在菩提树下

#美国4月CPI录得3.8%，超出预期 #沃什确认5月15日接任美联储 Against the backdrop of April's PPI annual rate unexpectedly soaring to 6%, far exceeding expectations, newly appointed Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh is facing a triple challenge of "inflation rebound + political pressure + growth concerns." Considering his personal stance and the current Fed framework, his most likely approach is: no rate cuts in the short term, a hawkish tone, accelerated balance sheet reduction, re-evaluation of inflation indicators, strengthened expectation management, while drawing clear lines with the White House on trade and fiscal matters. 1. Understanding the current situation (why it's tricky) Data shock: April PPI annual rate at 6% (expected 4.9%, previous 4.4%), the highest since December 2022; core PPI also exceeded expectations, indicating upstream cost pressures continue to transmit downstream. Warsh's dilemma: If cutting rates too early: inflation expectations become unanchored, PPI → CPI spiral upward, repeating 2022's mistakes. If aggressively raising rates/maintaining high rates long-term: commercial real estate and highly leveraged companies face pressure, recession risk rises, directly conflicting with Trump's "rate cuts to boost growth" demands. His baseline: inflation hawk + balance sheet reduction supporter + emphasizes Fed independence, opposes QE normalization, advocates "balance sheet reduction first, rate cuts second." 2. Warsh's optimal response combination (three steps) 1. Monetary policy: hold rates steady, intensify balance sheet reduction (core) Maintain benchmark rates unchanged (3.5%–3.75%): clearly state "inflation is not stable, conditions for rate cuts are not met," resist White House pressure for cuts; dot plot lowers expected rate cuts for the year (e.g., from 2 cuts to 1 or 0). Accelerate balance sheet reduction (QT): raise monthly cap from about $60 billion to $80–100 billion, focusing on reducing long-term Treasuries and MBS, directly withdrawing liquidity, raising long-term rates, suppressing upstream capital expenditure and pricing power—this is Warsh's core argument for "balance sheet reduction replacing rate hikes" [(CICC Wealth)]. Operational logic: he believes "inflation is a monetary phenomenon," excess liquidity is the main cause; balance sheet reduction hits money supply more directly than rate hikes, while avoiding short-term rate spikes that hurt employment. 2. Inflation framework: re-evaluate indicators, focus on core (avoid noise) Promote "trimmed mean PCE/core PPI": downplay overall PPI/CPI, emphasize "trend inflation" excluding temporary supply shocks like energy, food, tariffs; define tariff-driven price increases as "geopolitical noise," not tightening monetary policy because of it. Revamp inflation model: upon taking office, advance "billion-level price data project," introduce AI and high-frequency data to improve real-time tracking of upstream cost transmission and supply chain bottlenecks, reducing lagging misjudgments. Purpose: provide data basis for "not raising rates due to short-term PPI spikes," while stabilizing long-term inflation expectations (anchoring 2% target). 3. Expectation management + political isolation: tough stance, reject fiscal monetization Public hawkish messaging: emphasize "inflation hurts the poor, Fed's primary duty is price stability," willing to sacrifice short-term growth to curb inflation; downplay dot plot and forward guidance, adopt "data-dependent, no preset path" brief communication to reduce market misjudgments. Draw clear lines with White House: explicitly refuse to pay for Trump's tariff policies—the inflation caused by tariffs is the responsibility of Treasury/trade policy, Fed will not punish the entire economy through rate hikes; also oppose fiscal deficit monetization, reject large-scale bond purchases to finance government. Market communication: signal "high rates maintained longer, balance sheet reduction intensified," guide market to lower rate cut expectations, adjust asset prices (especially long bonds and growth stocks), preemptively absorb inflation risk premium. 3. Key risks and fallback plans (just in case) Risk 1: core PPI continues rising → inflation unanchored Fallback: pause balance sheet reduction, restart moderate rate hikes (25bp each), clearly prioritize "inflation out of control over growth." Risk 2: rapid employment deterioration (unemployment >4.5%) → recession Fallback: keep rates unchanged, slow balance sheet reduction, emphasize "flexible response to employment under stable core inflation." Risk 3: White House pressure for rate cuts + political attacks Fallback: repeatedly emphasize Fed independence, use legal and institutional barriers to resist interference, publicly disagree with Trump if necessary. 4. One-sentence summary of Warsh's "breakthrough strategy" Tighten monetary policy with "no rate cuts + fast balance sheet reduction," filter noise by "re-evaluating inflation indicators," stabilize expectations and preserve independence through "tough stance + political isolation," walking a tightrope between curbing inflation and preventing recession.

