the bull market" may be "muddle through", but in the future, with the repeated recognition of the trend of economic recovery, the pessimism of the economy is much more favorable.

Instead, the logic will be revised, and there may be a "super fix" bond market yield in the future.

There is also a view that the nominal growth rate of the economy has passed, and that the bond yield will be "on schedule", thereby driving bond yields into the downstream channel.

In this regard, we do not agree.

We believe that after 2013, there is a clear deviation between nominal economic growth and the yield of the 10 year treasury bonds. Even more than half of the time, there is a reverse trend between the two. The fundamentals may no longer be the core variables of the bond market. On the contrary, the central bank's monetary policy is the core variable of the Chinese bond market. Therefore, by judging that the nominal economic growth rate has passed, it is not convincing to infer that the bond market returns have passed and the bond market interest rate has entered the downstream channel.

It is doubtful that many bonds should be relaxed.

In fact, from the perspective of market research, the redemption and expiration of the contract has become a "new normal". What is the "regulatory slowdown" of the "debt market"? We believe that on the one hand, the expected guidance of strict supervision policy has not been alleviated (the banks have a negative attitude towards the delayed self reporting report). On the other hand, the policy of strict supervision has not been weaker than expected.

What is the root of the debt cow? We believe that the real core of the bull market is "regulatory coordination 2" - the monetary policy of the central bank is loosening. Attention should be paid to monetary policy and regulation.

From May 8th, we noticed "strict regulation +"

"Policy" may have caused some "economic trend + financial market" turbulence, regulators will probably pay attention to this, and then slow down the "tight supervision + currency" policy; in May 12th, the central bank announced the first quarter monetary policy implementation report, we accordingly judged that "regulatory coordination entered the 2 era". After that, the central bank's monetary policy really relaxed, laying the foundation for the second half of 2017, which is the root of this round of debt cattle.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.