II 全球机构情报
景顺 · 2026/08/27

收益率上升、资产负债表健康,以及AI支出热潮

前往官网原文 ↗
完整研报正文
完整中文译文

收益率上升、资产负债表健康,以及AI支出热潮

关键要点

尽管科技公司的债务增加,但信贷市场并未出现股票市场那样的集中度问题。

公司资产负债表总体看来健康,收益率已从低位反弹。

充足的现金储备有助于我们的投资级团队在未来几个月抓住潜在的投资级交易机会。

当今投资级债券市场的表面之下,从超大规模企业的支出到健康的企业资产负债表,再到更高的收益率,都在发生着许多变化。北美投资级负责人Matt Brill将解读这些变化对信用投资者的意义——以及为什么固定收益市场可能比许多人想象的更具活力。

聆听完整对话,并阅读Matt的要点摘录。

文字记录

大家好。我是丹妮尔·辛格,景顺财富管理平台负责人,欢迎收听《重新思考投资组合》,这是《更大可能性播客》系列的一档节目。本节目通过深入对话,带您走进投资组合经理的决策过程,探索我们的专家如何管理风险、识别机会并驾驭不断变化的市场。

我们今天的嘉宾是马特·布里尔。他是景顺北美投资级信用负责人及高级投资组合经理。现在听马特对信用市场的看法再及时不过了。所有人的目光都集中在美联储9月会议之前。超大规模企业的借款规模让一些人怀疑股市中的人工智能集中风险是否会渗入信用市场。还有一些投资者正在等待将现金投资组合的久期延长的那个“完美”时机。欢迎你,马特。

当然。马特,我们合作了很长时间,但让我们先从你的头衔开始。你能向我们的听众介绍一下你在景顺的职责吗?

好的。作为北美投资级负责人,我的主要工作是担任许多涉及高质量信用(即投资级评级债券)的不同策略的首席投资组合经理。我们也会用到一些高收益债券、一些新兴市场债券,但总体来说,我的团队管理的大部分投资组合都将是投资级评级的。不过,这不仅仅指投资级公司债。我认为很多人立刻会想到公司信用。那将是其中的一部分,但我们还会纳入一些结构性信用产品,以及一些类似机构抵押贷款的产品。

太好了。听起来我们有很多不同领域可以讨论。让我们深入探讨其中一些领域。我们与客户(尤其是美国客户)交流时经常遇到的第一个问题就是关于美国经济的状况,而今年头条新闻层出不穷。我们在想美联储可能会关注哪些数据点,您认为短期利率会如何变化?

好的。美联储有双重使命。他们关心劳动力市场,也关心通胀。当我们看劳动力市场时,它持续表现良好,我认为这让许多投资者感到有点意外。他们以为人工智能会进来让所有人失业,但至少到目前为止,情况并非如此。所以到目前为止,那里有令人鼓舞的迹象。就业市场,我想失业率大约是4.2%、4.3%,所以相当紧张。目前失业率不高。我们称之为“不招不裁”或“低招低裁”的就业市场,意思是活动不多。公司有点不敢解雇任何人,但也不敢大量招人。所以劳动力大军相当停滞,但总体还不错。因此,美联储在就业市场方面并不急于采取任何行动。

但他们双重使命的另一面是通胀方面。我们经历了一段通胀时期。我们在2021和2022,开始,当时美联储已经有点像屠杀了通胀怪兽,但后来它在这里重新浮现。我们正在试图弄清楚,这是否会回到2022的水平,即5%的通胀,还是我们只会停留在这种略微升高、对美联储来说有点不舒服的区域,而根据凯文·沃什和美联储的说法,我们已经在这个区域待了太久。所以他们觉得我们现在所处的水平太高了。但他们要怎么做,为什么会发生这种情况呢?

所以我认为首要原因显然是战争,中东冲突推高了大宗商品价格。大家都意识到了这一点。由于那里的休战或停火,这种情况曾暂时消失过一阵,但现在又有点回来了,油价再次上涨,我们将看看这是否会渗透到经济中并造成更多通胀。到目前为止,对核心PCE的影响是微乎其微的。显然,油价上涨了,但就真正渗透到经济其他部分而言,还没有发生。

但总体而言,人工智能的建设有两个部分。一是建设,二是实际的实施或使用。所以短期内是建设以及所有投入到其中的支出,这是通胀性的。这推动了在许多不同地方的成本上升。想想数据中心的地价。想想购买用于所有布线的铜。想想全国范围内投入到建设设备中的每一美元,这些都是通胀性的。但如果你相信人工智能将会高效并确实产生积极成果,那么从长远来看,它将是通缩性的。它通过生产力的大幅提升来节省成本。

所以我们会看到的。美联储可能会争辩,或者至少凯文·沃什可能会争辩,生产力即将到来,我们只需要在短期内忍受一点痛苦,然后我们就会开始看到这些人工智能投资带来的收益,而且不会太遥远。但对我而言,我会说不要过于担心大宗商品价格以及那边战争和冲突带来的通胀。我更担心的是这是否是人工智能带来的更长期影响。我的总体观点是并非如此。因此,由于它不会在长期内造成通胀,我倾向于相信这个问题会得到解决,我们将有一个非常好的前景,美联储不会被迫加息。

所以我们将继续讨论宏观经济,特别是思考经济增长既是企业也是消费者的函数。当我听到你过去的演讲时,你提到过K型经济,其中收入水平之间存在相当大的分化。现在还是这样吗?这会影响利率水平吗?

是的。所以我认为这是一个非常具有挑战性的问题,仅仅是因为K的顶端绝对表现良好。K的顶端拥有资产所有权,他们拥有股票、房屋和其他随着通货膨胀而上涨的商品或资产,显然也随着市场改善而上涨。所以K的顶端继续表现良好。人工智能的构建通常对K的顶端有利。

K的底端则复杂得多,我认为,正如我之前所说,许多投资者确实认为人工智能对底端将是极其不利的。但我不想说低端消费者没有问题。确实存在问题。有些人仍在努力维持生计。但鉴于当前的劳动力市场,以及4.2%、4.3%的失业率,经济的底端实际上仍然相当不错。你去餐馆,它们很繁忙。低端餐馆繁忙,高端餐馆也繁忙。你去旅行,头等舱满员,飞机后部也满员。到处都是人们消费的场面。

而且我认为消费者信心仍然有点棘手,因为它受到政治动机的很大影响。我认为很多时候,人们做调查时询问他们如何看待经济,他们会根据很多政治观点来形成意见。但总体而言,经济实际上非常好。所以我们认为这是个不错的状态。我们希望更多的人参与其中。我们希望更多的工人、消费者和更多的人口受益于这场人工智能繁荣和整体强劲的经济。但总体而言,我们认为经济相当不错。所以我们不认为你需要避免次级贷款之类的东西。这不是我们投资组合的主要部分,但我们确实没有看到那里的裂缝,表明低端消费者存在信用危机,并且会蔓延到其他领域。所以我们对此感觉良好。

但对我而言,经济的总体驱动力是人工智能,所以只要超大规模企业按照他们的数字支出,这将成为经济的普遍推动力,从而创造生产力繁荣,同时也在创造大量整体经济发展。因此,即使K的底端稍微落后一点,我们认为它不会变得更糟,而且我们认为顶端表现非常好,这带来了整体强劲的经济。

太好了。我将让你继续谈论超大规模企业,但首先,我想暂时从宏观转向你所覆盖行业的公司基本面前景。让我们从你目前投资的公司整体健康状况开始。

是的。从公司资产负债表的角度来看,非常非常强劲。可能在过去20年里我们所见过的几乎最好的状态,比如债务与EBITDA的比率、整体评级上调与下调之比、我们所谓的"堕落天使"(即从投资级降至高收益级的公司)的缺乏等。所以总体而言,我们认为基本面非常非常强劲。

当然,其中也有一些子集表现不佳。但总体而言,目前大多数公司的盈利都超过预期。所有公司,无论是科技公司、医疗保健公司还是工业公司,总体上表现都很好。所以基本面良好。我们认为我们处于一个想要投资信贷的有利位置,因为资产负债表良好,而且正如我所说,整体评级轨迹非常好。这并不是说目前没有风险,但总体而言,消费者健康,大型企业的资产负债表健康,这为投资信贷提供了良好的环境。

好的。我让你回到"超大规模企业"这个热门词。我们允许节目中的每位嘉宾讨论它如何影响他们各自的资产类别。我们知道从股票角度来看,指数仍然由超大规模企业主导,但这如何影响信贷市场,我们是否开始看到一些裂缝?

