After the crude oil shock, is the overseas economy facing recession or stagflation? | Jiantou Macro · Zhou Junzhi Team

Log in to the Sina Finance app and search for【disclosure ratings】to see more assessment levels

（Source: CSC Research, Macro Team）

Important notice: The views and information published through this official account are for reference only for institutional professional investors who meet the requirements of the《Securities and Futures Investor Suitability Management Measures》 issued by China Construction Investment Securities Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “China Construction Investment”). Since this official account is temporarily unable to set access restrictions, if you are not an institutional professional investor among the customers of China Construction Investment, to control investment risk, please cancel your follow, and please do not subscribe to, receive, or use any information from this official account. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you, and thank you for your understanding and cooperation!

After this round of the oil price shockwave, will the world move toward recession or stagflation? At present, the mainstream view is “recession,” because experience from the past 20 years shows that high oil prices will ultimately suppress demand.

We tend to believe that after the crude oil shock, the market should price in “stagflation” instead.

A demand decline cannot pull up additional crude oil supply. In the face of absolute supply rigidity caused by geopolitical games, the stickiness of falling prices will be far higher than the decline in demand.

Moreover, after the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the weaknesses of the manufacturing “hollowing out” in the US, Europe, and Japan have become even more apparent. The contraction in total demand in the US, Europe, and Japan also cannot bring bond yields lower. This has been demonstrated vividly in the upward trend of long-term bond yields in the US, Europe, and Japan since 2022.

When it comes to recession or stagflation, the biggest trading variables are two: whether prices will fall, and whether bonds can be positioned for gains. In this round of the US-Iran conflict, both answers may be no. Therefore, compared with “recession,” after the US-Iran conflict, overseas markets are more likely to enter a round of “stagflation” trading.

This week’s performance snapshot of major global asset classes:

Under the influence of uncertainty in the Middle East situation, global risk-averse sentiment keeps heating up. This week, China’s A-shares adjusted across the board, with non-bank financials leading the decline; Hong Kong stocks continued to come under pressure. This week, the bond market saw choppy strength, with interest rates falling across maturities.

Overseas: US Treasury yields rose overall. Near-term risk-aversion demand, the US’s continued position as a net exporter of oil, and the advantage in spreads continued to support a stronger US dollar. The gold market experienced sharp volatility and showed a typical “V-shaped” reversal. Oil prices returned to the vicinity of the $100 mark.

1. China’s equity market: A-shares adjusted across the board this week (AH shares).

Recap of China’s AH shares:

A-shares: This week, the market experienced severe volatility due to geopolitical conflict shocks. The Shanghai Composite Index briefly fell below 3,800, hitting a new intrayear low. By industry, basic chemicals, non-ferrous metals, and the power and utilities sectors led the gainers, while non-bank financials, computers, and agriculture/forestry/animal husbandry sectors lagged.

H-shares: This week, Hong Kong stocks adjusted. The Strait of Hormuz still has not reopened for navigation. Oil prices remained volatile at high levels, intensifying market concerns about inflation, while also increasing fears about the sustainability of economic growth under high oil prices. Earlier this week, the medical and healthcare industry and the raw materials industry, which had seen larger adjustments, rebounded. The real estate sector lacked further catalysts and saw a larger decline this week.

Outlook for China’s equity market.

A-shares: In the short term, risk appetite may continue to cool. The ongoing spillover from geopolitical conflict will keep weighing on market sentiment. The process of grinding out the market bottom has not ended yet; investors need to wait for the market bottom to form effectively. A clear, significant expansion in trading volume will be the key validation signal that the market is stabilizing. Under the existing game of reduced positions, it is not advisable to rush to bet on a rebound. It is recommended to focus on three main themes: first, the safe-haven and resources theme catalyzed by geopolitical conflicts, such as coal and new energy and other alternative energy directions; second, sectors that directly benefit from rising energy prices, including oil extraction, coal-chemical industries, and oil shipping; and third, opportunities for A-shares brought by the remaking of global supply chains after energy prices rise.

