Since the establishment of the first new fund of 1998, the fund team has developed vigorously and its position in the securities market has been strengthened day by day, mainly in the following aspects: by August 2002, the total net value of 59 funds had exceeded 1029 billion, accounting for 8% of the total market value of the secondary market.
Evolution of investment concept. It can be roughly divided into two stages: the first stage, from 1999 to the publication of the article "fund shady", adopts the investment strategy of centralized investment, long-term operation and continuous increase in holdings under the background of bull market; In the second stage, from the beginning of 200 1 to the middle of 2002, from centralized investment to diversified investment and portfolio investment, a small number of stocks were obviously increased. Gradually emphasize liquidity risk and asset ratio allocation, and at the same time emphasize "small wins are big wins" and enhance active investment. The investment styles of various funds gradually converge.
The dominant influence on the market and individual stocks. Through the study of fund trading behavior in the first half of the year, it is found that institutional game has become a common phenomenon in the market, and even has become the dominant factor in determining the market price and individual stock price at this stage. Many "good stocks" generally have funds, but there are fundamental differences on the price positioning, which is reflected in the fact that one fund has significantly reduced its position in a stock for a period of time, while another fund is quietly absorbing the stock. Even if one or two fund management companies are still like this, the game relationship among countless other institutional investors will be more complicated, and the types and degrees of differences will be wider.
In this context, funds gradually crowd out other investors, mainly in two aspects: one is to crowd out investors who also take portfolio as their main investment characteristics, and the other is to crowd out speculative capital subjects. In 2000, marked by the publication of the article "fund shady", especially since the Yinguangxia incident exposed the liquidity risk of the fund, the investment concept and "profit model" of the fund have undergone fundamental changes, with more emphasis on safety and asset liquidity. According to the statistics of the fund's semi-annual report in 2002, the average number of shares held by 52 funds at the end of the period was 123. According to this amount, at present, 60 funds hold 7380 "person-times" of stocks, with an average holding amount of 6.5438+0.5 million yuan per "person-time". Considering the principles in the actual operation of the fund, after we exclude the loss-making stocks, meager profit stocks, problem stocks, strong stocks and big profit stocks in the market, there will be more than 700 "good stocks". These stocks valued by funds are held by 10 funds on average, and the average holding amount of funds is10.50 billion yuan. In this way, as long as the fundamentals are acceptable, there is an average of 10 funds and 654.38+500 million sedan chair funds. What is this concept? At present, the average circulating market value of stocks is 940 million yuan, which means that 16% of these stocks are in the hands of sedan chair fund.
However, unlike the past, because funds are decentralized portfolio investments, generally speaking, the current funds rarely control the stock price excessively according to the practice of 1999 or imitating the practice of "bookmakers". Because the fund itself has no interest cost of funds, the normal fluctuation of stock price and the extension of cycle will not "wash" the fund out, that is to say, the fund will not be too worried about the operation of funds because of its low cost.
There is not much to talk about. If a fund buys 100 to 200 stocks, each stock will have hundreds of thousands of shares, which means less. Nearly half of the stocks in the market are touched by funds, and 60 funds buy them, and the fund's shareholding portfolio is not small. Take the market on June 24, 2002 as an example. Due to the sudden outbreak of the market, the varieties that the fund chooses to intervene are similar, such as sub-new shares, large-cap stocks and other varieties that are easy to open positions and have less history, and become the first choice. After the blowout, the operation of these stocks became a "headache" for fund managers. Because in the institutional game model, after the institutions know each other's cards, no one wants to add positions and take over or sedan chair for others. However, if some institutions reduce their positions first, the institutions that reduce their positions later will lose money. If everyone is scrambling to reduce their positions, they will bear the losses caused by the sharp drop in heavy stocks together. This is the "prisoner" dilemma brought by the institutional game.
The above-mentioned shareholding dilemma directly led to the "three-point phenomenon" in the weak market. The collapse of 200 1 has aroused great concern of institutional investors, especially funds, about liquidity risk. Regardless of the value type, growth type, balanced type, optimized index type or other types of funds, in 2002, on the basis of avoiding liquidity risk, they generally began to pursue diversified investments that were equal to or slightly stronger than the index. The corresponding operation method has also changed to band operation characterized by high throwing and low sucking. Some people jokingly call it the "three hairs phenomenon", that is, when the stock rises by two or three hairs, the selling orders increase sharply. When the boldest retail investors in the market are accustomed to throwing small profits and not touching big profits, they actually declare the demise of the profit model (building villages) by controlling the rise and fall of stock prices. In the past, the relative proportion of funds of retail investors was relatively large, and institutions could use "lead investment" to induce small and medium-sized retail investors to follow suit, and then take the opportunity to throw out their stocks. Now that the proportion of non-main funds in the market is decreasing, institutions are not so easy to use when they get used to the market of "three or two cents", and it is even more difficult for main funds to induce other institutions.
