The market is closed, let me elaborate:

Why do I think this time both the height and sustainability can be expected? Because judging from the timing and intensity of the policies, it can basically be considered as "reckless" and "at any cost" to pull up the stock market. I even think that from the wording of the policies, the importance of the stock market may come before the real estate market. Obviously, the decision-makers believe that the problems in the real estate market are much more complicated and can only be delayed, not solved fundamentally.

Since it is an "artificial leveraged bull market," it must have its historical mission. I think one of the main missions is to transition from supply-side to demand-side reforms (of course, there is also support for technological innovation and the expansion of central state-owned enterprises). At the same time, it will balance wealth distribution to a certain extent: central state-owned enterprises get rich first, increase dividends, and then drive the private sector to get rich later, which is the Western "helicopter money" model advocated by some economists, but we have GSY

In addition, judging from past bull markets, none of them were led by the stocks that rose in the first few days all the way to the end. On the contrary, because too many people rushed into the so-called "obvious targets" in the first few days, the chips were ruined, leading to too much pressure to close positions for a long time, such as the liquor, real estate, and some consumer stocks in the past few days. I think it is fundamentally difficult to reverse. The real fat fish often appears in the second or third wave of opportunities. Calm hunters need to constantly observe the chip structure and changes in fundamentals.