Hong Kong shares: In the short term, the downward pressure on the current Hong Kong stock market is relatively high, and it is still in the bottom-building phase. The market is extremely sensitive to external liquidity and geopolitical risk premia, so continue to closely watch the direction of the Middle East situation. In an environment of external turmoil, the attractiveness of renminbi assets improves, and Hong Kong shares may receive more international capital allocation. However, it is important to monitor how this year’s Hong Kong IPO and de-listing (unlocking) schedule impacts the market.

2. China’s bond market: This week the bond market was volatile but strengthened, with yields falling across maturities.

Recap of this week’s bond market: This week, the bond market was volatile but strengthened; yields fell across maturities. The short end was relatively strong due to relaxed year-end funding conditions. The ultra-long end stayed in a choppy pattern, while the long end saw more repair. This week, the yield on the 2Y government bond fell 1.3BP to 1.3%, the 10Y government bond yield fell 2.25BP to 1.81%, and the 30Y government bond yield fell 1BP to 2.29%.

Bond market outlook: With year-end funding conditions supported and relatively steady, the bond market’s performance was constrained by a strong start in economic data. Even if the equity market weakens in the short term, it is more driven by imported inflation concerns stemming from the external situation, and the stock-bond “see-saw” effect is unlikely to work. Therefore, it is expected that the near-term bond market trend will likely remain choppy/sideways.

3. Overseas interest rates and FX: Intraday, the 10Y US Treasury touched 4.48%, a new high for the year.

Recap of this week’s overseas interest rate and FX assets:

US Treasury yields rose overall this week. As of Friday’s close, yields on 2-year, 5-year, 10-year, and 30-year Treasuries were 3.91%, 4.07%, 4.44%, and 4.98%, respectively, changing by about 1bp, +6bp, +5bp, and +2bp compared with last Friday. The 10-year yield briefly touched 4.48% intraday, the highest level for the year, but fell back late in the day.

In FX: The US dollar index (DXY) rose 0.5% week-on-week to 100.19, extending its gains for four consecutive days. The energy shock made the currencies of Asian net importing countries (Indian rupee, Thai baht, and Philippine peso) the most fragile. In response to the rupee falling to a historical low, the Reserve Bank of India introduced new rules to limit FX speculation.

This week, driven by the escalation of the US-Iran conflict, UK gilt yields fell slightly over the week, while JGB 10-year yields continued to rise. Specifically, UK gilt yields fell 1.8BP to 4.92%, Japan’s 10-year yields rose 11.2BP to 2.38%, and Germany’s 10-year yields rose 6BP to 3.40%.

Overseas interest rates and FX outlook:

For US Treasuries: Central banks’ messaging has been relatively hawkish to maintain credibility and stabilize inflation expectations—Powell said “Inflation has been deviating from the target for five years already.” The memory of underestimating inflation in 2022, combined with this energy supply shock, and the concentrated duration positioning, have pushed yield pricing beyond levels that are reasonable under most benchmark scenarios. Currently, the front-end market pricing has fully incorporated one more Fed rate hike, 3–4 ECB rate hikes, and fully priced 4 rate hikes by the Bank of England. We believe this market pricing is likely too high.

But in the short term, yield declines need to be supported by key catalysts. First, geopolitical easing drives oil prices lower, directly relieving inflation pressure and pulling yields down—this is also the logic behind the rapid yield drop after the announcement of the peace proposal earlier this week. Second, growth data continue to worsen (before Friday’s close, concerns about growth had already started to surface), which ultimately forces central banks to step back from hawkish stances. The nonfarm payroll data on April 4 will be the key near-term catalyst. Over the medium term, the forecast for the 10-year US Treasury yield by year-end is lowered to 4.10%.

In the short term, the Iran issue is hard to resolve quickly. Trump is both sending TACO signals while continuing to deploy troops to the Middle East. The short-term risks to non-US yields still tilt slightly upward, especially for non-US countries with higher external energy dependence.

In FX: In the short term, risk-aversion demand, the US’s net oil-export position, and the advantage in spreads continue to support a stronger US dollar. But over the medium term, if the energy shock falls within three months under the benchmark scenario, the dollar will return to a slow depreciation track.