是的。超大规模企业,可能不久之前这个词还不存在于任何人的字典中,对吧?但是超大规模企业突然冒了出来。为了让大家都明白,超大规模企业指那些科技领域的大型资本支出投资者。这包括Alphabet、亚马逊、Meta、微软和甲骨文。这五家是被指定的超大规模企业。还有一些其他的外围超大规模企业。SpaceX正在进入讨论,英伟达可能也在进入。但归根结底,大多数人指的是五大企业,但这些其他大型公司也在借贷或投资,而为了投资,他们经常借贷。

因此,当我们思考这带来的影响时,我先从好的一面说起。这对许多其他行业来说都非常有利,不仅仅是科技行业。这种利好正传导至银行业。如果你考虑银行活动,当经济表现良好时,银行也会表现良好。它们本质上是经济的衍生品,而目前银行表现非常好。但银行在IPO和大型债券发行时也会表现良好。它们从中抽取分成。它们几乎拥有投资银行业务中的佣金式结构,并因所有正在发生的资本市场活动而表现优异,其盈利非常强劲,资产负债表也非常稳健,经济持续向好。因此,我们看好银行,银行因超大规模企业的各种活动而表现良好。

其次,如果你思考科技行业之外谁在受益,那就是电力公司。电力是AI建设最大的障碍之一。电力公司,我们需要更多电力,我们需要更多电力,我们需要更多电力。你听到每位高管……黄仁勋前几天在CNBC上谈到我们国家需要多少电力。还有所有这些大型基础设施公司在进行建设,随之而来的是对电力的需求非常高,我们仍然相信许多公用事业公司会因此表现良好。

但第三个不涉及科技的领域是传统工业。那些建设数据中心、移动土方、建造墙壁、铺设铜缆并布线数据中心、以及为所有数据中心安装冷却设备的公司。这些活动目前正在全国范围内进行,对传统的中美洲工业来说是一个巨大的繁荣。因此,你的银行、公用事业和传统工业都因所有AI需求而表现良好。

此外,生产力提升的早期阶段正外溢到经济的各个领域和所有行业。那些投资并使用AI的公司发现自己更具生产力,盈利能力更强,利润率在扩大,我们在一份又一份的财报中看到这一点,这非常令人鼓舞。所以一切看起来都非常好。现在,有些人说这都是一个大交易,也许是这样,也许不是。但我认为这是一个长期趋势,你会继续看到,生产力表现良好,并惠及所有企业,无论其所属行业。

但如果你特别关注科技,你问的问题是,是否过于集中?我们是否看到固定收益市场出现像股票市场那样的情况?当你考虑股票市场的结构时,许多股票指数是基于市值的,公司越大,在指数中的权重就越大。债券市场类似,你借的越多,在指数中的权重也越大。但仅仅因为市值大,并不意味着会有很多债务,但它们往往可能相关。

直到最近,这些科技公司几乎不借钱。它们有大量现金,没有什么是需要大规模资本支出预算的,所以它们通常回购一些股票,有些支付少量股息,并开展一些资本支出项目,但这些规模都不大,以至于需要被称为超大规模企业。这种情况已经改变。所以科技业务,或纯企业世界中固定收益指数中的科技部分,可能几年前仅占2%到3%。现在仍然是单位数,但已显著上升,不过仍然是单位数。根据你如何分类一些关键信用,它大约在6%到8%之间。所以相比之前是上升了,但你在固定收益方面的多元化程度仍然远高于股票世界,在股票世界中,某些集中度根据指数不同可能达到35%到50%。

所以总体而言,科技债务确实更多了。我们认为这些公司,我们稍后可能会讨论它们的信用质量,但总体上信用质量仍然非常强劲。但集中风险在固定收益世界中并不像股票世界那样明显,而且这是有原因的。当你买入股票时,你可以在这只股票上获得无限收益。我们通过持有固定收益获得的上行空间有限。我们获得票息和到期还款。我们没有股票世界中的那种上行空间,因此,我们希望保持防御性、保持多元化,这实际上更适合我们的市场,降低集中度。到目前为止,这对固定收益世界非常有利,我们正在密切关注。但你可以安心入眠,因为你的固定收益投资组合的集中度与股票组合不同。

这绝对引人入胜。我认为这对听众理解分散投资的好处非常重要,而且你可以围绕超大规模企业进行大量集中的讨论,但当你开始层层剖析时,会发现更多内容,尤其是对于信用投资者而言。也许我们开始思考你的团队用来评估不同投资的不同领域。我们已经谈过基本面。我想你之前给出了一些A评级。但如果我们审视这三个不同领域——基本面、技术面和估值——你目前会如何评级每一个?

是的。所以如果我们把一个三脚凳来思考,基本上它们都很重要,无论是估值、技术面还是基本面。在市场的某些时候,其中一些会比其他的更重要。我们倾向于说估值不是催化剂,所以东西不会仅仅因为变便宜而立即变好。你必须有一些理由让它们变好,这通常是基本面,但往往是技术面。而现在,技术面,我会说,对固定收益市场来说通常是负面的,特别是在投资级领域,因为发行的债务数量。你有债务发行,显然是由政府发行的,但也有很多债务是由这些超大规模企业发行的,这些大型科技公司正在给市场带来一些技术压力。因此,我们不太看好信贷市场的技术面,仅仅是因为这些大型超大规模企业发行了太多的供应。

好消息是需求通常存在,并且在强度上是相等的,因为估值,而收益率基础上的估值非常有吸引力。所以收益率基础上的估值,你在几乎所有的固定收益上接近你的20年高位,这取决于你看曲线的哪一部分,你看信用质量的哪一部分。但所有收益率都接近高点。我们认为它们是有吸引力的。它们吸引了大型养老金计划、保险公司、捐赠基金等,这些机构确实试图通过购买高质量固定收益来免疫长期负债。所以需求在那里,但技术面不那么好,仅仅是因为有很多供应。

收益率基础上的估值非常有吸引力。利差基础上的估值不那么有吸引力。所以当我们谈论利差时,那是额外的收益,或者是你持有国债以外的东西所获得的额外增量收益。而目前,在所有的固定收益资产类别中,无论是投资级、高收益、新兴市场还是结构性信贷,它都处于较低端。我们认为这是合理的,因为基本面如此强劲。技术面开始稍微放松,我们继续从一些超大规模企业那里获得更多的发行。这可能实际上会溢出并创造一个很好的买入机会。我们拭目以待。

但总的来说,我们在三脚凳的基础上看待事物,基本面非常好。技术面不那么好,因为为了资助这种资本支出增长而进行的发行量很大。然后,估值是双重的,在利差上不那么有吸引力,在收益率上,这是大多数投资者关心的,大多数投资者实际上只关心所有收益率,那种收益率在我看来是有吸引力的。

所以你有这三个支柱,它们并不总是告诉你同样的事情。我的猜测是风险管理然后变得非常重要。所以让我把这个作为下一个自然的主题。如果你考虑你今天如何承担风险,比如说,与去年夏天相比,那会是什么样子?