US April PPI year-on-year increased by 6.0%, the highest since December 2022, expected to increase by 4.9%, previous value revised from 4.0% to 4.3%; April PPI month-on-month increased by 1.4%, the highest since March 2022, expected to increase by 0.5%, previous value revised from 0.50% to 0.7%. US April core PPI year-on-year increased by 5.2%, expected to increase by 4.3%, previous value increased by 3.8%.

Analysis: 4.67 trillion yen "voting with their feet," Japanese capital accelerates selling of U.S. Treasuries! In Q1 2026, Japanese investors net sold 4.67 trillion yen (approximately $29.6 billion) of U.S. Treasuries and other dollar bonds, marking the largest single-quarter sell-off in nearly four years; essentially, Japan is "voting with their feet" to save the yen and control inflation by withdrawing from dollar assets.[] 1. What are the data? Time: January–March 2026 (Q1)[] Scale: Net sell of 4.67 trillion yen (≈$29.6 billion), highest since Q2 2022[] Structure: Net sell of 2.2 trillion yen in March alone, two consecutive months of reduction[] Identity: Japan is the largest overseas holder of U.S. Treasuries (holdings exceed $1.2 trillion), its moves directly affect U.S. Treasury pricing 2. Why sell? (Three layers of pressure) 1️⃣ Yen collapse, forced market intervention (direct cause) From April to May 2026, USD/JPY approached 160, a 30-year low Yen plummeting → imported inflation (Japan imports 95% of its crude oil) → soaring prices, real wages decline Japan has no room to raise interest rates: government debt exceeds 240% of GDP, a 1% rate hike would increase annual interest by 10 trillion yen, risking fiscal collapse The only way: sell U.S. Treasuries → exchange for dollars → buy yen → support exchange rate, intervention scale nearly 10 trillion yen in April–May 2️⃣ U.S.-Japan interest rate differential inversion, carry trade reversal (core driver) Fed rates at 3.5%–3.75%, Japan rates at 0%–0.75%, interest rate gap continues to widen Previously: borrow low-interest yen → buy high-interest U.S. Treasuries, $6 trillion yen carry trade was prevalent Now: Japanese inflation + yen depreciation → carry trade unprofitable, institutions close U.S. Treasury positions, convert back to yen 3️⃣ Rising U.S. Treasury risk, active risk aversion (underlying reason) U.S. debt exceeds $36 trillion, interest payments account for 30% of fiscal revenue, debt sustainability questioned Fed rate cut expectations delayed, U.S. Treasury yields rise, prices fall, unrealized losses on holdings expand[] 3. What are the impacts? (Chain reactions) On the U.S.: U.S. Treasury yields soar, financing costs rise; U.S. Treasury Secretary urgently visits Japan to pressure "stop selling U.S. Treasuries, change to rate hikes" On Japan: short-term yen stabilization (160 → 155), but foreign reserves deplete, long-term structural dependence on the dollar remains On the world: dollar credit loosens, de-dollarization accelerates; global asset pricing anchor (U.S. Treasury yields) moves up, stock and bond market volatility increases 4. Summary in one sentence The 4.67 trillion yen sell-off is Japan's passive "voting with their feet" on dollar assets amid the deadlock of "yen depreciation → runaway inflation → fiscal inability to raise rates," and is also a key step in global de-dollarization.