4. Commodities: Geopolitical risk remains the dominant factor.

Recap of this week’s commodities:

This week, commodities ETFs saw the largest-ever scale of capital outflow: net outflows exceeded $11 billion in a single month, setting the biggest monthly net outflow record since 2005. Gold became the worst-hit area for selling, and global largest gold ETF SPDR Gold Shares was redeemed by more than $7 billion. This reflects the market’s shift from safe-haven assets to a “cash is king” logic.

First, the gold market experienced intense volatility and showed a typical “V-shaped” reversal. When global stock markets were halted and plunged due to the Middle East war, high-leverage investors faced forced position closures; surprisingly, gold—the asset with the best liquidity—became the target of selling.

Second, oil prices returned to the vicinity of the $100 mark. As the US-Iran conflict in the Middle East keeps escalating, the risk of disruption to navigation through the Strait of Hormuz has become the market’s core focus.

Third, base metals first fell and then rebounded. Oil prices surged early in the week, triggering inflation concerns and dragging down copper prices. Then, after Trump said he would negotiate with Iran, market risk appetite recovered, driving a copper price rebound.

Outlook for global commodities:

Gold: In the short term, gold prices will continue to be jointly led by the Middle East geopolitical situation and Fed rate expectations. It is expected that gold will maintain a broad choppy trading pattern. To truly form a bottom and rebound later, gold prices still need clearer resolution of the Middle East geopolitical situation, or a shift in Fed monetary policy expectations.

Crude oil: Geopolitical conditions remain the core influence on current oil prices. Any further escalation could trigger a new round of volatility in crude oil prices.

Copper: In the short term, macro uncertainty may continue to weigh on prices. The market needs to see clearer signs of demand recovery and easing geopolitical risks before copper prices can break through the current trading range.

Table of contents

Main text

1

Performance of major asset prices

This week is from March 16, 2026 to March 20, 2026.

(A) A-shares

This week, the market experienced severe volatility due to shocks from geopolitical conflicts. The Shanghai Composite Index briefly fell below 3,800, hitting a new intrayear low.

On Monday, due to geopolitical conflict and a broader market selloff, the market saw panic selling, with nearly 5,200 stocks falling. The Shanghai Composite Index fell 3.63%, briefly breaking below 3,800 and setting a new intrayear low. The ChiNext index fell 3.49%. Themed sectors such as computing hardware, AI applications, cloud computing, consumer electronics, semiconductors, cybersecurity, commercial aerospace, financial technology, humanoid robots, and others all declined. By contrast, the coal sector rose against the trend.

On Tuesday, the market rebounded strongly, with more than 5,100 stocks rising. The Shanghai Composite Index gained 1.78%, the ChiNext index gained 0.5%, and the oil and natural gas sector pulled back.

On Wednesday, the rebound continued, with more than 4,800 stocks rising. The Shanghai Composite Index closed up 1.3%, and the ChiNext index closed up 2.01%.

On Thursday, the market fell again, with nearly 4,500 stocks declining. The Shanghai Composite Index closed down 1.09%, and the ChiNext index closed down 1.34%. Insurance, environmental protection, gold, real estate, and military-industrial sectors saw larger declines. Meanwhile, the battery industry chain strengthened, and oil and gas and coal sectors rose against the trend.

On Friday, the market traded with volatility and climbed. The Shanghai Composite Index returned to 3,900, and more than 4,300 stocks rose. The Shanghai Composite Index closed up 0.63%, and the ChiNext index closed up 0.71%. A-shares’ total trading turnover across the day was 1.86 trillion yuan, setting a new intrayear low for trading value. Innovative drugs and lithium battery themes surged.

This week, the Shanghai Composite Index fell 1.10%, the ChiNext index fell 1.68%, the STAR 50 fell 1.33%, the CSI 300 fell 1.41%, the CSI 500 fell 0.29%, the CSI 1000 fell 0.48%, and the CSI 2000 rose 0.35%. By industry, basic chemicals, non-ferrous metals, and the power and utilities sectors led the gains, while non-bank financials, computers, and agriculture/forestry/animal husbandry sectors led the declines. This week, trading value across both Shanghai and Shenzhen markets gradually shrank. Trading values on Thursday and Friday both fell below 2 trillion yuan, setting a new intrayear low.