是的。所以我认为很多人五年来一直在呼吁经济衰退,基本上。所以很多人一直在说“经济衰退来了,经济衰退来了。”我们几乎在所有时间都站在另一边,一直追溯到2021和2022,当时那第一次出现。所以我们的风险状况有点更偏好风险,因为我们继续相信美国经济比大多数投资者认为的更有韧性。那更像2022和2023。

然后,我们看了'24和'25,我们开始看到AI正在发生的建设,我们说这将是推动经济从这里前进的东西。基本面将非常好,因为AI建设,这将是对美国经济有利的事情。因此,我们想拥有高收益,我们想拥有美国中心的投资级信贷,我们会拥有一些新兴市场,取决于它是否与大宗商品相关以及它在全球市场中的定位。但总的来说,这给了我们一个积极的趋势和拥有固定收益的积极感觉,我们称之为spready资产或比国债更有风险的资产。那是好的。

我们进入今年,突然,我们看到市场... 利差在年初略微收紧。我们确实降低了风险,深入到这一点。所以我们因估值而减少了一些风险,我们说,“看,估值已经到了一个点,也许它们没有定价完美,但它们确实将事情定价得有点乐观。”虽然我们确实认为经济会表现良好,但我们确实看到了一些潜在的负面因素。然后,果然,伊朗发生了冲突,利差确实扩大了。我们利用这个机会重新增加了风险。然后,利差,果然,有点回来了,市场有点说,“你知道吗?毕竟不会出现经济衰退。”所以我们预测经济衰退连续五年都错了。市场承认了这一点,我们站在正确的一边,所以我们再次降低了风险。

所以我想说,现在我希望利差能稍微扩大一些,这样我们可以增加风险敞口,但利差实际上有所收窄。但总体而言,我们的观点是经济非常非常强劲,因此我们希望略微超配信用债。但我们仍意识到,除科技外,利差并未提供我们期望的回报。在科技领域,价格相当便宜,可能有投资机会,但供应持续增加。我认为今年一个有趣的统计是,到目前为止,我们已经看到了七笔$25十亿美元的交易,在投资级市场中有$25十亿或更多的交易到目前为止在2026年。而在过去七年里,我们总共只有七笔。所以过去每年大约只有一笔。我们过去偶尔会看到大型并购交易。现在,我们看到这些大型交易,甚至不是为了并购,而是为了资助资本支出。因此,从这个角度来看,我们减少了风险敞口,并等待情况是否有所缓和。我们希望保留资金储备,以便利用我们认为即将到来的机会,这些机会通常会在劳动节后出现。通常会有大量大型投资级交易。预计还会有一些有趣的新兴市场交易,我们希望为这些机会保留资金。这就是我们目前的情况,并非对经济持负面态度,但可能采取战术性策略,试图利用9月初利差可能出现的疲软,将其作为再次承担风险的机遇,因为我们确实认为这是一个多年期的经济周期。

那太棒了。感谢你的分享。最后,如果只能让听众记住今天这一期的一个要点,那会是什么?

是的。所以我认为一个要点,或者可能是两个,是债券可以很有趣,债券可以很有意思。希望这期节目能让大家感受到我们日常工作的趣味性。但债券可以很有趣,债券可以很有意思。但最后一个要点是,现在固定收益领域有收益率。多年来,在高质量的固定收益产品中获得超过2%或3%的收益率真的很难。你必须承担巨大的风险才能获得这样的收益率,或者你必须转向市场的其他部分。

但总的来说,现在的收益率非常高。达到这个水平的过程对投资者来说有点痛苦,我理解。但总体而言,收益率相当有吸引力,投资固定收益可能非常有趣,因为你支持的是多种不同的方式。这不仅仅是关于10年期国债,也不仅仅是关于美联储。那些是我们将要讨论的关键事项,但固定收益远比那更立体、更有趣。

非常酷。我今天学到的是,投资组合经理有时可以不仅仅考虑无聊的蓝色西装。谢谢你,Matt。至于其他人,下次见。

你收听的是Invesco的Greater Possibilities播客,Rethink Markets。

所表达的观点是发言人的观点,基于截至18,年2026,月当前的市场状况,如有更改,恕不另行通知。这些观点可能与其他Invesco投资专业人士的观点不同。

这不构成对任何投资策略或产品对特定投资者的推荐。投资者在做出任何投资决定前应咨询财务专业人士。如果本内容包含任何前瞻性陈述,请理解这些陈述不是对未来结果的保证。它们涉及风险、不确定性和假设。无法保证实际结果不会与预期产生重大差异。

所有投资都涉及风险,包括损失的风险。

过往业绩不代表未来结果。

无法直接投资于指数。

对特定公司的引用不构成买入/卖出建议。

分散投资不保证盈利或消除损失风险。

失业统计数据来源:美国劳工统计局,截至2026年6月。

2022通胀水平基于核心个人消费支出(PCE)指数,该指数衡量消费品和服务的价格变化,不包括食品和能源价格。

石油价格信息来源:Invesco和彭博,基于截至18,年2026月的布伦特原油价格。

关于消费者支出的评论来源:经济分析局。

关于美国经济实力的评论基于ISM制造业和服务业采购经理人指数,截至2026月,分别为55.6和54.1。高于50表示扩张。

关于强劲盈利和公司资产负债表实力的评论来源:彭博智库,基于每股收益增长、营收增长以及营业利润率和净利润率等因素。

关于银行实力的评论反映摩根大通、高盛、美国银行、花旗集团和富国银行在2026,年第二季度合计盈利超过$49亿美元,较去年同期跃升39%,据《华尔街日报》报道,截至14,年2026月。

关于工业繁荣的评论反映,据彭博报道,自2026,年初以来,48家大型工业企业(市值超过$32亿美元)中有31家出现了盈利上调。

六大超大规模企业(亚马逊、苹果、Alphabet、Meta、微软和甲骨文)合计占彭博美国信用指数的4.73%,整个科技行业配置大约为7%。相比之下,标普500指数和罗素1000成长指数的科技配置分别为37%和54%。来源:彭博,截至11,年2026月。

彭博美国信用指数衡量投资级、美元计价、固定利率、应税公司债券和政府相关债券市场。

罗素1000®成长指数,是Frank Russell Co.®的商标/服务标志,是代表大盘成长股的非管理指数。

关于综合收益率(all-in yield)的评论来源:美国国债和彭博,截至18,年2026月。所有主要市场的10年期收益率均大幅高于其10年和20年的平均水平。

关于投资级市场$25亿美元以上交易的评论来源:彭博新闻和道琼斯机构新闻专线。

固定收益投资受发行人信用风险和利率变化的影响。利率风险是指债券价格通常随利率上升而下降,反之亦然的风险。发行人可能无法履行利息和/或本金支付义务,从而导致其工具价值下降并降低发行人的信用评级。

科技相关行业的许多产品和服务面临快速淘汰的风险,这可能降低发行人的价值。

人工智能(AI)科技公司对特定风险敏感,如市场规模小、商业周期变化、经济增长、技术进步、淘汰和监管。这些公司可能产品、市场、资源或人员有限,使其证券更具波动性,尤其是较小的初创公司。快速的技术变革可能对其业绩产生不利影响。AI公司通常依赖专利、版权、商标和商业秘密来保护其技术,但无法保证这些保护足够。大量的研发(R&D)支出不能确保产品或服务成功。

对基础设施相关公司的投资可能面临与资本建设计划相关的高利息成本、环境及其他法规相关的成本、经济放缓和产能过剩的影响、节能政策的影响、政府监管及其他因素。

集中于特定行业或板块的投资面临更大风险,且与更分散的投资相比,受市场波动的影响可能更大。

资本支出(或capex)是指公司使用资金购置或升级有形资产(如物业、工业建筑或设备)。

票息是债券支付的年利率,以面值的百分比表示。

久期是衡量固定收益投资价格(本金价值)对利率变化敏感性的指标。

每股收益(EPS)是指公司总收益除以流通股数。

EBITDA是息税折旧摊销前利润的缩写。

超大规模云服务商是能够在企业规模提供计算和存储等服务的大型云服务提供商。

K型经济是指复苏或增长同时分化为两条相反路径的经济。一个群体受益并扩张,而另一个群体停滞或落后。

金融中的利差是两个相关值(如价格、利率或收益率)之间的差额。

《重新思考投资组合》和《更大可能性播客》由Invesco Distributors, Inc.为您呈现。

从超大规模云服务商的借款到更高的收益率,当今债券市场表面之下正在发生很多事情。Matt Brill解读了这一切对信用投资者的意义——以及为什么固定收益可能比许多人意识到的更具活力。(Invesco Distributors, Inc.)

