这并不是说如果现任总统奥巴马获得连任,股市必定大涨。但正如摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)首席美国股市策略师帕克(Adam Parker)所指出的,在至少112年里,在国会分歧如此之大的情况下,总统选举的结果都不是民主党候选人当选。所以历史平均数据可能根本不重要。
The dominance of stock returns under Democrats might be a subtle kind of statistical illusion. The research by Prof. Johnson and his colleagues suggests the Federal Reserve's monetary policy is far more important.
民主党执政时期的股市高回报或许只是统计上的假象。约翰逊及其同事进行的研究表明,美联储(Federal Reserve)的货币政策要重要的多。
Since 1965, according to the study, large stocks have returned an annual average of nearly 12 percentage points more when the Fed was cutting rates than when it was raising them. (The researchers started their analysis then because 1965 was the dawn of modern Fed policy.) Over the same period, the difference in stock returns under Democratic versus Republican presidents was less than seven percentage points; a statistical analysis shows that the effect of Fed policy dwarfs the impact of presidential party.
据研究显示,自1965年以来,相比美联储加息时期,降息时大型股的平均年回报率要高出近12个百分点。(研究人员选择从那个时候开始分析是因为1965年是现代美联储政策的开端。)同期,民主党总统执政期间和共和党总统执政期间的股市回报率相差不到七个百分点;一项统计分析显示,美联储政策的影响要大于哪个党派控制白宫的影响。
【怎样的美国大选结果对投资者有利?】相关文章:
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15