(B) H-shares

This week, Hong Kong stocks continued to adjust. Against the backdrop of ongoing escalation of the Middle East geopolitical conflict, Hong Kong stocks adjusted this week. The Hang Seng Index fell 1.29% to 24,951.88 points, and Hang Seng Tech fell 1.94% to 4,778.01 points. Looking at sub-industries, the medical and healthcare sector and essential consumer sector performed relatively better, rising 2.90% and 1.35%, respectively; real estate and construction and information technology were relatively weak, falling 3.00% and 1.52%, respectively.

This week, Hong Kong stocks saw a large drop on Monday in the early part of the week. After some rebound on Tuesday and Wednesday, they fell again. The Strait of Hormuz still has not reopened for navigation. Oil prices stayed volatile at high levels, increasing concerns about inflation, while also increasing worries about the sustainability of economic growth under high oil prices. Uncertainty about the Middle East situation was high, risk-avoidance sentiment among funds was strong, global equity markets were hit, and foreign capital flowed out of Hong Kong stock markets. The overall tone of the Fed is neutral to hawkish, continuously suppressing Hong Kong stock valuations.

In the first part of this week, the medical and healthcare sector and the raw materials sector—those that had adjusted more sharply—rebounded. The real estate sector lacked further catalysts, and thus saw a larger decline this week. Driven by the impact of Trump’s “verbal ceasefire” and repeated claims that he would negotiate with Iran, oil prices were volatile, and the energy sector adjusted somewhat.

© China’s bond market (interbank)

This week, the bond market fluctuated but strengthened, with yields falling across maturities. Yields on the short end were relatively strong due to relaxed year-end funding conditions, while the ultra-long end remained in a volatile pattern. The long end repaired more. This week, the yield on the 2Y government bond fell 1.3BP to 1.3%, the 10Y government bond yield fell 2.25BP to 1.81%, and the 30Y government bond yield fell 1BP to 2.29%.

On Monday, the bond market pulled back. The ultra-long end performed better. Over the weekend, the escalation of the US-Iran conflict weakened equity markets, but the bond market was also somewhat bearish due to liquidity concerns, with only the ultra-long end performing relatively better. On Tuesday, the bond market’s performance diverged, with the ultra-long end performing better. After-hours, it was reported that overnight Trump said the negotiations with Iran had made good progress, inflation concerns eased, long bond yields fell slightly, and a report said that the newly appointed top leader of Iran agreed to hold talks with the US. This pushed the long end and ultra-long end further down. On Wednesday, the bond market traded in a relatively narrow range. The ultra-long end performed worse. At the start of trading, the bond market tone was warm, with long bond yields slipping slightly; later, after a rebound in equity markets, the bond market weakened. On Thursday, yields first fell and then rose. Ahead of the market opening, bond market sentiment was weak. After equities opened, they continued to weaken, while the central bank conducted large net open-market purchases to support cross-quarter liquidity, leading yields to fall across maturities. Toward the close, profit-taking sentiment gathered, and yields moved back. The ultra-long end turned green after rising. On Friday, the bond market showed divergence: the short and medium ends performed better, while the long end and ultra-long end weakened under the suppression from a strengthening equity market.

(D) Overseas interest rates

This week, US Treasury yields rose overall. As of Friday’s close, yields on 2-year, 5-year, 10-year, and 30-year Treasuries were 3.91%, 4.07%, 4.44%, and 4.98%, respectively, changing by about 1bp, +6bp, +5bp, and +2bp compared with last Friday. The 10-year yield briefly touched 4.48% intraday, the highest level for the year, but fell back late in the day.

From Monday to Wednesday: the release of the peace proposal caused yields to temporarily fall— the 10-year yield fell to 4.33% at one point, and the 2-year yield fell to around 3.85%. But on Tuesday, demand in a 69 billion USD 2-year auction was weak (bid-to-cover 2.44, the lowest since May 2024).

On Thursday, an OECD interim report raised its forecast for US 2026 inflation to 4.2%. Combined with this week’s three auctions for 2Y/5Y/7Y Treasuries all clearing at yields higher than the guidance (the worst auction week since May 2024), yields jumped across the curve— the 10-year yield surged 9bp to 4.41%, reaching a new 8-month high.