According to the transaction amount of two fund management companies with better performance, we can find that the average turnover rate of 1 1 funds managed by these two fund companies is 203%, while the average turnover rate of Shanghai and Shenzhen A shares in the first half of the year is 126%, the former is much higher than the latter. Using the ratio of the total turnover of140.4 billion shares in the first half of the year to the average value of131500 million shares at the beginning and end of the period, it is calculated that the overall turnover rate of the market is 107%, which is lower than 126%. This high turnover rate of funds reflects that fund managers are unwilling to hold stocks for a long time. In other words, the stocks in the hands of funds come in and out once every three months.
As a result, there are fewer "dark horse" days in the market, most of the stocks swing back and forth, and the speculative value is reduced. In the long run, some active funds that are "willing to take certain risks and get corresponding benefits" will inevitably be squeezed out of the stock market by funds to find other investment and speculation opportunities. This situation is by no means a minority. The crowding-out effect shows that the market participation funds are reduced, the total market value is shrunk, and the stock price is close to the investment value.
The crowding-out effect of the fund on other investors, especially speculative investors, is also manifested in the fact that the funds used by the fund have no rigid requirements for the appreciation of principal and interest, and the performance evaluation is out of line with the fees, which leads to the fact that it can bear a greater capital cost and time period than other investors in investment behavior. According to relevant statistics, at present, more than 70% investors in the securities market do not aim to pursue the same income as the index, nor do they aim to lose more than the market index. Therefore, as in other investment fields, when the investment cost of one party is obviously lower than that of the other party, the latter mostly chooses to quit.
So, in the current market, we found such a chain:
Pre-funds have been issued one after another, but the market is still depressed, which seems quite contradictory. One of the explanations is that the massive expansion of funds has replaced small and medium investors in the market, that is, the strength of gathering retail investors is "big retail investors". However, their investment strategy has also played a "crowding out effect", that is, other funds that are willing to take certain risks to obtain certain returns are squeezed out of the secondary market.
From this point of view, while accelerating the change of the main pattern of stock market investment, the fund itself has to bear the result of "crowding out" of funds brought about by this change. The change of credit structure strongly supports China's economic restructuring and transformation and upgrading. However, judging from the current credit structure, there is still room for improvement in the allocation efficiency of capital resources.
"The proportion of long-term loans in China is still high." Lian Ping, chief economist of Bank of Communications, said that in recent years, the proportion of medium and long-term credit in China's commercial banks has risen rapidly. According to the data of the central bank, by the end of last year, medium and long-term loans had increased by 4.6 trillion yuan compared with the beginning of last year, an increase of10.7 trillion yuan year-on-year, accounting for 510.6% of new RMB loans, an increase of 16.5 percentage points compared with 20 12 years.
The credit structure is mainly medium and long-term loans, which is closely related to the financial soft-constrained sector. Some financial soft-constrained departments have a large demand for funds, occupying a lot of credit resources, and some dynamic small and medium-sized enterprises are also facing the problem of financing difficulties and expensive financing.
"Debt pressure has produced a very strong crowding-out effect," said Guan Qingyou, vice president of Minsheng Securities Research Institute. Last year, the amount of credit and the scale of social financing were very high, but if we exclude the speed of debt expansion, we will find that corporate financing is still very difficult. Moreover, there is a situation of "bullying the small with the big". It is relatively easy for real estate and local financing platforms to obtain financing, but it is more difficult for SMEs to obtain financing; Most banks issue medium-and long-term loans for infrastructure construction, occupying a large amount of existing loan funds for a long time, while advanced manufacturing enterprises and strategic emerging industries are difficult to obtain funds. The crowding-in effect of fiscal policy was first proposed by Canadian economist Michael Parkin in his book Economics. The concept of crowding-in effect put forward by Mr. Parkin provides a new perspective for fiscal theory.
According to Parkin, the so-called crowding-in effect refers to the effect that when the government adopts expansionary fiscal policy, it can induce the increase of private consumption and investment, thus driving the increase of total output or total employment. For example, increasing government investment in public enterprises will improve the local investment environment, cause the decline of private investment costs, and produce external economic effects. Therefore, it is possible to induce an increase in private investment, which in turn leads to an increase in output; For another example, the government's use of financial funds to establish pension and medical security for residents can form people's good expectations for the future and dispel the idea of prudent consumption, thus causing a series of expansionary economic behaviors such as reducing savings, increasing consumption and investment.
