We are all in history, continuously cycling.

It is unknown whether it is delightful or lamentable, but it is difficult to escape this cycle that repeats over and over again.

Speaking broadly, the rise and fall of dynasties cannot do without the regularity of cycles.

Speaking narrowly, the rise and fall of stocks are also repeatedly reenacting history.

Therefore, we cannot change the reenactment of history, because our power is too small.

But we can use the laws of history to find out what we should do now.

Use the wisdom left by "the ancients" to guide us and make relatively correct choices.

We like to use the bull and bear market to tell the history of the stock market.

Advertisement

Which years are the bull market, and which years are the bear market, to witness the rise and fall of A-shares.

In fact, the first bull market of A-shares was from 1991 to 1992, but there were few retail investors in the stock market at that time, so everyone was indifferent.Even during the bull market from 1994 to 2001, there were not many retail investors.

The first bull market that comes to everyone's mind refers to the one from 2006 to 2007, and the number 998 will also be remembered for sure.

It's like those who have a deeper understanding of history, will start from the times of Yao, Shun, and the Shang and Zhou dynasties, followed by the Qin and Han periods.

However, many people's study of history mostly stays at the Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties.

And it's okay to consider the 2006-2007 period as the first bull market.

The only bull market that can be compared to this one is currently the one from 2014 to 2015.

If the end of the 2015 bull market had not been artificially intervened, then the trend of the two bull markets would be exactly the same.

Both are two big A-kills, with no difference.

In 2015, because of the market rescue, the decline was delayed halfway, with a few more months of rebound.

The reason for the A-kill is also very simple.Unilateral rise is a superimposition of emotions, valuations, and a double blow.

Whether it was in 2006 or 2014, the overall market environment was similar.

In 2006, the market had gone through a five-year bear market from 2001 to 2005.

And in 2014, it was exactly five years after the rebound from 2009 to 3478 ended, and the market had been falling all the way, ushering in a turning point.

From a valuation perspective, the low points of 998 and 1849 correspond to market valuations at an extremely low level.

You can also understand it this way: the main force has been absorbing at an absolute low position for a long time.

You can also understand it this way: the economy is growing, but the market is consolidating, and the market's divergent trend is accumulating a huge amount of energy.

But no matter what the situation is, it eventually evolved into a bull market.

This is the repetition of history.

So why was the bull market from 2019 to 2021 not a big overall increase, and the speed of the decline was not fast?Because the adjustment in 2018 was not significant, the overall increase in this so-called bull market was also not substantial.

There was no extremely low valuation, nor was there long-term emotional suppression.

More importantly, the bottom in 2018, the range of 2400-2600, was too short, and the funds did not hold enough chips.

If one must refer to history, the adjustment from 1997-1998 and the bull market from 1999-2001 is a corresponding reflection.

At that time, the index adjusted from 1510 to the lowest of 1025, and later rose to 2245.

And the high point of 2018, 3587, adjusted down to 2440, and the overall range was also roughly the same.

So the subsequent market increase, naturally, would not be too large.

Precisely because the range of this market was not large, the highest was 3731, which directly led to the bear market that started in 2021, and the overall decline was also relatively restrained.

Even if you count the low point of 2635, from 3731 down, it's about 30%.

And the slow rise directly led to the slow fall, the entire market's decline cycle lasted more than 3 years, still not completely over, and continues.This pattern is also written in history, or it can be called symmetry.

Some people will surely ask, isn't there a saying in the market that there are sharp declines followed by slow rises, and slow declines followed by sharp rises?

Regarding the slow decline and sharp rise, it is also correct, but this is a phenomenon that will only appear in a new alternation of bull and bear markets.

For example, from 2001 to 2005, four years of bear market, in exchange for the bull market of 2006-2007, is a slow decline and sharp rise.

Similarly, from 2009 to 2014, five years of bear market, in exchange for the bull market of 2014-2015, is also a slow decline and sharp rise.

But this does not conflict with sharp rises paired with sharp declines.

You will find another historical pattern, after a sharp rise and sharp decline, there needs to be a long period of alleviation.

That is, the interval between bull market cycles usually has more than 5 years, or even 7 or 8 years, even if the most important rises and declines only end in 2-3 years.

Let's talk about a question that everyone is more concerned about.From a historical perspective, what point in time is the current A-share market at?

The second half of 2005 and the beginning of 2014 are two points in time that are more closely aligned with the current cycle of A-shares.

Although they are close, each reenactment of history has more or less some differences.

The differences stem from various aspects.

The first aspect is the market's capital.

In fact, at the end of the previous bear markets, the market also lacked incremental capital.

Incremental capital only entered during the mid-to-late stages of speculation, seeing the market's profit effect.

However, even if the current market rises, which capital is willing to take over at high positions is a question mark.

The scarcity of market capital is not that we haven't printed money, but there is a problem in the circulation of money.

Including market confidence, there is also a problem, and the repair of this confidence is estimated to take a certain amount of time.The second aspect, the policy of the market.

The logic of the market is quite similar to the logic of playing cards.

Before the first two bull markets, the market was more about guiding reforms.

Whether it was the shareholding system reform or the merger and reorganization, they were all revolutionary reform systems.

But now, the core of the market has become restructuring, or standardizing the system.

The dividends, shareholding reduction, and delisting systems that were not blocked before have been improved, but the essential problems have not been solved.

These system reforms are more like patching up, rather than upgrading, and there is no great leap forward.

The third aspect, the market's explosive power.

The market value of the market has grown round by round and has become very large.

The market's explosive power is definitely not as good as before.The current capital is now inclined towards rationality, and the future bull market no longer exists in the form of a rapid bull market; it is more likely to be a slow bull market.

The probability of a super bull market occurring as in the first two rounds has become much smaller, with diminishing explosiveness.

The market is like us humans; the younger it is, the stronger its explosiveness, and the older it becomes, the more stable its pace.

Therefore, history will definitely not simply repeat itself, and there will be some changes and uncertainties.

However, the essential laws, such as valuation, sentiment, and bull markets, must exist in a regular pattern.

The reenactment mentioned here refers to the situation where, even if the overall market environment is not friendly, the bull market that is due will still come, but it will be a bit awkward and the rise will be a bit stumbling.