On Friday, the long end rose further—the attack on Prince Sultan intensified expectations that the war would become prolonged. The 1-year Michigan inflation expectation jumped to 3.8%, pushing up the term premium. The 10-year yield touched 4.48%, a new intrayear high, before falling back late in the day to 4.44%. The 2-year yield fell 7bp to 3.91% due to risk-aversion demand, and the curve steepened.

This week, affected by the escalation of the US-Iran conflict, UK gilt yields fell slightly, while Japanese and German 10-year yields continued to rise. Specifically, UK gilt yields fell 1.8BP to 4.92%, Japan’s 10-year yields rose 11.2BP to 2.38%, and Germany’s 10-year yields rose 6BP to 3.40%.

This week’s UK gilt yields fell 1.8BP to 4.92%. Earlier, UK gilt yields had spiked sharply. As Trump released easing signals and with February retail sales showing negative growth, UK gilt yields retreated slightly.

This week, Japanese government bonds rose 11.2BP to 2.38%. This week, oil prices rose slightly. Japan faced a relatively high inflation shock; the yen exchange rate broke below 160, and yields continued to rise.

This week, German government bonds rose 6BP to 3.40%. This week’s oil prices rose slightly. Germany’s general public faced an inflation shock, and yields continued to rise modestly.

In the short term, the Iran issue is hard to resolve quickly. Trump is both sending TACO signals and continuing to dispatch troops to the Middle East. The short-term risks to non-US yields still tilt slightly upward, especially for non-US countries with higher external energy dependence.

(E) FX rates

In FX: The US dollar index (DXY) rose 0.5% week-on-week to 100.19, extending gains for four consecutive days. The energy shock made the currencies of Asian net importing countries (Indian rupee, Thai baht, and Philippine peso) the most fragile. In response to the rupee falling to a historical low, the Reserve Bank of India introduced new rules to limit FX speculation. In the short term, risk-aversion demand, the US’s net oil-export position, and the advantage in spreads continue to support the dollar’s strength. But in the medium term, if the energy shock falls within three months under the benchmark scenario, the dollar will return to a slow depreciation path.

This week, the renminbi depreciated. The midpoint rate of USD/CNY fluctuated between 6.89 and 6.90. The onshore USD/CNY spot rate closed on Friday at 6.91; the mean rose 119 points week-on-week to 6.90. The offshore USD/CNY spot rate closed on Friday at 6.92; the mean rose 121 points week-on-week to 6.90.

(F) Commodities

Gold: Gold prices show a typical “V-shaped” reversal.

This week, gold prices show a typical “V-shaped” reversal. On March 23, spot gold briefly broke below $4,100 per ounce, setting a four-month low, and then quickly rebounded.

When global stock markets were halted and plunged due to the Middle East war, high-leverage investors faced forced liquidation pressure, and gold—which has the best liquidity—ended up becoming the object of selling. On March 23, a circuit breaker triggered in the South Korean stock market; institutions sold gold in a concentrated manner to raise margin, causing gold prices to plunge further.

This week, London gold closed at $4,493.36 per ounce, up 0.04% cumulatively.

Crude oil: Oil prices returned to the vicinity of the $100 mark.

This week, the crude oil market exhibited intense volatility dominated by geopolitical tensions, and ultimately returned to the vicinity of the $100 mark. As the US-Iran conflict in the Middle East continues to escalate, the risk of disruption to navigation through the Strait of Hormuz has become the market’s core focus.

The US-Iran conflict has entered its 28th day, and neither side’s intensity has shown clear signs of cooling. Israel attacked Iran’s steel mills, power plants, and nuclear facilities. Iran retaliated with drones and missiles and warned that it might fully shut down the Strait of Hormuz (about one-fifth of the world’s oil transportation routes). This threat directly heightened the market’s concern about supply disruption, leading oil prices to swing sharply multiple times during the week.

This week, WTI crude oil closed at $99.64 per barrel, up 1.44% cumulatively.

Copper: In the short term, macro uncertainty is the price-dominating factor.

This week, Shanghai copper showed a “fall first, then rise” V-shaped rebound pattern.

Early in the week (March 23), affected by Middle East geopolitical tensions, copper prices fell sharply, hitting a recent low. Then, on March 24–25, there were two consecutive days of strong rebound, mainly driven by news that US President Trump said he would negotiate with Iran. In the latter part of the week, prices consolidated in a range at high levels.