尽管科技公司债务攀升,集中度风险并非隐忧

在纯企业债的固定收益指数中,科技板块几年前可能仅占2%至3%。如今这一比例已显著上升,但仍处于个位数。根据对部分关键信用主体的分类方式不同,该比例大约在6%至8%之间。因此,相较于以往,这一占比有所提高,但固定收益领域的多元化程度仍远高于股票市场,后者在某些指数中的集中度可能达到35%至50%。

购买股票时,潜在收益可以是无限的。而持有固定收益产品,我们的上行空间有限。我们获得票息,并持有至到期。我们没有股票市场那样的上行潜力。因此,我们希望保持防御性,保持多元化,较低的集中度实际上更契合我们的市场定位。

超大规模企业的支出可使科技行业以外的公司受益

超大规模企业是大型科技支出方,是科技领域资本支出的主要投资者。为了投资,它们通常会借债。这对许多其他行业都有利,而不仅仅是科技行业。你的银行、公用事业和传统工业企业,都会因人工智能需求而表现良好。

此外,生产率提升的早期阶段正在向经济的所有领域和所有行业溢出。投资并利用人工智能的公司发现自己生产率更高、盈利能力更强、利润率扩大,我们在一个接一个的财报中看到了这一点,这非常令人振奋。

现在,有人说这只是一笔大交易,也许是,也许不是。但我认为这是一个长期趋势,你将持续看到,生产率表现良好,且无论哪个行业,企业都能从中受益。

大型企业资产负债表总体稳健

从公司资产负债表的角度来看,目前的情况可能与过去20年中的最佳时期相当,这体现在债务/EBITDA比率、总体评级上调与下调的情况,以及所谓的“堕落天使”(即从投资级降至高收益级的公司)数量较少等方面。当然,其中也有部分子领域表现不佳。但总体而言,目前大多数公司的盈利超出预期。我们认为,当前正是投资信用产品的时机,因为资产负债表状况良好,且评级整体趋势非常积极。这并非意味着当前没有风险,但总体来看,消费者健康状况良好,大型企业资产负债表稳健,这为投资信用产品创造了良好的环境。

储备弹药,把握潜在大型交易机会

总体而言,我们认为经济非常、非常强劲,因此我们希望适度超配信用债。但我们仍意识到,除科技领域外,信用利差所给予的回报并不如我们所愿。

我认为今年一个有趣的统计数据是,到目前为止,我们已在投资级市场完成了$25笔规模达2026亿美元或以上的交易。而过去七年合计也只有七笔。也就是说,过去平均每年仅一笔。我们以前偶尔会看到一笔大型并购交易。现在,我们看到的这些大型交易,甚至不是为了并购,而是为了筹集资本开支资金。因此,从这个角度出发,我们已降低了风险敞口,正在观望市场是否会出现一定程度的缓和。

我们希望储备弹药,以利用我们认为即将到来的一些机会,这些机会通常应在劳动节后出现。届时通常会有大量大型投资级债券交易。同时也应会出现一些有吸引力的新兴市场交易,我们希望为此留足子弹。

因此,这就是我们目前的立场——并非看空经济,而是可能采取战术性操作,试图利用9月初信用利差可能出现的疲软,将其作为再次增加风险敞口的机会,因为我们确实认为当前正处于一个多年期的经济周期中。

收益率已反弹

当前固定收益市场存在收益率。多年来,在高质量固定收益领域很难获得超过2%或3%的收益率。你必须承担巨大风险才能获得这样的收益率,或者你必须涉足市场的其他部分。达到这一水平的过程对投资者来说有些痛苦。我理解。但总体而言,收益率相当有吸引力。而且这不仅仅关乎10年期(美国国债收益率),也不仅仅是美联储。这些是关键因素,但固定收益远不止于此,它更立体、更有趣。

一个由深入的自有研究驱动、经验丰富的团队指导的全球主动管理高确信度投资组合平台。

所有投资都涉及风险,包括本金损失的风险。

过往业绩并不保证未来结果。

不能直接投资于指数。

这并不构成对任何投资策略或产品适用于特定投资者的建议。投资者在做出任何投资决定前应咨询金融专业人士。

关于强劲盈利和公司资产负债表实力的评论来源于彭博行业研究,基于每股收益增长、营收增长以及营业利润率和净利润率等因素。

关于投资级市场$25亿美元以上交易的评论来源于彭博新闻和道琼斯机构新闻专线。

六大超大规模云服务商(亚马逊、苹果、Alphabet、Meta、微软和甲骨文)合计占彭博美国信用指数的4.73%,整个科技板块的配置约为7%。相比之下,标普500指数和罗素1000成长指数中科技板块的配置分别为37%和54%。数据来源:彭博,截至11,年2026月。

人工智能(AI)科技公司对特定风险敏感,如市场规模小、商业周期变化、经济增长、技术进步、过时和监管。这些公司可能产品、市场、资源或人员有限,使其证券更具波动性,尤其是较小的初创企业。快速的技术变革可能对其业绩产生不利影响。AI公司通常依靠专利、版权、商标和商业秘密来保护其技术,但无法保证这些保护措施足够充分。大量研发支出并不能确保产品或服务的成功。

彭博美国信用指数衡量投资级、美元计价、固定利率、应税公司债券和政府相关债券市场。

资本支出(或capex)是指公司使用资金购置或升级有形资产,如房地产、工业建筑或设备。

票息是债券每年支付的利率,以面值的百分比表示。

信用利差是指到期期限相似但信用质量不同的债券之间的收益率差异。

分散投资并不保证盈利或消除损失风险。

EBITDA是息税折旧摊销前利润的缩写。

固定收益投资受发行人的信用风险和利率变化的影响。利率风险是指债券价格通常随利率上升而下跌,反之亦然。发行人可能无法履行利息和/或本金支付义务,从而导致其工具价值下降并降低发行人的信用评级。

超大规模云服务商是大型云服务提供商,能够以企业规模提供计算和存储等服务。

对基础设施相关公司的投资可能面临资本建设计划的高利息成本、环境和其他法规成本、经济放缓和产能过剩的影响、节能政策的影响、政府监管及其他因素。

专注于特定行业或板块的投资比分散投资面临更大的风险,且更容易受到市场波动的影响。

科技相关行业提供的许多产品和服务面临快速过时的风险,这可能会降低发行人的价值。

罗素1000®成长指数是Frank Russell Co.®的商标/服务标志,是一个非管理指数,被认为代表大盘成长股。

所表达的观点是演讲者的观点,基于截至18,年2026,月的当前市场状况,如有变更,恕不另行通知。这些观点可能与其他景顺投资专业人士的观点不同。

离开Invesco.com

此链接将您带至与Invesco无关联的网站。该网站仅供参考。Invesco不保证其内容,亦不对任何内容承担任何责任。

完整英文原文

Key takeaways

Despite rising tech company debt, the credit market isn’t experiencing the type of concentration seen in the stock market.

Company balance sheets generally look healthy, and yields have rebounded from their low levels.

Dry powder can help our Investment Grade team take advantage of potential investment grade deals in the coming months.

There’s a lot happening beneath the surface of today’s investment grade bond market, from hyperscaler spending to healthy corporate balance sheets to higher yields. Matt Brill, Head of North America Investment Grade, breaks down what it all means for credit investors — and why fixed income may be more dynamic than many people realize.

Listen to the full conversation and read highlights from Matt below.

Transcript

Hello. I'm Danielle Singer, head of wealth management platforms for Invesco, and this is Rethink Portfolios, a series from the Greater Possibilities Podcast. This show brings you inside the decision-making process of portfolio managers through in-depth conversations that explore how our experts manage risks, identify opportunities, and navigate changing markets.

Our guest today is Matt Brill. He's the head of North America investment-grade credit and senior portfolio manager at Invesco. Getting Matt's perspective on credit markets could not be more timely. All eyes are on the Fed ahead of its September meeting. The amount of borrowing from hyperscalers has some wondering if AI concentration risk in equities is going to seep into credit markets. And some investors are waiting for that, quote, "perfect" moment to extend the duration of their cash portfolios. Welcome, Matt.

Of course. Now, Matt, we've worked together for a long time, but let's start off with that title. Can you tell our listeners what you do at Invesco?

Yeah. So as the head of North American investment-grade, basically, what I do is lead portfolio manager for a lot of different strategies that involve high-quality credit, so investment-grade-rated bonds. Now, we do use some high-yields, some emerging markets, but at the base, the large majority of the portfolios that we're going to manage on my team are going to be investment-grade-rated. That doesn't just mean investment-grade corporates though. I think a lot of people immediately think corporate credit. That will be a part of it, but we'll include some structured credit, we'll include some things like agency mortgages.

