没有人想重温2007-2008年金融危机那段水深火热的日子。美国最大的数家银行竞相争取紧急救助，房地产市场崩溃，数百万人失业。华尔街（Wall Street）最终获救，小企业和平民百姓却为此支付了高昂的代价。

    危机过后，为了避免另一场灾难，美国通过了新的金融法规。一切似乎意味着人们已经汲取了教训。但是，事实果真如此吗？

    金融业如今已经从陷入困境的借款人带来的巨额损失中恢复了元气，又飘飘然起来。美国各大银行在剔除最危险的资产、清理资产负债表之后，大多数都通过了年度压力测试。投资者当然注意到了这一情况。今年到目前为止，标准普尔500指数（Standard & Poor's 500）的金融类成分股已经上涨了16%，高于总指数的涨幅（9%）。美国银行（Bank of America） 的股价更是飙涨了59.3%，成为涨幅仅次于西尔斯百货公司（Sears）的标准普尔500指数成分股。

    但是，与金融危机爆发前几年那些臭名昭著的特征非常类似的风险似乎正缓慢回潮。美联储（the Federal Reserve）的宽松货币政策可能刺激了投资，在理想状况下，这些投资又将反过来促进经济增长。但代价是什么呢？

    以下四个迹象显示，风险正在重返华尔街：

高风险借款人重新获得贷款

    对于一些贷款人来说，麻烦缠身的借款人似乎已经不再令它们感到困扰。

    第一资本公司（Capital One）和通用金融公司（GM Financial ）又开始引诱那些仅仅几年前金融机构还避之唯恐不及的高风险借款人。《纽约时报》（The New York Times）最近报道称:去年12月份，信用卡贷款人向信用受损的借款人发行了110万张新卡，比上年增长了12.3％。

    我们可以从不同的角度来看待这一增长。首先，正如《纽约时报》所指出的，它对更宏观层面的经济是否有利值得怀疑。消费者是否已经做好了准备，承担更沉重的债务？失业率依然高企。数百万人背负的抵押贷款依然高于其房屋的现有价值。这些显然都引发了道德问题。

    与此同时，它也反映出银行现在正在适应新型的借款人。各大银行逐渐意识到，鉴于这场金融危机甚至把信誉最好的借款人也逼到了丧失赎回权的境地，它们不可能永远把那些带有信用污点的人拒之门外。当然，发放抵押贷款时，银行依然在执行严厉的放贷标准。但德勤咨询公司（Deloitte）表示，对于贷款人来说，驳回“首次欠款人（first-time defaulter）”的贷款申请将是一个错误之举——倘若不是因为受此轮经济衰退的影响，他们原本可以一直保持良好的信用记录。德勤在去年夏天发布的一份报告中建议：“首次欠款人群体可以成为金融机构一个独特的创收机会。”

    德勤公司或许认为这个机会是“独特的”，但各大银行很有可能视其为“必需的”。毕竟，它们正在想方设法弥补因新的金融法规而丧失的数十亿美元交易费收入。因此，它们把（收取相对较高的利率和滞纳金）信用卡作为解决问题的办法，我们实在不必感到惊讶。

    Nobody wants to relive the height of the 2007-2008 financial crisis. The biggest banks scrambled for federal aid, the housing market crashed, and millions lost their jobs. Wall Street was saved, and Main Street paid dearly for it.

    In the wake of the crisis, new financial regulations were passed to help avoid another disaster. This might suggest Americans have learned their lessons. Or have we?

    The finance industry is starting to feel better about business again, having recovered from huge losses made to troubled borrowers. Most of America's largest banks passed their annual stress test after unloading their riskiest assets and cleaning up their balance sheets. And investors have certainly taken notice. So far this year, shares of financial companies listed on the Standard & Poor's 500 index have risen 16%, higher than the overall index's rise of 9%. Bank of America (BAC) stock, in particular, has rallied 59.3%, becoming S&P's second-biggest gainer next to Sears (SHLD).