Interpreting “News Trader: 3.8% Inflation Means Rate Hike? Don’t Rush, There’s a ‘Statistical Trap’ Inside” US April CPI year-on-year is 3.8%, core CPI 2.8%, and the market instantly priced in “the Fed might restart rate hikes.” But many traders are shouting: don’t rush, there’s a clear statistical trap here, actual inflation isn’t that strong. Below is a breakdown of the core logic of this article "News Trader: 3.8% Inflation Means Rate Hike? Don’t Rush, There’s a ‘Statistical Trap’ Inside" (combined with Jin10 / Wall Street mainstream interpretations, as of 2026-05-13): 1. The most critical trap: Housing item is “mechanically high,” a one-time large disturbance The biggest driver of April CPI is housing (Shelter): Month-on-month: +0.6%, nearly double the previous value Contributes over 40% to overall CPI But traders point out this is a statistical adjustment, not a real price increase: In October last year, the US government shutdown prevented BLS from normally collecting rent data, so a temporarily underestimated model was used. In April this year, a one-time catch-up adjustment was made to compensate for the “underestimated rents” over the past six months, which raised core CPI by about 0.1–0.15 percentage points at once. In other words: within the 3.8%, part is a “catch-up,” not the real inflation for April alone. 2. Energy is a “geopolitical one-time shock,” not an endogenous trend April energy month-on-month **+5.4%, year-on-year +28.4%**, directly pushing overall CPI to 3.8%. Main reason: escalation of Middle East conflict, Iran-Israel tensions pushing oil prices up, a supply-side sudden shock, not US domestic overheating. Historical pattern: energy price hikes from geopolitical conflicts have weak transmission and poor persistence; the Fed usually “sees through” and won’t hike rates because of this. 3. Core inflation is “averaged out,” real stickiness isn’t that strong Official core CPI (excluding food and energy): 2.8%. But traders look at trimmed mean / median CPI (excluding the most extreme price changes, better reflecting “general prices”): Cleveland Fed trimmed mean: 3.0% (year-on-year) Median CPI: ≈3.0% Still looks high, but key points: Core goods (used cars, appliances, clothing): zero inflation, even deflation. True stickiness only in housing + some services (car insurance, medical), and housing has statistical distortion. In short: inflation is not “broad-based across all categories,” but pushed up by a few items + statistical adjustments. 4. Market overreacted: mistaking “one-time shocks” for “trend restarts” Current market pricing: 2026 rate hike probability: 31% (new high) Rate cut expectations pushed directly to 2027 But traders’ reminder is straightforward: Within the 3.8%, there are statistical adjustments, geopolitical oil prices, housing weight distortions—not purely “economic overheating + inflation out of control.” Chasing a stronger dollar and shorting gold now is like treating short-term noise as a long-term trend, easily to be “slapped in the face” by tonight’s PPI and subsequent data. 5. How does tonight’s PPI fit this logic? (20:30) If the “statistical trap” holds, PPI should show: Overall PPI: driven by energy, year-on-year relatively high (≈4.7%–4.9%) Core PPI (excluding energy/food/trade): weak (≈4.0%–4.2%), reflecting no broad overheating on the production side → If core PPI is below expectations, it will reinforce the judgment that “CPI is statistical + energy noise, not a trend,” possibly causing the dollar to fall and gold to rebound. Trader’s conclusion (core of original text): 3.8% inflation ≠ rate hike. At least 0.3–0.5 percentage points come from: Housing statistical one-time catch-up Middle East conflict pushing energy prices Weight and extreme value distortions Real endogenous inflation is more like 2.5%–3.0%, slowly declining, not out of control.