In contrast, the formation mechanism of extrusion effect is completely different. If the crowding-in effect is caused by the positive externality of government expenditure behavior, then the crowding-out effect is caused by the negative externality of government expenditure behavior to the private sector, which is transmitted through interest rate variables. Generally speaking, private sector investment is very sensitive to interest rates, so the opportunity cost of private investment will increase with the increase of interest rates, which will lead to the decrease of private sector investment enthusiasm and investment volume. In the IS-LM model, the expansionary fiscal policy of the government causes the IS curve to shift to the right. When the position of LM curve is relatively unchanged, the equilibrium point will move to the upper right, so the interest rate of the whole market will increase. According to the definition of investment function, private investment will decline.
It should be pointed out that the crowding-in effect of fiscal policy is not realized by taking interest rate as an intermediary variable. The government's expansionary fiscal policy is generally only adopted in the case of economic depression. At this time, the interest rate level is often very low, and private investment is not sensitive to interest rates. In this case, the main factors affecting enterprise investment are not only the interest rate level, but also the factors from the total demand. In other words, because the total demand is not strong, the backlog of products in the enterprise sector is formed, which in turn leads to pessimistic expectations in the private sector. At this time, if the government implements an expansionary fiscal policy and increases the total demand (including domestic demand and external demand), although there may be a potential crowding-out effect with the increase of interest rate, with the increase of demand, the hidden cost outside the enterprise will be reduced, and the external economy will make the enterprise have a certain degree of profit space, so that even if the interest rate increases or the financing cost of the enterprise increases, the enterprise will increase its independent investment, which is the reason for the crowding-out effect of fiscal policy.
In order to give full play to the crowding-in effect of fiscal policy, the government's fiscal expenditure behavior must help reduce the operating costs of enterprises and create a good external environment for the survival of enterprises, which undoubtedly puts forward high requirements for the guidance of fiscal expenditure. Generally speaking, fiscal policy can better play the function of crowding-in effect when it makes a difference in "bottleneck" industries. For example, when the selling price of electricity is limited, there may be a shortage of electricity supply. If government expenditure is aimed at improving the supply structure of electricity and energy, then enterprises may increase investment. Otherwise, the power shortage will cause the electricity price to rise, the production cost of enterprises will also rise, and the investment will decrease. 1. Factors affecting crowding-in effect
The crowding-in effect of fiscal policy generally varies with the degree of market development. For example, the economic impact of the same amount of government fixed assets investment will be very different in the eastern and western regions of China, which is related to the size of the actual government expenditure multiplier. In fact, the multiplier of actual government expenditure can be used to measure the crowding-in effect of fiscal policy to some extent. We know that if a region's marginal propensity to consume is B, theoretically the multiplier of government expenditure should be 1( 1-b). So, what factors are related to the actual expenditure multiplier? It is obviously related to the marginal propensity to consume B in this area. Generally, the marginal propensity to consume in the eastern region is relatively large, so the expenditure multiplier is large; One of the reasons is that the marginal propensity to consume in the western region is small, or the marginal propensity to save is large, so the expenditure multiplier is relatively small. On the other hand, we can look at the production process of expenditure multiplier. Government investment leads to the increase of residents' (factor owners') income, which in turn leads to the increase of consumption, forming the first round of crowding-in effect, and the increase of consumption leads to the increase of income of another part of producers or sellers, which in turn leads to the increase of consumption in the second round, that is, the second round of crowding-in effect, and so on until the n round. Theoretically, n should tend to infinity, but in fact, if the market capacity is not large enough and the market is underdeveloped, then this chain cannot be derived indefinitely, so the total crowding-in effect is far from the degree reflected by the multiple relationship of 1( 1-b). So the actual expenditure multiplier is relatively small, so the total crowding-in effect is relatively small.
In addition, the crowding-in effect of fiscal policy varies with the source of financial funds. Generally speaking, there are two sources of funds for expansionary fiscal policy: one is tax; The second is public debt. According to Ricardo's equivalence theorem, national debt and tax have the same impact on the economy. But in fact, there are disputes about Ricardo's equivalence theorem in theoretical circles. For example, during the economic depression, the expenditure policy derived from public debt is more effective, while the expenditure policy derived from tax may aggravate the economic depression. This shows that in different stages of the economic cycle, the impact of capital sources on the economy is different. For another example, the two have different effects on economic efficiency. As we know, under normal circumstances, taxes will lead to the net loss of overall social welfare, while public debt will generally not lead to the decline of economic efficiency as long as it does not have a great impact on the interest rate level of financial markets during the economic depression. This is because during the economic depression, private investment (mainly direct investment) is insensitive to the change of interest rate, and the change of interest rate can only affect the scale of indirect investment (securities investment) at best, but has little effect on private direct investment. Therefore, during the economic depression, the crowding-in effect of public debt funds is relatively large, while the crowding-in effect of tax funds is relatively small.