This is great. So it sounds like we're going to have a lot of different spaces to talk about. Let's dig into some of those areas. So one of the first questions we get a lot when speaking with clients, especially here in the US, is about the state of the US economy, and there's been no shortage of headlines this year. We are thinking about what are the data points the Fed might be looking at, and what do you think might happen to short-term rates here?

Yeah. So the Fed has a dual mandate. They care about the labor markets, and then they care about inflation. And so when we look at the labor market, it continues to do well, and I think that it's been a little bit of a surprise to many investors. They thought AI was going to come in and just put everybody out of work, and that hasn't been the case, at least so far. So so far, encouraging signs there. And the job market, I think it's 4.2%, 4.3% unemployment rate, so it's pretty tight. There's not a lot of unemployment right now. We do call it a no hire, no fire, or a low hire, low fire job market, meaning there's not a lot of activity. Companies are kind of nervous to let go of anybody, but they're also nervous to hire a lot of people. So the labor force is pretty stagnant, but it's good, it's pretty good overall. So the Fed is not in a hurry to do anything one way or another in terms of the job market.

But their other side of their dual mandate is the inflation side. We've gone through periods of inflation. We started back in 2021 and 2022, and the Fed had kind of slayed the inflation beast, and then it's sort of resurfaced here. And we're trying to figure out, is this going to go back to these 2022 levels of 5% inflation, or are we just going to remain in this slightly elevated, a little bit uncomfortable for the Fed zone that we've been in for too long, too long according to Kevin Warsh and the Fed? So they think that this is too much where we are. But what are they going to do about it, and why is it even happening?

So I think the first reason is obviously the war, the conflict in the Middle East has elevated commodity prices. Everybody's aware of that. That's something that had kind of gone away for a little bit with the truce, or the ceasefire over there, but it's come back a little bit and oil prices are elevated again, and we'll see if that flows through the economy and does create more inflation. To date, it's been marginal on the core PCE. It's increased, obviously, oil prices, but in terms of really flowing through into other parts of the economy, it hasn't happened yet.

But overall, the build-out of AI has two parts to it. One is the build-out, and then two is the actual implementation or the use of AI. So the near term is the build-out of it and all the spending that's going into that, and that is inflationary. That's driving up costs in a lot of different places. Think about land prices for data centers. Think about copper being bought for all the wiring. You think about just every dollar for construction equipment around the country that's going into this, that is inflationary. But if you believe that AI will be productive and actually result in positive things, it is going to be deflationary down the road. It's going to save you cost by being massively improving from a productivity standpoint.

So we'll see. And the Fed is going to probably argue, or at least Kevin Warsh is probably going to argue that the productivity is coming, and we just have to live through a little bit of the pain near term, and then we're going to start to see the gains of all this AI investment not too far down the road. But for me, I would say don't worry too much about the inflation from commodity prices and some of the war and the conflict over there. I would worry more about is this a longer term effect from the AI or not? And my general view is that it is not. And so because it is not inflationary longer term, I tend to believe that this is going to be fixed, and we're going to have a very good outlook, and the Fed is not going to have to hike rates.

So we're going to keep talking about macro, and specifically thinking about economic growth being both a function of businesses and the consumer. When I've heard you speak, you talk about, in the past, it's been a K-shaped economy, where there's quite a bit of dispersion among income levels. Is that still the case? And does any of this have impact in the level of interest rates?

Yeah. So I think it's a very challenging question, just simply because the top of the K is absolutely doing well. The top of the K has asset ownership, they own stocks, they own houses, they own other goods or other assets that go up with any inflation and go up with obviously the markets improving. So the top part of the K continues to do well. The AI build-out generally is good for the top part of the K.

The bottom part of the K is a lot more complicated, and I think, as I stated earlier, a lot of investors really thought that AI was just going to be very negative for the bottom end. And I don't want to say that there's not problems on the lower end consumer. There certainly are. There are certain people that continue to struggle to make ends meet. But with the labor market where it is, and at 4.2%, 4.3% unemployment, the bottom end of the economy continues to actually be pretty good. You go to restaurants, they're busy. Low-end restaurants are busy. High-end restaurants are busy. You go travel, first class is busy, the back of the plane is busy. Everywhere, people are spending.

And I think that the consumer confidence remains a little bit tricky because it gets very politically motivated. I think a lot of times, the people do surveys and they ask them how they think their economy is, and they'll base their opinion on a lot of their political views. But overall, the economy is actually really good. So we do think that it's a good spot. We want more people to participate in it. We want more workers, more consumers, more of the population to be benefiting from this AI boom and this overall strong economy. But overall, we do think it's pretty good. So we are not of the opinion that you need to avoid subprime lending, things like that. It's not a huge part of our portfolio, but we're just not really seeing the cracks there that tell us that there's some sort of credit crisis at the low-end consumer that will spill over to the rest. So we feel pretty good there.

But to me, the overall driver of the economy is this AI, and so as long as these hyperscalers are spending at the numbers that they are, it is going to be a rising tide generally for the economy, which is creating this productivity boom, but also just creating a lot of overall economic development. So even if the lower end of the K lags behind a little bit, we think it's not really getting any worse, and we think the top end is doing very well, which produces an overall strong economy.

This is great. And I'm going to let you keep talking about hyperscalers in just a moment. But first, I want to pivot for a moment from macro to the fundamental outlook for the sectors you cover. Let's start with what's the general health of the companies that you invest in right now?

Yeah. So from a company balance sheet standpoint, it's very, very strong. It's probably about as good as we've seen in the last 20 years, in terms of things like debt-to-EBITDA, overall ratings upgrades versus downgrades, lack of what we call fallen angels of companies going from investment-grade to high-yield. So the fundamentals overall we think are very, very strong.

Now, there are subsets of it that are not doing as well. But overall, you're seeing most earnings beat right now. All companies, whether they're a tech company or a healthcare company or an industrial, they generally are doing well. So the fundamentals are good. We feel like we're in a position that we want to be investing in credit because the balance sheets are good, and the overall, as I stated, the trajectory of ratings is very good. So it's not as if there aren't risks right now, but overall, the consumer's healthy, and the balance sheets of large corporations is healthy, which is a good environment to investing in credit.

All right. I'm going to let you get back to the buzzword of hyperscalers. And we've allowed every guest on the show to talk about how it's impacting their various asset classes. We know from an equities perspective that indices remain dominated by hyperscalers, but how does this play into credit markets, and are we starting to see any cracks?

Yeah. So the hyperscalers, it probably wasn't a word that was even in anybody's dictionary not that long ago, right? But hyperscalers have come out of nowhere. And just so everybody knows, hyperscalers are the large tech spenders, the large investors in CapEx out of the tech space. It's going to be Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Oracle. Those are the designated five hyperscalers. There are others that have are fringe hyperscalers. SpaceX is entering that conversation. Nvidia might even be entering that conversation. But at the end of the day, most people refer to it as the five big ones, but these other large names are borrowing as well or investing as well, and in order to invest, they're often borrowing.

So when we think about what this is doing, I'll start with the good. It's very good for a lot of other sectors, not just tech. So the good that it is flowing over to is in the banks. If you think about the banking activity, the banks do well when the economy does well. They're essentially derivative of the economy, and the banks are doing very well right now. But the banks also do well when there's IPOs, when there's large debt issuances. They make a cut. They have almost a commission-like structure from the investment banking world that they're doing very well off of all the capital markets activity that's happening, and their earnings are very, very strong, and their balance sheets are very robust as well as the economy continues to do well. So we like the banks, the banks are doing well as a function of what all is happening with the hyperscalers.

Second, if you think about who is benefiting from this outside of technology, the power companies. Power is one of the biggest roadblocks for the build-out of AI. The power companies, we need more power, we need more power, we need more power. You hear every executive... Jensen Huang was on CNBC the other day talking about how much more power we need in this country. And you have all these big infrastructure companies that are building things out, and with that, the demand for power is very, very high, and we continue to believe a lot of the utilities will do well due to this.

But the third area that isn't involved with tech is the classic industrials. So your companies that are building out the data centers, they're moving the dirt, they're constructing the walls, they're putting the copper and they're wiring it throughout the data centers, and they're putting the coolant on all the data centers. All this is happening around the country right now, and it is a massive boom to classic middle America industrials. So your banks, your utilities, and your classic industrials are doing very well as a function of all the AI demand.