Tracking the Middle East Situation in the US-Iran Conflict ① Iran 1. Iran has filed a lawsuit with an international arbitration body over US actions in the "12-Day War." 2. According to Iran's Tasnim News Agency: The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran conducted military exercises in Tehran Province. 3. According to The New York Times: The latest assessment shows that Iran still maintains operational capability at 30 of its 33 missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, indicating that Iran's military strength is far greater than what Trump claimed. ② United States 1. US Secretary of Defense: The Iran ceasefire agreement remains valid. 2. The US plans to use renaming to circumvent the war authorization time limit issue. 3. Trump says stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons is "just a matter of time." 4. The US offers a $15 million bounty to disrupt the funding network of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. 5. US Department of Defense: The cost of war with Iran has risen to about $29 billion and may increase further. 6. Trump claims to have 100% control over Iran's nuclear fallout, asserting Iran will "100%" abandon nuclear weapons. 7. US media: Trump is considering resuming military operations against Iran; US officials question Pakistan's efficiency in relaying messages. ③ Israel 1. The US Ambassador to Israel says Israel has deployed the "Iron Dome" in the UAE. 2. The Israel Defense Forces say they intercepted a drone launched from the east. ④ Strait of Hormuz 1. The UK will dispatch drones, fighter jets, and warships to participate in the Hormuz operation. 2. The US military has rerouted 65 commercial ships, causing 4 vessels to be unable to operate. 3. An oil tanker carrying Iraqi crude oil stopped sailing after approaching the US military deployment area. 4. White House National Economic Council Director Hassett: Trump is confident the Strait of Hormuz will open soon. ⑤ Ceasefire Negotiations 1. Iran offers the US a "ticket" to nuclear talks, including asset unfreezing and recognition of sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. 2. Trump: When negotiating with Iran, I do not consider the financial situation of the American people; I do not consider anyone. ⑥ Other Situations 1. A 4.6 magnitude earthquake occurred in the Tehran area of Iran. 2. Reuters: Iraq, Pakistan, and Iran have reached an energy transportation agreement. 3. According to Western and Iranian officials, Saudi Arabia previously launched multiple undisclosed attacks on Iran. 4. The Iranian Foreign Ministry refutes Kuwait's statement that Tehran plans to take "hostile actions" against the Gulf country.

What has Trump been busy with in the past 24 hours? Trump has been mainly focused on four things: finalizing the China visit, erupting over the Iran issue, preparing for the Middle East trip, and rallying on social media, with a very high activity density. 1. Official announcement and China visit preparations (core event) Morning of May 11 (Beijing time): China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs officially announced Trump's visit to China from May 13 to 15[]. The White House confirmed simultaneously, with the team urgently finalizing the itinerary, security, and trade list (focusing on tariffs, rare earths, agricultural products, and energy). All day on the 11th: Convened national security and trade teams to finalize the China visit agenda list and finalize possible joint statement points; held phone calls with core aides to assess the risks of China-US, Middle East, and Russia-Ukraine linkages. 2. Hardline stance on Iran issue (most explosive public opinion point) May 11: Iran submitted a formal response to the US ceasefire proposal; Trump posted 3 posts on Truth Social, angrily calling Iran's response "completely unacceptable," "a piece of scrap paper," and warned "military options are not ruled out." Simultaneously: intensified financial and energy sanctions on Iran and deployed more patrol aircraft in the Middle East, showing a tough posture. 3. Final sprint for the Middle East trip to three countries (starting May 13) May 11–12: finalized details for visits to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE from May 13 to 16[]. Core goals: Saudi Arabia: finalize $1 trillion investment, oil/dollar agreement, major arms sales[]. Qatar: advance order of 100 Boeing passenger planes, base renewal[]. UAE: AI/chip cooperation, Gulf security framework. Morning of the 12th: phone call with Saudi Crown Prince MBS to confirm reception standards and signing list[]. 4. Social media rallying + interviews (continuous control of the narrative) About 12 tweets/posts within 24 hours: Praising the US economy, stock market, employment data; Criticizing the Federal Reserve, inflation, media "fake news"; Previewing the China and Middle East visits, claiming to "bring back historic agreements"[]. Evening of the 11th: interviewed by Fox News, discussing Iran, China-US, Russia-Ukraine, 2028 election, stating "If Putin is willing, I can meet in Turkey to discuss Russia-Ukraine ceasefire." 5. Other minor matters Reviewed federal personnel nominations (including ambassadors and minister-level); Received briefings on border security and immigration policies; Private dinner at the White House in the evening, inviting key donors and core allies to "brief" on the China and Middle East trips. In summary: In the past 24 hours, Trump has been finalizing the China visit, issuing tough words on Iran, preparing to secure big deals in the Middle East, while frequently posting on social media and controlling the narrative rhythm throughout.