2. Factors of extrusion effect
According to the IS-LM model, to sum up, we can see that the crowding-in effect of fiscal policy actually reflects the benign interaction between government expenditure and private investment and consumption, and the relationship between harmony and prosperity, while the crowding-out effect is that government expenditure excludes private investment and consumption to a certain extent. Generally speaking, the actual net effect of fiscal policy should depend on the comparison of these two opposite effects. If the crowding-out effect of fiscal policy is greater than the crowding-in effect, it means that the current fiscal policy must be properly adjusted. If the crowding-in effect of fiscal policy is greater than the crowding-out effect, it means that the current fiscal policy can continue.
In order to make fiscal policy produce more crowding-in effect and reduce crowding-out effect, we should pay attention to the following points when adjusting fiscal expenditure policy at present:
1. Fiscal policy must be able to adapt to changes in the macro situation.
When private investment is sensitive to interest rates, or from the perspective of economic cycle, when the economy is in the recovery and high stage of economic cycle, the government should adjust the scale and direction of fiscal expenditure in time and appropriately narrow the scope of constructive fiscal expenditure. Due to the sensitivity of private investment to interest rates, the crowding-out effect of government expenditure is relatively large and the crowding-in effect is relatively small. At this time, the effect of constructive fiscal expenditure policy is not ideal, but it should be noted that there is still a need to ensure a considerable scale of public expenditure, because public expenditure can improve the environment for economic development. When private investment is insensitive to interest rates or the economy is in depression and recession, the crowding-out effect of fiscal policy is relatively small, while the crowding-in effect is relatively large. Therefore, when China's deflation and economic downturn have retreated to the position of secondary contradiction, the main goal of fiscal policy should be to prevent economic overheating and possible inflation. At this time, in general, from the perspective of funding sources, the fiscal expenditure policy derived from tax is better, and the scale of fiscal expenditure derived from public debt must be appropriately limited.
2. Fiscal expenditure should consider the improvement of both "soft" and "hard" environment.
Financial expenditure should not only focus on improving the "hard" environment for investment, that is, the construction of traditional infrastructure such as energy, raw materials and telecommunications, but also focus on improving the "soft" environment for investment, that is, strengthening the transformation of the investment environment for human capital and vigorously setting up medical and health industries, so as to attract more private direct investment and give better play to the crowding-in effect of financial funds. In fact, from the past policy practice, the difference in the ability of attracting private investment between the eastern and western regions of China is not only reflected in the "hardware" facilities such as infrastructure, but also in the "software" facilities such as the quality of human capital. If the bottleneck of human capital in western China cannot be effectively alleviated at this stage, the advantages of material resources in these areas will inevitably be difficult to play, and the strategic goal of the government's western development will eventually be difficult to fully realize. Therefore, in the future, China's government financial expenditure, especially in the western region, should make great achievements in education, medical care and security. The improvement of human capital quality promoted by fiscal policy will promote the conditions and possibilities of rational directional flow of human capital and create favorable conditions for the future development of urbanization, urbanization and agricultural industrialization in China.
We must optimize the regional distribution of fiscal expenditure.
Because the crowding-in effect of fiscal policy changes with the development of the market, in order to ensure the efficiency of the use of fiscal funds, the government should, as always, strive to improve the investment environment in the relatively developed eastern region. Generally speaking, the output efficiency (crowding-in effect) of fiscal funds in the more developed areas in the east is obviously higher than that in the less developed areas in the west, but at the same time, we notice that the fiscal policies in the less developed areas in the west can better reflect the fairness of government policies. In view of this, the current use of financial funds in China should treat the eastern and western regions, developed regions and underdeveloped regions, cities and regions differently, and adhere to the principle of ensuring key points.
4. Evaluate the effect of fiscal policy comprehensively and correctly.
In fact, we only measure the effect of government macro-control from the perspective of economic efficiency and economic growth. Obviously, this measure is not comprehensive and unfair. Because the market economy has the inherent impulse of one-sided pursuit of economic efficiency, it leads to the phenomenon of market failure. Therefore, the government's policies should not add fuel to the fire, but pay attention to efficiency and more reflect the fairness and stability of economic development. Nowadays, people pay more and more attention to the quality of economic development and sustainable economic development, and the macro-control objectives of governments all over the world are moving towards diversification. Therefore, at present, China should not only measure the gains and losses of fiscal policy by the crowding-in effect or crowding-out effect, but also obey the requirements of the strategic goal of large economic development, and comprehensively investigate and evaluate the effect of fiscal policy by combining environmental indicators, equity indicators and other quantitative indicators, which is our specific policy practice in the future.