Funds are mainly stock funds, which means that investors of investment funds should pay close attention to the trend of the stock market. If the stock market still can't reverse the bear market trend and continues to fluctuate downward, then as a fund investor, it should also redeem the fund on rallies before and after the end of the market rebound, but there is a difference between the fund and the stock. Stocks want to sell more freely, but funds are more complicated and care more about long-term holding. Therefore, the rational investment mentality of fund investors is the same as that of stocks. Which fund the market chooses in a bear market becomes a secondary issue. Because funds are also losing money, the timing of intervention and retreat has become something that fund investors must learn. Customers borrow money from securities companies to buy securities, which is called financing transaction. Customers borrow securities from securities companies to sell securities, which is called securities lending. The news initially restricted the capital entering the market. It has been on the right track for a long time (maybe more than three years), and the scale may have a great impact on the market. Moreover, according to foreign markets, the development of margin financing and securities lending will contribute to the ups and downs, but it will not change the general trend. If the news is positive in a bull market, it will amplify the upward momentum, while in a bear market, it will be very bad to some extent, because the downward trend may also be amplified. The policy is to double down. Under different trends, the effect is just the opposite. Because the system involves business mortgage, compulsory margin regulation, compulsory liquidation system, settlement risk fund, credit rating system and so on. It must be noted that the investment risk brought by leveraged investment far exceeds the previous investment risk. Of course, as an institution that wants to ship goods, even if it is bad, institutions, stocks and the media will fool individual investors into thinking that the policy is substantial. Of course, they just want individual investors to think so. Their psychology is very clear. The policy may not do any good to the stock market for several years, or even it may be because the stock market has fallen more sharply in the bear market. In the final analysis, individual investment funds are more willing to take over with stamp duty policy. The irrationality of China stock market is staged again, and investors don't care whether the so-called favorable market really supports the market. Recently, it seems that the global crisis experienced by China's economy has never happened, and it is no longer a threat to investors. As long as the so-called favorable market continues in the future, investors will be crazy to intervene and fight. The authenticity and moisture of a good investor do not need to be verified. As long as it is positive, Huijin's increase of 2 million shares will become a major positive (retail investors buy more than it). China Petroleum Company increased its holdings of 60 million shares on the 22nd (only 410000000 shares were bought in bulk on that day, and all the shares bought by retail investors were 565438+), and no one cared about the complete truth of the news. The increase in holdings is still only a symbolic action, full of false data. Just raised by the market, retail investors who have no stocks to buy will care about the tricks in these data? The tax cuts in the United States have also become a major positive for China (US stocks have fallen continuously because of this news), which has become a reason for speculation. It is hard for investors to doubt where the 700 billion bailout funds promised by the United States came from after the tax cuts. It could have been extracted through tax increase (now it is tax reduction). The latest congressional vote in the United States shows that the 700 billion bailout proposal was finally passed. Although it is not normal, it gives the most direct answer to the bailout measures. The American stock market has gone up and down as high as 100 points. This actually reflects that the 700 billion bailout fund is a drop in the bucket in the face of the storm (at most, it is only a short-term benefit). If we can't stop this storm now, the bankruptcy of a super giant like Lehman may be just the beginning (the United States has hinted that an international insurance giant is preparing to file for bankruptcy, which basically offsets this 700 billion). First of all, it needs money to save the market, and this most basic thing, as the richest man in the world, the United States has a very embarrassing thing. The United States is the only country except China that survived the economic crisis by relying on strong domestic demand, but this time the problem is internal rather than external, so it is different from the last Southeast Asian economic crisis. If this crisis expands into a global financial crisis with the stretched bailout funds of the United States, it can be said with certainty that the United States may experience economic recession for more than five years, but now that the global economy is integrated, China will certainly not be immune to it. The current impact is just the beginning, unlike the arrogance of the China administration to comfort the people of China, the subsequent negative effects will surely emerge one after another. China's strategy of expanding domestic demand is also imminent. Since the crisis has just begun, the footsteps of bankrupt companies will not stop there. It can be expected that many American economic giants will fall one after another. Where did the United States get so much money to save the market? So the test of the China government has just begun. Of course, the test of China stock market has just begun. I hope that the China stock market can withstand the double pressures of non-size and financial crisis. What is the organization doing when painting a bright future for retail investors? TopView data shows that, in sharp contrast to the determined bulls of hot money, on the day of the daily limit of the market last Friday, the fund bought 3,683.2 million yuan and sold 7,069.2 million yuan, with a net investment of 338,665.438 billion yuan, with retail investors buying the most; The net