Did Brother Maji get liquidated? As of 2026-05-12 22:30, the full public position of Brother Maji (Huang Licheng) on Hyperliquid (on-chain tracking data): 1. Current total position (long, full position) Total size: about 58 million USD long (reduced from 76 million at the beginning of May) Account equity: about 1.6 million USD (principal + unrealized profit, rolled from 1.195 million to 1.6 million this round) 2. Breakdown by coin (latest as of 2026-05-12) 1) ETH long (25×) Quantity: 17,200 ETH Opening average price: $2,335 Current price: $2,280 Status: unrealized loss of about 950,000 USD Liquidation price: $2,248 (about $32 away from current price, very close) 2) BTC long (40×) Quantity: 265 BTC Opening average price: $77,500 Current price: $80,700 Status: unrealized profit of about 850,000 USD Liquidation price: $75,200 3) Others HYPE: fully closed (liquidated in early May) 3. Key facts (after today's CPI plunge) No liquidation: ETH bottomed at $2,260, still a bit above the $2,248 liquidation price, narrowly avoiding forced liquidation. Position not collapsed: He slightly reduced ETH position today but still holds heavy positions of 17,200 ETH + 265 BTC, leverage remains very high. Account safety buffer is extremely thin: Account equity: 1.6 million Potential ETH liquidation loss: about 4 million → If it drops further, it will go straight to zero. In short: Currently holding a heavy 58 million USD long position (ETH ≈ 40 million + BTC ≈ 18 million), ETH liquidation price at 2248, no liquidation today but very dangerous.

Interpretation of US data and its impact on financial markets and BTC, ETH. 1. Key US data today (2026/5/12) At 20:30 Beijing time, April CPI (inflation) was released, significantly exceeding expectations: CPI YoY 3.8% (expected 3.7%, previous 3.3%) Core CPI YoY 2.8% (expected 2.7%, previous 2.4%) CPI MoM 0.4%, Core CPI MoM 0.4%, both accelerating from last month Key interpretation: Inflation heats up again, core inflation remains sticky, delaying Fed rate cut expectations, market strengthens pricing for **higher for longer** interest rates. Institutions like Goldman Sachs have pushed the first rate cut expectation to the end of 2026. 10-year US Treasury yield jumped to 4.44%, the dollar strengthened, growth/tech stocks came under pressure. 2. Impact on traditional financial markets 1. US stocks: Inflation kills valuations, Nasdaq leads the decline Close: Dow -0.59%, S&P 500 -0.64%, Nasdaq -0.99% Logic: High inflation → prolonged high interest rates → revaluation of tech/high-valuation sectors; energy stocks relatively resilient due to rising oil prices (WTI ≈ $101). 2. US Treasuries: Yields rise, curve flattens bearishly 10-year yield 4.44% (+8bp), 2-year yield 4.65% (+6bp) Logic: Inflation exceeds expectations → rate cut expectations delayed → short-end rates rise faster, yield curve flattens bearishly. 3. US Dollar: Strengthens, non-US currencies under pressure Dollar Index **+0.35% to 105.8**, euro, yen, etc. retreat Logic: Interest rate differential advantage + safe-haven demand, dollar short-term bias stronger. 3. Impact on BTC/ETH (as of 22:00) 1. Market performance BTC: $80,700 (-1.2%), intraday range $80,400–$82,100 ETH: $2,280 (-2.1%), weaker relative to BTC (ETH/BTC hits 10-month low) 2. Core transmission path Liquidity tightening: rate cut delay → marginal tightening of risk asset liquidity, crypto assets hit first. Risk appetite decline: inflation exceeds expectations → increased macro uncertainty, funds shift preference to cash/short-term bonds, reducing high-volatility crypto holdings. ETH weaker: ETH’s growth attributes + stronger DeFi leverage make it more sensitive to rising rates; BTC’s digital gold narrative keeps its decline relatively controlled. 3. Key observation signals $80,000 (BTC) and $2,200 (ETH) are short-term strong supports; breaking these may lead to a drop to $78,000/$2,100 range. If subsequent data (e.g., Thursday retail sales) remain strong, rate cut expectations cool further, crypto market may continue to oscillate downward. 4. Summary and outlook Today’s inflation surprise is core, directly delaying Fed rate cuts, liquidity tightening expectations suppress risk assets. Traditional markets: US stocks adjust, Treasury yields rise, dollar strengthens pattern to continue short-term. Crypto market: BTC resists decline, ETH weaker, mainly oscillating; as long as key supports hold, rebounds are possible; under sustained high interest rates, large trend rallies are unlikely. Risk warning: This analysis is based on public data and does not constitute investment advice. Crypto assets are highly volatile; please manage risks carefully.