In addition, you're getting the early stages of the productivity increases are spilling over to all areas of the economy and all sectors. So companies that are investing and using AI are finding themselves to be more productive, they're getting more profitability, they're expanding their margins, and we're seeing that in earnings report after earnings report, which is very strong to see. So everything looks really good. Now, some people say it's all one big trade, and maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But I think that's the longer term trend that you're going to continue to see, that productivity do well and benefit all corporations regardless of the sector.

But if you look at the technology specifically, the question you asked was, is it too concentrated? Are we seeing this happen in the fixed income market, like we've seen in the equity world? And when you think about equity world construction, a lot of the equity indices are based on market caps, and the bigger the company gets, the bigger they become of the index. The bond market is similar, where the more that you borrow, the larger you are of the index as well. But just because you have a large market cap, doesn't mean that you're going to have a lot of debt, but they often can be correlated.

Until recently, these tech companies did not borrow really at all. They had so much cash, they didn't have anything that they were really spending massive capex budgets on, so they bought back some stock generally, some paid a small dividend, and they did some capex projects, but they weren't massive to the point where they had to be called a hyperscaler. That's changed. So you have the tech business, or tech part of the fixed income indices in the pure corporate world was maybe 2% to 3% just a few years ago. It's still single digits, so it has increased significantly, but it is still single digits. Depending on how you classify some of the key credits, it's somewhere between 6% and 8%. So it's up versus where it was before, but you are still materially more diversified in fixed income than you are in the equity world, where some of these concentrations, depending on the index, can be 35% to 50%.

So overall, there is more tech debt, absolutely. We think that these companies, we'll talk maybe about the credit quality of them in a little bit, but credit quality generally is still very, very strong. But the concentration risk is not quite there in the fixed income world that it is in the equity world, and there's a reason for that. When you buy a stock, you can make an infinite amount on that stock. We have limited upside by owning fixed income. We get our coupon, we get more maturity. We don't have the upside that you get in the equity world, so because of that, we want to stay defensive, we want to stay diversified, and it actually fits our market much better to be less concentrated. And so far, that's been very positive for the fixed income world, and it's something we're monitoring very closely. But you can sleep well at night knowing that your fixed income is not the same concentration level that your equity portfolio is.

That is absolutely fascinating. And it's so important, I think, for our listeners to understand the diversification benefit, and that you can be having tons of concentrated conversations around something like hyperscalers, but when you start to peel back the layers of the onion, there's a lot more to it, especially for credit investors. Maybe we start to think about then the different areas that your team looks at to evaluate different investments. We've talked about fundamentals. I think you gave some things A ratings before. But if we look across those three different areas, fundamentals, technicals, and valuations, how would you rate each of these in your process currently?

Yeah. So if we think about a three-pillar stool, essentially, they're all important, whether it's valuations, technicals, or fundamentals. There are certain times in the market where some are going to be more important than others. We tend to say things like valuation is not a catalyst, so things don't just immediately get better in price because they got cheap. You have to have some reason for them to get better, and that's usually going to be fundamentals, but oftentimes it's technicals. And right now, the technicals, I would say, are generally a negative for the fixed income markets, particularly within the investment-grade space because of the amount of debt being issued. You have debt being issued, obviously, by governments, but you have a lot of debt being issued by these hyperscalers, these large tech companies that is putting some technical pressure on the market. So we are less positive on the credit markets from a technical standpoint, simply because there is so much supply being issued by these large hyperscalers.

The good thing is the demand is generally there and equal in terms of its strength because of the valuations, and the valuations on a yield basis are very attractive. So valuations on a yield basis, you're close to your 20-year-highs in all-in yields on pretty much all fixed income, depending on which part of the curve you look, which part of the credit quality you look at. But all-in yields are pretty close to the highs. In our opinion, they're attractive. And they're bringing in large pension plans, insurance companies, endowments, things like that that are really trying to immunize long-term liabilities by buying high-quality fixed income. So the demand is there, but the technicals are not as good, simply because there is a lot of supply.

The valuations on a yield basis, very attractive. Valuations on a spread basis, not so attractive. So when we talk about spread, that's the additional yield, or the additional incremental pickup you get by owning something other than a Treasury. And right now, that's pretty low in all fixed income asset classes, whether it's investment-grade, high-yield, EM, or structured credit, it is on the lower end. And we think it's justified because the fundamentals are so strong. The technicals are starting to loosen things up a little bit, and we continue to get more issuance out of some of these hyperscalers. That might actually spill over and create a great buying opportunity. We'll have to see.

But overall, we look at things on the three-pillar basis, and the fundamentals are very, very good. The technicals are not as good because of the amount of issuance that's being done to fund this CapEx growth. And then, the valuations are twofold, on spread, not so attractive, on yield, which is what most investors care about, most investors really only care about the all-in yield, that yield is attractive, in our opinion.

So you've got these three pillars, they're not always all telling you the same thing. My guess is that risk management then becomes very important. So let's make that this next natural topic. If you think about how you're taking risk today compared to, let's say, last summer, how might that look?

Yeah. So I think a lot of people have been calling for a recession for five years now, basically. So a lot of people have been saying, "A recession's coming, a recession's coming." And we've taken the other side of that for pretty much the entire time, all the way back to 2021 and 2022 when that first came up. So our risk profile was a little bit more risk-seeking, because we continued to believe that the US economy was more resilient than most investors thought. That was more like 2022 and 2023.

And then, we looked at '24 and '25 and we started to see the build-out that was happening in AI, and we said this is going to be what propels the economy from here. The fundamentals are going to be very good because of the AI build-out, and this is going to be a good thing for the US economy. Therefore, we want to own high-yield, we want to own US-centric investment-grade credit, and we'll own a little bit of EM, depending on whether it's commodity-related and how it's positioned in the global markets. But overall, that gave us a positive trend and a positive feeling for owning fixed income, what we call spready assets or more risky assets than Treasuries. So that was good.

We entered this year, and all of a sudden, we've seen the market... Spreads got a little bit tighter early in the year. We did reduce risk down into this a little bit. So we took some risk off the table on valuations, and we said, "Look, valuations have gotten to the point where maybe they're not pricing in perfection, but they are pricing in things to be a little bit on the rosy side of things." And while we do think the economy's going to do very well, we did see some negatives that were potentially on the horizon. And then, sure enough, you had this conflict over in Iran, and spreads did go wider. We used that as an opportunity to add risk back. And then, spreads, sure enough, kind of came right back, and the market kind of said, "You know what? There isn't going to be a recession after all." So we've been wrong in predicting the recession for five straight years. The market conceded that, and we were on the right side of that, and so we took down risk again.

So I would say right now, I wish that spreads were a little wider so we could have more risk on, but the spreads are softened up a little bit. But overall, our view is that the economy is very, very strong, so we want to be overweight credit marginally. But we are still aware that spreads aren't giving us as much as we would like outside of technology. Within technology, it is cheap enough, quite considerably, it is potentially an opportunity here, but the supply keeps coming. I think one of the interesting stats of the year is we've had seven $25-billion deals so far, $25-billion or more deals in the investment-grade market so far in 2026. We had seven for the last seven years combined.

So just one per year in the past. So we used to get an occasional large M&A deal. Now, we're getting these large deals, not even for M&A, they're to fund capex. So from that standpoint, we've reduced our risk, and we're waiting to see if this softens up a little bit. We want to have dry powder to take advantage of some of these opportunities that we think are coming, which should usually happen after Labor Day. There's usually a lot of large investment-grade deals. There should hopefully be some interesting emerging market deals, and we want to have dry powder for that. So that's where we are right now, where it's not negative on the economy, but it's potentially tactical to try to take advantage of some potential weakness from a spread standpoint in the start of September and use that as a chance to get long risk again, because we do feel like this is a multi-year cycle for the economy.

Really dynamic. And what seems really cool is your team's ability to look through the headlines and stay very focused on those key three pillars and how to deploy risk around them. You've probably gotten a lot of our listeners very excited now about all the things they can be touching as bond investors.

Now, in the last few minutes, I want to ask some fun questions, a little bit of a lightning round maybe, if you're game.

Great. So midterm elections are right around the corner. Should we expect elevated volatility or simply consistent with the September to November time of the year?