outflow of institutional funds in one day on Monday released a large amount of funds with the market, accounting for the vast majority of active selling. And QFII's seat sales department is a net sale! Why are institutions so optimistic about the market outlook, while encouraging retail investors to boldly bargain-hunting, but frantically lightening their positions? Now they can only use the word crazy. Wave after wave of tug-of-war will cooperate with new favorable rumors (after the holiday, the market rumors that margin financing and T+0 will be launched) (I have repeatedly mentioned to small and medium-sized investors that when the country really wants to formulate policies, it is a sneak attack, not to let the society know in advance. When is this not the case? Recall it! In other words, the rumors may be as good as the previous rumors, but it is impossible to say that all the rumors are made by the organization to cooperate with the shipment, and there is only one result. If it can't be cashed after the holiday, the only thing waiting for small and medium investors is risk. ) In July and August, good news flew all over the sky for two months. You may remember that when rumors are good, they may not be good. When rumors disappear and the market falls from panic, no one believes that it is good, and it may just come out, but it may be wise to stand on the opposite side forever. When most people lose their reason and judgment crazily, there is no harm in keeping a vigilant mind. A little more sensible fund managers are well aware that all the so-called interests in the world are dispensable, so the interests that do not affect the overall situation are resolutely reduced, but what they do is to make the interests that do not affect the overall situation look like substantial interests and give individual investors too much hope. The size problem of 1800 is only a matter of time, not the lowest point. And 2270 is the first pressure level of this rebound (it has been broken), and 2500 is the second pressure level. If it is at this point, the market will not be able to break through and turn around. Take it when you are ready. The stock market is complicated and simple. The complexity is that any factor may lead to changes in the stock market. The simple thing is that the long-term short-term trend of funds determines the long-term ups and downs of the market, but the stock market can't just fall and not rise, and it will definitely rebound on the way down, but the extent of the rebound should be judged according to the good news of the policy. If these intangible good news are still used to support the market, then every rebound is an opportunity to lighten up. After the size is not limited, the market can ease the financial pressure and bring a wave of intermediate rebound or even reversal. As long as the core problem leading to the plunge is not solved, investors will regard it as a rebound and lighten their positions on rallies. The accumulation of investors' confidence in continuous oversold makes bargain-hunting funds very cautious. Although bargain-hunting funds try to change this downward trend, the situation is not very optimistic. The current stock market is not as lacking in confidence and funds as the government said. Personally, I feel that both lack the shadow of size. This year is the lightest year, and the funds for lifting the ban are only 3 trillion (enough to eliminate the main force). Although the government will talk about politics when it comes to a fund, it seems that the real effect is not great. The organization's action of continuing to rebound shipments did not stop, so it had to choose the strategy of fighting and retreating to reduce losses. The government will offer so-called benefits to prevent the stock market from continuing to fall, but as long as it is not a substantive solution to the size of the non-issue, it is just some anodyne policies, then investors should not be too optimistic in the current market where the long-short balance of funds is broken, because the substantive problems have not been solved. Money will continue to be tight. When there is a rebound caused by policies, it is wise to reduce rallies. Don't believe that stock reviews don't consider the actual big market. Since the non-lifting funds in 2009 were nearly 7 trillion, the lifting funds in 20 10 were nearly 10 trillion, which has far exceeded the 3 trillion this year. Therefore, it is impossible to solve the pressure of funds before the core problem that led to this plunge is solved. Any marginal favorable policy will only bring about a rebound, not a reversal. Although the stock market is complex, it is actually very simple. The rule of the stock market is that if you sell more, you will buy down, and if you buy more, you will sell up. Most people understand this truth, but why are some people unwilling to face it when the funds have already been reflected? Don't believe that size also requires long-term investment. When the profit is as high as 400% or even as high as 1000% as soon as the listing is lifted, do you think the holders of the size will be safe or will continue to watch their profits shrink in a weak market (the size of the size is also an investor, and the profit first is also their idea, when long-term investors think that only retail investors with institutional education will do it) and the selling power in a long-term trend is overwhelming for some reason. Non-substantive policies bring about a rebound, not a reversal. Because the strongest support area of the market is 3300~3400 points, and the so-called policy iron bottom with the strongest stock evaluation and institutions is 2990 points, it has collapsed rapidly in the case of unbalanced funds. Therefore, in the short term, in the absence of new favorable policy support, the rebound is an opportunity to reduce positions. Only when the funds are in hand can we have the initiative and usher in the real bottom. The bottom line is that the main participants are not retail investors. When the main force is forced to reduce positions on a large scale under the pressure of the size, what small and medium-sized investors can do is to follow the trend, not to move against the trend. We should also control our positions when the institutions reduce their positions. The above is purely a personal opinion, please adopt it carefully.