Interpretation of "US ADP Weekly Employment Change for the Week Ending April 25: +33,000, Previous: 39,250." US ADP Weekly Employment (as of April 25) Current period: +33,000 (4-week moving average, preliminary) Previous: 39,250 (slightly revised down) Interpretation: Employment growth is moderately slowing but remains positive, indicating labor market resilience and relative stability. Comparison with Monthly ADP (April) April Monthly ADP: +109,000 (above expectations, previous 61,000), a 15-month high [__LINK_ICON]. Weekly vs Monthly: Weekly smoothed data shows a decline, while monthly figures remain strong, suggesting a slowdown in employment growth but no sharp drop. Market Impact (Brief) Federal Reserve: Expectations for rate cuts have further cooled, reinforcing the "higher for longer" interest rate outlook. USD/US Treasuries: Short-term bullish on USD, suppressing long-term bonds. Nonfarm Payroll Preview: Tonight's nonfarm payrolls expected around +62,000, watch for consistency with ADP data []. Would you like me to organize the ADP weekly data from the past 4 weeks into a single line comparison for quick trend review?

Situation Continues to Escalate, Will the U.S. Engage in Full-Scale War with Iran? Latest Situation (May 2026) 1. Current Military Standoff The U.S. military has deployed over 20 warships to enforce a naval blockade on Iran Continuous clashes occurred in the Strait of Hormuz (May 7-8) Iranian missiles and drones have locked onto U.S. targets and are on standby The U.S. has blocked more than 70 oil tankers from entering or leaving Iranian ports 2. Predicaments of Both Sides United States Iran Ammunition shortage, low morale Under naval blockade but can sustain for months Domestic oil prices rising, public opinion under pressure Firm stance, rejects U.S. ultimatums Allies criticize and express concern Receives international support (Japan, India, EU) Eager to end conflict Not in a hurry, can withstand pressure 3. Diplomatic Negotiation Updates U.S. submitted a ceasefire memorandum (including 14 clauses) Trump has repeatedly expected a response from Iran but received no positive reply UN Secretary-General intervened to mediate Negotiations have not been interrupted; both sides maintain minimal communication 🎯 Why is the likelihood of full-scale war low? 1. Neither side intends to fully engage in war The U.S. media "The Atlantic" pointed out: The Trump administration "dares not continue fighting, but Iran is uncooperative in negotiations" Analysts: The situation has entered a phase where "war and complete cessation of talks are both impossible" 2. Huge costs and consequences The Strait of Hormuz handles 30% of global oil trade; full-scale war would push oil prices beyond $150/barrel The U.S. is already bearing domestic oil price hikes and pressure from allies Iran, though blockaded, can maintain basic trade via land routes and Caspian Sea ports 3. International community involvement UN Secretary-General mediates Multiple countries call for restraint to avoid loss of control 4. Current pattern: conflict alongside negotiations Military friction has become normalized, but all parties exercise restraint Both sides use military pressure to increase negotiation leverage Analysts believe friction will not affect the final peace talks 📊 Conclusion The probability of full-scale war erupting in the short term is low, because: ✅ Both sides are willing to negotiate (despite firm stances) ✅ The cost of full-scale war is too high for either side to bear ✅ International mediation is playing a role ✅ Currently in a "mutual probing" phase, with friction and negotiations coexisting However, risk points to watch: ⚠️ Misjudgment risk: military friction could unexpectedly escalate ⚠️ Domestic politics: Trump faces pressure and may take more aggressive measures ⚠️ Third parties: involvement of regional forces like Israel Overall assessment: This is more like a "high-stakes game" where both sides use military deterrence to gain negotiation advantages, and it is very likely to lead to some form of compromise rather than full-scale war.