Only 7.1% of total US exports make their way to China, while 15% of Chinese exports make their way to the US.
So, China will get hurt more, right?
Not at all. Brazilian soybeans will replace US soybeans. It's a commodity after all. Airbus will replace Boeing.
The same can't be said for all the items the US imports from China. Foxconn doesn't have a factory in Salt Lake City.
US farmers and consumers will pay a far heavier price than Chinese tofu eaters and air passengers.
Now look at it from China's perspective.
The US makes up for only 7% of China's total imports. An 84% tariff on US goods, which are easy to replace from other sources, barely hurts. As a bonus, their other trading partners get to export more to China and reduce their own reliance on the US market.
All trade wars have to be government financed. Since governments are broke, they need to rely on the kindness of strangers to lend them money for interest.
Strangers are willing to lend to China at a far lower yield than the US, i.e. the bond market is saying US is a bigger credit risk.
Which makes sense.
Everyone thinks the US dominates in banking, but in reality 4 of the top 5 banks are Chinese. ICBC has 60% more assets than JP Morgan.
The CCP has more influence on Chinese institutions than Trump has on Jamie Dimon.
In terms of financing, China has yet another geopolitical ace up its sleeve. They can borrow at a lower rate in US dollars than the US Treasury itself. They demonstrated this when Trump was elected - a warning that the incoming administration completely ignored.
What happens if the US and China announce a trade embargo? China can easily replace its imports from the US and benefit other trading partners. The US cannot replace China. Period.
Chinese exporters will be hurt temporarily, but those factories are going nowhere. The government can always borrow cheap and support the industries that get hurt.
US consumers will find Wal-Mart's shelves 40% empty. No more solar panels. No more electronics since China controls the critical minerals used to produce them.
If there's no more trade with the US, the PBoC doesn't need to hold as many US Treasuries.
If Norinchukin selling Treasuries and going broke can cause so much turmoil that Trump capitulated on tariffs, imagine what will happen when China starts dumping treasuries.
As always, FinTwit influencers have completely inverted the picture and think China will have to devalue their currency or give Trump a call.
Nope. China holds all the aces and the other guy playing the game doesn't even know the rules.
TLDR: long China, short US.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
How did $NVDA manage to 15x its quarterly revenue in the last 4.5 years?
Everyone takes it for granted that it was due to demand for computing power for AGI. But the story goes deeper.
🧵
Part I: Changes in accounting policy
It all started with a change in accounting policy.
In the quarter ending April 2020 (Nvidia’s Q1 FY 2021), $NVDA changed its reporting segments from GPU and Tegra Processor to Graphics and Compute & Networking.
“Our Compute & Networking segment includes Data Center platforms and systems for artificial intelligence, or AI, high performance computing, or HPC, and accelerated computing; DRIVE for autonomous vehicles; and Jetson for robotics and other embedded platforms.” [emphasis added]
Until this point, Nvidia was a product company. Sell a unit, book the revenue. The unit, say GeForce RTX 20XX, comes with a software.
Let’s say a customer needs some custom work done on the software. $NVDA would recognize that revenue using the percentage completion method. It was all pretty standard, with no room for management to play around with the numbers.
However, once the reporting segments changed, revenue recognition practices changed as well.
Let's address this chart crime. The dollar milkshake theory, which forecasts a strong and forever rising dollar, claims the theory is valid because the DXY rose 30% from its 2008 lows.
When historians write history books, they don't claim to have predicted the past or call themselves oracles.
The DXY rose 30% is a factual statement. Claiming it rose because of the milkshake effect?
Karl Popper, George Soros' mentor, came up with the theory of falsification. Unlike verification, falsification focuses on categorically disproving theoretical predictions rather than confirming them.
Predictions made about the past are non-falsifiable. Today, I can easily "predict" that JFK was assassinated in 1963. If I make 10 such "predictions" and claim I invented a thingamajig that gives me this ability, would anyone take me seriously?
Yet, in the finance field, such common sense isn't as common.
There are 4 illegitimate ways a company can grow revenue and maintain margins the way Nvidia has.
The first, subtle way, is by offering something similar to a sales rebate but booking it separately so it doesn't impact net revenue.
Perhaps you pay your customer when you ship the product, but in return for future services and not as a rebate. That would show up under the balance sheet item "Prepaid expenses and other current assets".
Then you have the option of booking revenue but not collecting cash. The corporate equivalent of buy now pay later.
Why does this week's move in the yen matter so much?
🧵
The Bank of Japan implemented QE and zero interest rate policy in the 1990s, in response to the implosion of a mega bubble. Since then, Japan has had a deflationary economy, i.e. the opposite of the post-Covid US economy.
Rather than get eaten away by inflation, money in the bank was able to purchase more goods and services in the future.
Because of which, the yen kept strengthening against all other fiat currencies which were on a race to the bottom.
Post-2008, the Fed followed the BoJ's lead and implemented QE and ZIRP. The commodity bull market took off. Capital was borrowed for cheap in US dollars and invested in far off places like Mongolia and Kenya, in search of oil, copper and gold.
There is a reason Fed officials and MSM want you to focus on rates - it works to their advantage. The Fed gets to say it is doing its job in controlling inflation by keeping rates higher for longer. MSM reports rates are restrictive, hoping that repeating the message will lower inflation expectations.
This is the magician's trick - getting people to look one way while the science-y stuff behind the trick happens elsewhere.
I wrote about this in my December macro outlook. Time for an update 🧵
First off, banks are lending again. Note how borrowing started to take off just after the Nov FOMC, when the Fed hinted at changes to the SEP.
Non-farm payrolls never even blipped. Labor conditions are tight. Higher rates are hurting a lot of people but that doesn't show up in the payroll numbers.
The dot com bubble peaked on March 10, 2000. Is history about to repeat itself?
The up tick rule rarely gets triggered even on big red days like March 5th. That's a clear sign short sellers have completely disappeared from the market. When the degen gamblers on max leverage try to exit their positions, it's going to be crickets all the way down.
Punching the biggest bully in the yard might seem cool in the movies, but when it comes to short selling I'd rather pick on the old, the weak, and the lame.
The stocks which have witnessed technical damage.
The ones showing poor relative strength to $QQQ.
The stocks with no obvious buyers on the way down.
My current watchlist, organized by market cap👇
Buffet's selling, falling out of the Mag 7, and the failure of Apple Vison Pro, $AAPL should see a trendline break soon.