You should always expect some volatility around the midterm elections. I think longer term, they don't really matter a whole lot, but over the near term, they will matter from a headline standpoint. The two things that we are going to be watching, does anybody have, on either side of the aisle, some views on the budget deficit, trying to keep the budget deficit lower, tighter? That is good for fixed income if anybody wants to do that.

The second thing we're looking at is really the data centers, and it's an interesting topic because there's so much capex around it. But historically, some investors may have been in favor of it, some investors may be against it. Right now, it's become a political hot button. So I'm not going to have an opinion one way or another, but it is going to impact the capital markets by, if voters are in favor of having more data centers, that's going to lead to more capex. If voters are against it and there's somewhat of a moratorium on it, that actually could lead to a lot less capex. So there's some interesting things that can come from a budget deficitary standpoint, but also from the data center build-out standpoint.

Very interesting. Now, we're audio only today, but a lot of times, you're on video, on TV. What's the best thing you've ever worn on TV?

Well, I try to be interesting sometimes. During the summer of soccer, I did wear a US jersey the day after the Flo Balogun red card and I gave out a red card on air. But I liked one time, I'm a baseball fan, and back in 2021, the Braves went on to win the World Series. And this guy by the name of Joc Pederson, a player for the Braves, he wore this pearl necklace throughout the run, and I went on one of the TV shows and I wore the pearl necklace, and it was quite empowering to wear that pearl necklace. He led us, the Braves winning the World Series, and it felt like a great market for fixed income there for a little while as well. So that was fun because I'm not normally a jewelry-wearing guy.

It's great to see people that can have fun at work. So maybe staying on that thread, what's one of your favorite things about being a fixed income portfolio manager?

So I think what we've talked about a little bit today, and maybe I didn't hit on it so much, but what I love about it is literally everything that I see on a day-to-day basis is fueled by debt. You look at cars, there's generally loans on them. Houses, there's generally a loan on them. Corporations are borrowing to build factories to put people to work. So everything that we're doing, we feel like is helping companies and helping people get access to capital to buy things and do things that they wouldn't be able to otherwise, and I think that's great. I like to turn on the TVs in the morning, and I hear about all these different companies and what's happening in the world, and everything, whether it's a positive or negative, that the news is talking about that day is going to impact our portfolio in one shape or form. I love that.

And then, I just love seeing the capital markets at work and being a part of it. And right now is one of the most exciting times that we've seen in terms of CapEx being spent in this country, the build-out of all this AI. And I'm hopeful that it's going to be in a very positive way, creating a lot of jobs for this country and for the world. And to be any part of it is a lot of fun for us, and we get to see it on a day-to-day basis. And I just enjoy coming into work every day and seeing what things are going to be brought from all over the world. And we invest in every which way and in a lot of different asset classes, and I just love being a part of it.

That's very cool. Thank you for sharing. And as a final takeaway, if there's one thing you want listeners to remember about today's episode, what would it be?

Yeah. So I think the one thing, or maybe two, is that bonds can be fun, bonds can be interesting. Hopefully, this has come across as somewhat interesting, what we do on a day-to-day basis. But bonds can be fun, bonds can be interesting. But last would be there are yields in fixed income right now. So for years, it was really hard to get above 2% or 3% in high-quality fixed income. You had to take massive risk in order to get those types of yield or you had to do other parts of the market.

But overall, right now, yields are very high. The path to get here was a little painful for investors. I get it. But overall, yields are pretty attractive, and investing in fixed income could be pretty interesting because you're supporting a lot of different ways. And it's not all about the 10-year and it's not all about the Fed. Those are key things we're going to talk about, but fixed income is so much more three-dimensional and more interesting than that.

Very cool. And what I learned today is portfolio managers can do more than sometimes think about a boring blue suit. So thanks, Matt. And as for the rest of you, catch you next time.

You've been listening to Invesco's Greater Possibilities podcast, Rethink Markets.

The opinions expressed are those of the speakers, are based on current market conditions as of August 18, 2026, and are subject to change without notice. These opinions may differ from those of other Invesco investment professionals.

This does not constitute a recommendation of any investment strategy or product for a particular investor. Investors should consult a financial professional before making any investment decisions. Should this content contain any forward looking statements, understand that they are not guarantees of future results. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ materially from expectations.

All investing involves risk, including the risk of loss.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Investments cannot be made directly in an index.

References to specific companies aren’t buy/sell recommendations.

Diversification does not guarantee a profit or eliminate the risk of loss.

Unemployment statistics sourced from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of June 2026.

2022 inflation levels based on the core Personal Consumption Expenditures (or PCE) Index, which

measures price changes in consumer goods and services, excluding food and energy prices.

Oil price information sourced from Invesco and Bloomberg, based on Brent crude prices as of August 18, 2026.

Comments on consumer spending sourced from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Comments on US economic strength based on the ISM Manufacturing and Services Purchasing Managers Indexes, which were 55.6 and 54.1, respectively as of August 2026. Above 50 is expansionary.

Comments about strong earnings and company balance sheet strength sourced from Bloomberg Intelligence, based on factors including earnings per share growth, revenue growth, and operating and net margins.

Comments about the strength of banks reflect that JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo collectively earned more than $49 billion in the second quarter of 2026, a 39% jump from a year ago, as reported by the Wall Street Journal as of July 14, 2026.

Comments about the boom in industrials reflect that 31 out of 48 large industrials companies (with market cap of more than $32 billion) have seen upward earnings revisions since the start of 2026, according to Bloomberg.

The six major hyperscalers (Amazon, Apple, Alphabet, Meta, Microsoft, and Oracle) collectively represent 4.73% of the Bloomberg US Credit Index, with the entire technology sector allocation roughly 7%. In contrast, the technology allocation of the S&P 500 Index and the Russell 1000 Growth Index is 37% and 54%, respectively. Sourced from Bloomberg as of August 11, 2026.

The Bloomberg US Credit Index measures the investment grade, US dollar-denominated, fixed-rate, taxable corporate, and government-related bond markets.

The Russell 1000® Growth Index, a trademark/service mark of the Frank Russell Co.®, is an unmanaged index considered representative of large-cap growth stocks.

Comments about all-in yields sourced from the US Treasury and Bloomberg as of August 18, 2026. 10-year yields across all major markets sit materially above their 10- and 20-year averages.

Comments on $25 billion-plus deals in the investment grade market sourced from Bloomberg News and the Dow Jones Institutional News Feed.

Fixed income investments are subject to credit risk of the issuer and the effects of changing interest rates. Interest rate risk refers to the risk that bond prices generally fall as interest rates rise and vice versa. An issuer may be unable to meet interest and/or principal payments, thereby causing its instruments to decrease in value and lowering the issuer’s credit rating.

Many products and services offered in technology-related industries are subject to rapid obsolescence, which may lower the value of the issuers.

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology companies are sensitive to specific risks such as small markets, business cycle changes, economic growth, technological progress, obsolescence, and regulation. These companies may have limited products, markets, resources, or personnel, making their securities more volatile, especially for smaller start-ups. Rapid technological changes can adversely affect their results. AI companies often rely on patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets to protect their technology, but there's no guarantee these protections will be sufficient. Significant research and development (R&D) spending doesn’t ensure product or service success.

Investment in infrastructure-related companies may be subject to high interest costs in connection with capital construction programs, costs associated with environmental and other regulations, the effects of economic slowdown and surplus capacity, the effects of energy conservation policies, governmental regulation and other factors.

Investments focused on a particular industry or sector are subject to greater risk and can be more impacted by market volatility than more diversified investments.

Capital expenditures (or capex) is the use of company funds to acquire or upgrade physical assets such as property, industrial buildings, or equipment.

A coupon is the annual interest rate paid on a bond, expressed as a percentage of the face value.

Duration is a measure of the sensitivity of the price (the value of principal) of a fixed income investment to a change in interest rates.

Earnings per share (EPS) refers to a company’s total earnings divided by the number of outstanding shares.

EBITDA is the acronym for earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.

Hyperscalers are large cloud service providers that can provide services such as computing and storage at enterprise scale.

A K-shaped economy is one where recovery or growth splits into two opposite paths at the same time. One group benefits and expands, while another stagnates or falls behind.