    But similar risks that infamously defined the years leading up to the financial crisis appear to be slowly creeping back. The Federal Reserve's cheap money policy may have spurred investments, which in turn would ideally help the economy grow. But at what cost?

    Here are four signs that risk is back on Wall Street:

Risky borrowers get loan offers

    For some lenders, troubled borrowers no longer seem as troubled.

    Capital One (COF) and GM Financial are luring back riskier borrowers that financial institutions turned away only a few years ago, The New York Times recently reported. In December, credit card lenders issued 1.1 million new cards to borrowers with damaged credit, a 12.3% increase over the previous year.

    There are a few ways to look at the rise. For one, as the Times points out, it's questionable if it's even good for the broader economy. Are consumers even ready to take on more debt? Unemployment is high. Millions are still chained to mortgages worth more than their homes. This clearly raises ethical issues.

    Meanwhile, it also reflects banks responding to a new profile of borrowers. They've begun to realize they can't always turn down people with credit blemishes, given that the financial crisis has pushed even the most creditworthy borrowers into foreclosure. Of course, lending standards for mortgages remain tight, but the consultancy Deloitte has suggested that it would be a mistake for lenders to dismiss "first-time defaulters," who otherwise would be in good credit standing if it weren't for the recession. In a report released last summer, Deloitte recommended: "Targeting this segment of first-time defaulters could become a unique revenue opportunity for institutions."

    Deloitte might see it as "unique," but it's likely that banks just see it as necessary. After all, they're looking to make up billions of dollars in fees lost by new financial regulations. So it's really no surprise that credit cards, which charge relatively high interest rates and late fees, could be one answer.

美国国际集团故态复萌

    美国国际集团（AIG）由于在美国房地产市场投下重注而濒临破产不过是几年前才发生的事情。《华尔街日报》（The Wall Street Journal）本周报道称，如今，这家保险公司正计划重返美国房产投资领域。

    2008年，联邦政府通过一笔价值1,823亿美元的紧急救援资金，拯救了大厦将倾的美国国际集团，但这家公司现已偿还了“山姆大叔”的这笔贷款。今年到目前为止，该公司股价上涨了近32%。如今，财政基础更为坚实的美国国际集团似乎正在闲庭信步般重回风险领域。

    这家保险公司正在投资美国公寓市场——最近，房租的上涨正驱使一大批海外和美国投资者抢购多户型房产。美国国际集团现在的赌注或许不如金融危机爆发前那般令人叹为观止。《华尔街日报》指出，该公司的房产投资组合曾经包括一处位于佛蒙特州的滑雪别墅群，上海的数栋写字楼和位于东京的一座购物中心。

    但规模较小的投资可能成为大手笔投资的前奏。尽管如此，美国国际集团重新投资房产这一事实无论如何都具有某种象征意义。这家依然由美国政府持有70%股权的保险公司仍然清楚地记得金融危机和随之而来的经济衰退那段暴风骤雨般的岁月。

使用自有资金大手笔下注

    在2007年—2008年金融危机之后的几年中，自营交易已变成一个肮脏的字眼。以竭力阻止自营交易而著称的美联储前主席保罗•沃尔克声称，用自有资本进行大宗交易的公司在这场危机中扮演了一个重要角色。

    但就在华盛顿争辩“沃尔克规则”的实施细则之际，绰号“伦敦鲸”的摩根大通公司（JP Morgan Chase）交易员布鲁诺•伊克赛尔的行为使银行是否在使用自有资金承受过度风险这一问题进行的激烈讨论进一步升温。这位交易员囤积的信用违约掉期（CDS）空头头寸大得惊人，实际上是在赌一组公司的信誉将会改善，而不是恶化。对冲基金经理和证劵交易商表示，这些交易的规模足以影响市场指数，类似于用自有资金进行赌博。

    沃尔克规则是《多德-弗兰克金融改革法案》（Dodd-Frank Act）的一部分，这项法案限制获得政府支持的银行从事冒险行为，它在次贷市场崩溃引发自大萧条以来最严重的金融危机之后才获得了通过。

