Last night someone asked old K: What is your opinion on the big sector of medicine? Which is the recommended choice for medical, pharmaceutical or medical devices?
Although I didn't say it, my inner answer was: It is recommended to surrender!
Why?
In fact, the recent sharp decline in the pharmaceutical sector is not the impact of the new policy, mainly the problem of funds, and there is the market leader Jiuan Medical peaking to drive the collective adjustment of the entire large plate.
In this regard, I can only say that "success is also Xiao He is also Xiao He", but on the whole, the certainty of long-term high growth of the plate is still relatively strong. In particular, we subdivide the entire pharmaceutical sector and its recent rise and fall of constituent stocks, we can find that the divergence within the sector is still relatively large.
And compared with the recent trend charts of the three major indices of CSI medical devices, medicine, and medical treatment, you will also find that medical devices have a certain degree of resistance compared with the first two major indices.
At present, from a technical point of view, in addition to the shock of medical devices at the bottom of the box, the rest are still in a clear downward trend, the amount of the three major indexes has been amplified in the near future, where the amount of medical devices can be amplified the most obvious, and the moving average is also more closely bonded.
Of course, this is simply from the short-term technical point of view, we all know that the pharmaceutical sector is usually more suitable as a long-term track, so let's stretch these three major indices to 5 years, let's take a look at the trend comparison between them:
From the above trend chart and the phased income, it is clear that whether from the past January or the near march or even the near year, the resistance of medical devices is significantly higher than that of medical and pharmaceutical;
From the perspective of annualized income, the income of medical devices and medical treatment in the past three years is not much different, and the income of medical treatment in the past five years is significantly higher than that of medicine and medical devices.
Let's look at the valuation difference between the three:
At present, the price-earnings ratio of China Securities Pharmaceutical Index (000933) is about 33 times, which is at the historical percentile of 42.02%, and the valuation is moderate.
At present, the price-earnings ratio of the CSI Medical Index (399989) is about 38 times, which is at the historical percentile of 10.12%, and the valuation is low.
At present, the price-earnings ratio of the CSI Medical Device Index (H30217) is about 27 times, which is at a historical percentile of about 1.56%, and the valuation is extremely low. (To know that this 1.56% quantile of the past 5 years means that the current medical device index is cheaper than the 98.44% time point in the past 5 years.) ）
Therefore, whether from the performance or from the comparison of the price-earnings ratio in recent years, the attractiveness and cost performance of the current CSI medical device index are greater than those of CSI Pharmaceutical and CSI Medical Index.
Let's take a closer look at the segmentation and size of the three major index funds in the market:
At present, there are 2 related ETFs tracking the CSI Pharmaceutical Index in the Shanghai and Shenzhen markets, and from the perspective of scale, Huitianfu CSI Pharmaceutical is larger and equipped with its over-the-counter linkage fund.
At present, there are 3 related ETFs tracking the CSI Medical Liao Index in the Shanghai and Shenzhen markets, and from the perspective of scale, Huabao CSI Medical Liao is the largest, followed by Cathay Pacific CSI Medical, both of which have corresponding over-the-counter linkage funds.
At present, there are 2 related ETFs tracking the CSI Medical Device Index in the Shanghai and Shenzhen markets, and from the perspective of scale, Yongying CSI Medical Device ETF (159883) has the largest scale and the best liquidity, and it was just included in the two financing targets last Friday, and there are corresponding over-the-counter connection funds (013416), which can be set as the first choice. At present, the circulation share of medical device ETFs has reached 1.045 billion, and the latest scale is 836 million, and the scale is rising rapidly. Since the beginning of the year, the transaction has been continuously enlarged, and the transaction has exceeded 100 million for 2 consecutive days, and it seems that the market has paid high attention to this target recently.
Finally, I still want to emphasize the investment value of the entire pharmaceutical sector from a logical point of view:
Because no matter what, medicine is always a necessary consumption of life, and when you are sick, you have to take medicine, and if necessary, you have to use medical equipment. As long as the market is not satisfied, as long as the products are of sufficient quality and the company's moat is deep enough, in the long run, the performance of the pharmaceutical sector will continue to grow.
The reason why I am more optimistic about the main logic of medical devices In addition to the comparison between performance and valuation, I also look at the space for domestic replacement of medical devices.
Although the most cutting-edge medical device research and development technology is mainly overseas, do not forget that we also have various advantages in manpower and material costs.
And the original may not be able to do some high-end substitution, we can now gradually achieve domestic substitution, such as the current we are in the heart stent, orthopedic high-value consumables, medical device substitution has become more sufficient (here the representative enterprises have Lepu Medical, etc.).
In addition, from the perspective of the global market, the market size ratio of normal medical devices and medicines is roughly 0.5:1, and the proportion of developed countries such as Europe, the United States and Japan has risen to about 1:1, that is, the scale of medical devices and medicines is similar and balanced.
However, due to the late start of the mainland medical device industry and the long-term industry model of "using medicine to support doctors", the mainland medical device market is far behind the current situation of the drug market. According to relevant data, the per capita consumption ratio of drugs and medical devices in mainland China is only 1:0.35, far lower than the global average of 1:0.7, and even lower than the level of 1:0.98 in developed countries.
Therefore, if you look at the logic of the transformation from "heavy drugs and light devices" to "balanced development of drugs and devices", I personally believe that the future development space of medical devices is relatively large, and in the long run, the impact of medical devices on collection and procurement will be smaller than that of medicine and medical treatment.
Although ordinary medical devices will still be affected by the collection policy, according to the development law of the industry, the manufacturing cost of medical devices will be reduced because of concentration, which can partially offset the impact of the collection policy.
As for the question of how long to vote?
Personally, I think that in the long run, all sectors have done something, in fact, I have always taken the view that the undead track like medicine is: non-essential, never a large stop loss.
The medical and pharmaceutical fund recommends that you wait for the bottom to confirm before considering adding positions, or if the position is not heavy, you can consider falling and investing. As for medical devices, the current plate is in a state of extremely low historical valuation, and compared with medical medicine, the bottom form is relatively complete, so the short-term effective investment of funds into medical devices will not appear like medical medicine for a moment and a half basically unable to move.
Therefore, I recommend that you can track the trend of medical device ETFs (159883) in the short term, there are many opportunities to do swings here, in the long run, this position is a very good low-suction left side transaction, it is recommended to set investment to reduce investment costs.
In fact, the surrender of weapons I am talking about is not to let everyone throw away their armor and flee, but to let everyone lie flat in a suitable position, and in extreme times, they can "just look and don't move"! Of course, because everyone is concerned about and good at different fields, and the choices and strategies for expectations and switching between different varieties are also different, the specific operation is still based on everyone's understanding of the industry, here is only to give my insights and ideas, only for your exchange and reference.