This week, LME copper closed at $12,124.1 per metric ton, up 2.45% cumulatively.

Domestic steel (black commodities): Slow demand recovery limits upside for prices.

This week, the rebar market showed a pattern of “strong cost game, weak reality.” Cost increases driven by geopolitics provided support for steel prices, but high inventories and slow demand recovery limited the space for price increases.

Weekly rebar apparent demand increased by 172.8 thousand tonnes month-on-month, slightly above the level of the same period last year, but terminal demand release remained limited. Total inventory of five steel product varieties was 18.9784 million tonnes, down 483.9 thousand tonnes month-on-month, but up 1.60 million tonnes year-on-year—inventory remains at a high level.

2

Market liquidity watch

(A) Central bank liquidity injections

This week, the central bank conducted open market operations totaling 242.3 billion yuan of 7-day reverse repos and 450.0 billion yuan of MLF maturities. Cumulatively, it carried out 474.2 billion yuan of 7-day reverse repos and 500.0 billion yuan of MLF operations. The central bank’s total net injection for the week was 281.9 billion yuan. This week, DR007 was operated between 1.41% and 1.44%, and the weekly average fell by 0.05BP week-on-week to 1.43%.

(B) Liquidity in the A-share market

Market trading activity fell by a relatively large marginal amount. This week, average daily trading value was 20,994.42 billion yuan, further down from last week’s daily average of 21,971.53 billion yuan.

The amount of new funds raised this week (stocks + balanced funds) was 13.029 billion yuan, slightly down from last week’s 16.778 billion yuan.

3

Summary of key high-frequency data

Real estate: Sales of new homes across 30 cities improved month-on-month, while falling year-on-year.

The 7-day moving average of商品房 (commodity housing) sales across 30 cities recorded 301.3 thousand square meters, up month-on-month and down year-on-year.

Consumption: Auto consumption improved month-on-month, but fell year-on-year

(1) Travel sentiment remains relatively high: This week, the average daily subway passenger volume in 10 cities was 63.5955 million passenger trips, lower than the same period last year.

(2) Car sales rebounded month-on-month this week, but still declined year-on-year. In the past week (the week of March 22), the China Passenger Car Association’s average daily car sales for that week were 51,196 vehicles, down 7% year-on-year.

Exports: In March, high-frequency domestic export indicators continued to be upbeat, with electronics exports performing strongly.

Third week of March (3/15–3/22): China’s port container throughput was 6.842 million TEUs (yoy +9.42%). Port cargo throughput was 258 million tonnes (yoy -2.7%).

In terms of freight rates: the China export container freight rate index (CCFI) on the US West Coast route (reflecting executed freight rates) for the fourth week of March (3/27) was 813.47 points, slightly down from the previous period. The Shanghai export container freight index (SCFI) for the US West Coast route (reflecting spot freight rates) for the fourth week of March (3/27) was 2,352 points, up from the previous period. The CCFI Europe route freight rate index for the fourth week of March was 1,485.47 points, also up from the previous period.

In the first 20 days of February, South Korea’s exports remained highly strong. South Korea’s exports in the first 20 days of February grew 23.5% year-on-year, with the reading improving from the previous month (same period last month +14.9%); in South Korea’s first 20 days of February, semiconductor exports maintained a high level of strength, with semiconductor exports up 134.14% year-on-year (same period last month +70.16%). Exports of automobiles and auto parts still fell sharply, down 25.12% yoy (same period last month -11.1%).

Vietnam’s latest disclosed data show that import growth rates in the first half of March remain relatively high. Vietnam’s imports in the first half of March were up 18.12% year-on-year, slightly down from the previous month’s level (22.88%), but still at a high level. By sub-industry, Vietnam’s imports of apparel raw materials (including cotton, yarn, fabrics, and footwear raw materials) fell sharply year-on-year by -28.23% (same period last month -11.62%). Imports of electronic products (electronic components, computer spare parts, phones, and other components) grew 44.43% year-on-year, compared with 40.47% in the same period last month.