A spread in finance is the difference between two related values, such as prices, rates, or yields.

Rethink Portfolios and the Greater Possibilities Podcast brought to you by Invesco Distributors, Inc.

From hyperscaler borrowing to higher yields, there’s a lot happening beneath the surface of today’s bond markets. Matt Brill breaks down what it all means for credit investors — and why fixed income may be more dynamic than many people realize. (Invesco Distributors, Inc.)

Despite rising tech company debt, concentration risk isn’t a concern

The tech part of the fixed income indices in the pure corporate world was maybe 2% to 3% just a few years ago. It has increased significantly, but it’s still single digits. Depending on how you classify some of the key credits, it's somewhere between 6% and 8%. So it's up versus where it was before, but you are still materially more diversified in fixed income than you are in the equity world, where some of these concentrations, depending on the index, can be 35% to 50%.

When you buy a stock, you can make an infinite amount on that stock. We have limited upside by owning fixed income. We get our coupon, we get more maturity. We don't have the upside that you get in the equity world. So because of that, we want to stay defensive, we want to stay diversified, and it actually fits our market much better to be less concentrated.

Hyperscaler spending can benefit companies beyond the tech sector

Hyperscalers are the large tech spenders, the large investors in capex out of the tech space. In order to invest, they're often borrowing. It's very good for a lot of other sectors, not just tech. Your banks, your utilities, and your classic industrials are doing very well as a function of all the AI demand.

In addition, you're getting the early stages of the productivity increases spilling over to all areas of the economy and all sectors. Companies that are investing and using AI are finding themselves to be more productive, they're getting more profitability, they're expanding their margins, and we're seeing that in earnings report after earnings report, which is very strong to see.

Now, some people say it's all one big trade, and maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But I think that's the longer term trend that you're going to continue to see, that productivity does well and benefits corporations regardless of the sector.

Large corporations generally have healthy balance sheets

From a company balance sheet standpoint, it's probably about as good as we've seen in the last 20 years, in terms of things like debt-to-EBITDA, overall ratings upgrades versus downgrades, lack of what we call fallen angels of companies going from investment-grade to high-yield. Now, there are subsets of it that are not doing as well. But overall, you're seeing most earnings beat right now. We feel like we're in a position that we want to be investing in credit because the balance sheets are good, and the overall trajectory of ratings is very good. So it's not as if there aren't risks right now, but overall, the consumer's healthy, and the balance sheets of large corporations are healthy, which is a good environment to be investing in credit.

Building up dry powder to take advantage of potential large deals

Overall, our view is that the economy is very, very strong, so we want to be overweight credit marginally. But we are still aware that spreads aren't giving us as much as we would like outside of technology.

I think one of the interesting stats of the year is we've had seven deals of $25 billion or more in the investment grade market so far in 2026. We had seven for the last seven years combined. So just one per year in the past. We used to get an occasional large M&A deal. Now, we're getting these large deals, not even for M&A, they're to fund capex. So from that standpoint, we've reduced our risk and we're waiting to see if this softens up a little bit.

We want to have dry powder to take advantage of some of these opportunities that we think are coming, which should usually happen after Labor Day. There's usually a lot of large investment-grade deals. There should hopefully be some interesting emerging market deals, and we want to have dry powder for that.

So that's where we are right now, where it's not negative on the economy, but it's potentially tactical to try to take advantage of some potential weakness from a spread standpoint in the start of September and use that as a chance to get long risk again, because we do feel like this is a multi-year cycle for the economy.

Yields have rebounded

There are yields in fixed income right now. For years, it was really hard to get above 2% or 3% in high-quality fixed income. You had to take massive risk in order to get those types of yields, or you had to do other parts of the market. The path to get here was a little painful for investors. I get it. But overall, yields are pretty attractive. And it's not all about the 10-year (Treasury yield), and it's not all about the Fed. Those are key things, but fixed income is so much more three-dimensional and more interesting than that.

A global platform of actively managed, high conviction portfolios driven by in-depth proprietary research and guided by an experienced team.

All investing involves risk, including the risk of loss.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Investments cannot be made directly in an index.

This does not constitute a recommendation of any investment strategy or product for a particular investor. Investors should consult a financial professional before making any investment decisions.

Comments about strong earnings and company balance sheet strength are sourced from Bloomberg Intelligence, based on factors including earnings per share growth, revenue growth, and operating and net margins.

Comments on $25 billion-plus deals in the investment grade market are sourced from Bloomberg News and the Dow Jones Institutional News Feed.

The six major hyperscalers (Amazon, Apple, Alphabet, Meta, Microsoft, and Oracle) collectively represent 4.73% of the Bloomberg US Credit Index, with the entire technology sector allocation roughly 7%. By contrast, the technology allocation of the S&P 500 Index and the Russell 1000 Growth Index is 37% and 54%, respectively. Sourced from Bloomberg as of Aug. 11, 2026.

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology companies are sensitive to specific risks such as small markets, business cycle changes, economic growth, technological progress, obsolescence, and regulation. These companies may have limited products, markets, resources, or personnel, making their securities more volatile, especially for smaller start-ups. Rapid technological changes can adversely affect their results. AI companies often rely on patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets to protect their technology, but there's no guarantee these protections will be sufficient. Significant research and development (R&D) spending doesn’t ensure product or service success.

The Bloomberg US Credit Index measures the investment grade, US dollar-denominated, fixed-rate, taxable corporate, and government-related bond markets.

Capital expenditures (or capex) is the use of company funds to acquire or upgrade physical assets such as property, industrial buildings, or equipment.

A coupon is the annual interest rate paid on a bond, expressed as a percentage of the face value.

Credit spread is the difference in yield between bonds of similar maturity but with different credit quality.

Diversification does not guarantee a profit or eliminate the risk of loss.

EBITDA is the acronym for earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.

Fixed income investments are subject to credit risk of the issuer and the effects of changing interest rates. Interest rate risk refers to the risk that bond prices generally fall as interest rates rise and vice versa. An issuer may be unable to meet interest and/or principal payments, thereby causing its instruments to decrease in value and lowering the issuer’s credit rating.

Hyperscalers are large cloud service providers that can provide services such as computing and storage at enterprise scale.

Investment in infrastructure-related companies may be subject to high interest costs in connection with capital construction programs, costs associated with environmental and other regulations, the effects of economic slowdown and surplus capacity, the effects of energy conservation policies, governmental regulation and other factors.

Investments focused on a particular industry or sector are subject to greater risk and can be more impacted by market volatility than more diversified investments.

Many products and services offered in technology-related industries are subject to rapid obsolescence, which may lower the value of the issuers.

The Russell 1000® Growth Index, a trademark/service mark of the Frank Russell Co.®, is an unmanaged index considered representative of large-cap growth stocks.

The opinions expressed are those of the speaker, are based on current market conditions as of Aug. 18, 2026, and are subject to change without notice. These opinions may differ from those of other Invesco investment professionals.

Leaving Invesco.com

This link takes you to a site not affiliated with Invesco. The site is for informational purposes only. Invesco does not guarantee nor take any responsibility for any of the content.

预览 PDF
1 / 110%

正在载入文档……

AI 分析
由 AI 依据上文研报生成 · 非原文直译、非机构原话 · 重要判断请核对官网原文
关键论点
  • 企业资产负债表处于过去20年最强水平,债务/EBITDA较低,评级上调多于下调,堕落天使少。
  • 全价收益率接近20年高点,使固定收益在收益率基础上具有吸引力,但利差较紧。
  • 超大规模企业的AI支出不仅利于科技,也利于银行、公用事业和工业,推动经济增长。
  • 信贷市场的科技集中度(占彭博美国信贷指数6%-8%)远低于股市(标普500中占37%)。
  • 团队战术性持有干火药,若9月初利差走阔将增加风险。
  • 美联储不太可能加息,因为AI通胀被视为暂时性的。
风险
  • AI相关支出可能比预期更长时间保持通胀性,可能导致美联储加息。
  • 超大规模企业债券发行带来的高供应可能进一步施压信用利差,限制回报。
  • 如果科技借款持续增加,信贷市场的集中风险可能上升。
  • 地缘政治冲突(如中东)可能推高油价并重新点燃通胀。
  • 大量发行的技术面逆风可能超过有吸引力的收益率。