    到目前为止，还没有人称摩根大通或这位交易员的行为不当。尽管如此，如此巨大的“风险容量”让人不由得想起危机爆发前几年的情形。它清楚无误地说明，华尔街爱冒风险的偏好一直存在。

次贷债券重现华尔街

    这些曾经引爆美国房市的有毒住房债券现在显然再次成为了市场的宠儿。正如《华尔街日报》所报道的那样，一些由次级贷款支持、在危机前发放给借款人（其信用历史参差不齐）的不良债券价格今年已经出现了两位数百分比的增幅。

    金融危机期间，投资者基本上避免购买此类债券。这些债券的复苏显示，投资者的风险偏好正在回归。

AIG gets back in the game

    It was only a few years ago that American International Group (AIG) nearly went bankrupt as a result of outsized bets on the U.S. housing and real-estate market. Today, the insurer is planning to return to U.S. property investing, The Wall Street Journal reported this week.

    In 2008, the federal government rescued AIG through a $182.3 billion bailout, but the company has since repaid Uncle Sam. Its stock has risen nearly 32% so far this year. Now on firmer financial footing, it seems as though AIG is easing its way back into risk.

    The insurer is investing in the U.S. apartment market – joining the plethora of foreign and U.S. investors that have recently been snapping up multi-family properties as the price of rentals rise. AIG's bet might not be as grandiose as its pre-financial crisis days, given, as the Journal notes, its portfolio once included a Vermont ski village, office towers in Shanghai and a Tokyo shopping mall.

    But smaller investments could lead to bigger ones. And the fact that AIG has resumed property investing is nevertheless symbolic. The insurer, which is still 70% owned by the U.S. government, is still fresh in the memories of those tumultuous months of the financial crisis and the recession that followed.

Big bets with bank cash

    Propriety trading has become a dirty word in the years following the 2007-2008 financial crisis. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker is known for trying to put a stop to it, arguing that firms making big trades with their own capital played a key role in the crisis.

    But as Washington wrangles over implementation of the Volcker rule, JP Morgan Chase (JPM) trader Bruno Iksil, nicknamed the "London whale," has been fueling debate over whether banks are taking excessive risks with its own funds. The trader has amassed big positions in credit default swaps, effectively betting that the creditworthiness of a group of companies will improve and not deteriorate. Hedge-fund managers and dealers say the trades are big enough to move indexes and resemble proprietary bets.

    The Volcker rule is part of the Dodd-Frank Act, which sets limits on risk-taking by banks with government backing and was passed after the collapse of the subprime mortgage market triggered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

    There's no suggestion so far that JP Morgan or the trader acted improperly. Nevertheless, it's pretty clear the appetite for risk reminiscent of years prior to the crisis is ever present.

Sub-prime mortgage bonds are back

    Those toxic home loans that essentially blew up the U.S. housing market are apparently back in vogue. As The Wall Street Journal reported, prices of some distressed bonds backed by subprime loans issued before the crisis to borrowers with spotty credit histories have seen double-digit percentage gains this year.

    During the financial crisis, investors essentially avoided such bonds. Their resurgence signals that investors' appetite for risk is returning.

    某种程度上，由于股价反映出最糟糕的经济状况，投资者或许认为投资次贷债券更安全一些。此外，因风险更高，此类债券拥有相对较高的回报率，达到了7%到9%。在如今这个低利率时期，次贷债券或许是一个不错的投资选择。

    不过，话说回来，住房市场现在依然是一个烂摊子。欧洲目前的债务危机依然让投资者感到惊慌。如果再来一轮危机，这些债券肯定会变质发臭，但投资者显然情意承担这样的风险。

    译者 任文科

    In a way, investors may see it as a safer bet today since prices reflect worst-case economic scenarios. What's more, such bonds, because they're riskier, yield relatively high returns of 7% to 9%. And at today's low-interest rates, it might come as a decent alternative.

    Then again, the housing market is still a mess. And Europe's ongoing debt crisis has continued to rattle investors. Another crisis could certainly turn these bonds sour, but that's apparently the risk investors are willing to take.