4

Key items to watch next week

① Monday (March 30): the Bank of Japan will release a summary of the opinions of members at the March monetary policy meeting; the G7 finance ministers and energy ministers will hold a meeting to discuss the release of strategic petroleum reserves.

② Tuesday (March 31): FOMC permanent voting member and New York Fed Chair William’s remarks; China’s March PMI.

③ Wednesday (April 1): Ministry of Finance and the State Taxation Administration: starting April 1, abolish VAT export tax rebates for products such as photovoltaic; Eurozone manufacturing PMI; US March ADP employment change.

Uncertainty remains about the sustainability of consumption recovery. Since the beginning of this year, residents’ consumption has started to improve, but it still has not returned to pre-epidemic normalized growth rates. Whether the repair and improvement can continue in the future still needs to be closely tracked. If consumption again weakens, the impetus for an economic rebound will clearly weaken.

Uncertainty remains about whether the real estate sector can continue to improve. This round of the real estate downturn cycle has lasted for a relatively long time. Although there has been a temporary warming trend now, many indicators are still showing negative year-on-year growth. Whether the warming trend can be maintained still needs to be observed.

The impact of tightening monetary policies in the US and Europe may exceed expectations, dragging down global economic growth and asset price performance.

Geopolitical conflicts still carry uncertainty, disrupting the outlook for global economic growth and market risk appetite.

Name of the securities research report: 《After the crude oil shock, will overseas face recession or stagflation?

— Weekly view on global major asset classes (97)》

Overseas release date: March 29, 2026

Report issuing institution: China Construction Investment Securities Co., Ltd.

Research analysts:

Jun Zhuyunzhi, practicing license number: S1440524020001

Mao Chen, practicing license number: S1440523030002

Disclaimer

The content published in this official account is only for institutional professional investors that meet the requirements of the《Securities and Futures Investor Suitability Management Measures》. China Construction Investment does not, by any act of following this official account or receiving/reading the content of this official account, treat the follower as a client of China Construction Investment.

This official account is not a platform for publishing research reports of China Construction Investment. All content comes from research reports officially published by China Construction Investment or follow-up tracking and interpretation of those reports. Any complete research view should be subject to the research report officially published by China Construction Investment. If subscribers use the content from this official account, they may misunderstand key assumptions, ratings, target prices, and other items due to insufficient understanding of the full report. Subscribers are reminded to refer to the complete securities research report published by China Construction Investment, carefully read the various attached explanations, statements, disclosures, and risk warnings, pay attention to the key assumptions under which the related analyses and forecasts can be成立 (valid), pay attention to the time horizon for forecasts of investment ratings and securities target prices, and accurately understand the meaning of investment ratings.

China Construction Investment makes no express or implied guarantee regarding the accuracy, reliability, timeliness, and completeness of the content in this official account. The content and opinions in this official account only represent the judgment made on the release date of the source securities research report. Related research views may be changed by China Construction Investment in its subsequent release of securities research reports without issuing a notice. Other departments, personnel, and other professionals of China Construction Investment may, based on different assumptions and standards, and using different analysis methods, make market commentaries and/or views orally or in writing that are inconsistent or opposite to the content and opinions in this official account. China Construction Investment has no obligation to update this content or opinions to subscribers.

The content published in this official account is not investment decision-making service. Under any circumstances, it does not constitute any investment advice to any recipients regarding the content of this official account. The content and opinions in this official account are for reference only and do not constitute any guarantee. Subscribers should not rely solely on the information from this official account to replace their own independent judgment. Subscribers should fully understand various investment risks, make investment decisions independently based on their own circumstances, and bear investment risks themselves. Under any circumstances, China Construction Investment does not assume any responsibility for any losses incurred by any person due to the use of any content from this official account. Any decisions made by subscribers based on the content of this official account are unrelated to China Construction Investment or the related authors.

All copyrights of all content published in this official account belong to China Construction Investment. Without China Construction Investment’s prior written permission, no institution and/or individual may modify, forward, reprint, copy, publish, or quote all or any part of the content published in this official account in any form. Nor may any institution, individual, or media platform that has not been authorized in writing by China Construction Investment receive, forward, copy, or quote all or any part of the content published in this official account. All rights reserved—any violations will be prosecuted.

Massive information and precise interpretation—only on the Sina Finance app