神马文学网格雷厄姆-多德都市的超级投资者们巴菲特1984哥伦比亚大学著名演讲（下）--博客巴菲特
来源：百度文库 编辑：神马文学网 时间：2024/04/19 11:25:27
格雷厄姆-多德都市的超级投资者们
THE SUPERINVESTORS OF GRAHAM-AND-DODDSVILLE
－巴菲特1984年在哥伦比亚大学的著名演讲（下）
blogbuffett 编辑
I should add that in the records we‘ve looked at so far, throughout this whole period there was practically no duplication in these portfolios. These are men who select securities based on discrepancies between price and value, but they make their selections very differently. Walter‘s largest holdings have been such stalwarts as Hudson Pulp & Paper and Jeddo Highland Coal and New York Trap Rock Company and all those other names that come instantly to mind to even a casual reader of the business pages. Tweedy Browne‘s selections have sunk even well below that level in terms of name recognition. On the other hand, Bill has worked with big companies. The overlap among these portfolios has been very, very low. These records do not reflect one guy calling the flip and fifty people yelling out the same thing after him.
我必须补充说明一下，截至目前我们所观察的记录，投资组合在整段期间都几乎没有重叠。他们都是根据价格与价值间的差异来选股，选择的标的也截然不同。华特的最重要持股都是扎实的企业，如Hudson Pulp&Paper、Jeddo HighHand Coal、New York Trap Rock Company，即使是偶尔阅读金融版新闻的人，对这些企业的名称也耳熟能详。帝地布朗公司所选择的标的则更是名不见经传的企业。另一方面，比尔的选择标的则是大型企业。这些投资组合极少出现重叠现象。他们的记录并非由某人主导的猜测铜板，其他人则只听命附和。
Table 5 is the record of a friend of mine who is a Harvard Law graduate, who set up a major law firm. I ran into him in about 1960 and told him that law was fine as a hobby but he could do better. He set up a partnership quite the opposite of Walter‘s. His portfolio was concentrated in very few securities and therefore his record was much more volatile but it was based on the same discount-from-value approach. He was willing to accept greater peaks and valleys of performance, and he happens to be a fellow whose whole psyche goes toward concentration, with the results shown. Incidentally, this record belongs to Charlie Munger, my partner for a long time in the operation of Berkshire Hathaway. When he ran his partnership, however, his portfolio holdings were almost completely different from mine and the other fellows mentioned earlier.
表5的投资业绩来自于我的—位朋友，他毕业于哈佛法学院，并且成立了一家主要的法律事务所。我大约在1960年认识他，并且建议说，法律作为嗜好是件好事，但是他应该做得更好。于是，他成立了一家合伙公司，他的操作方式和华特迥异，他的投资组合集中在极少数的证券，因此绩效的变动比较激烈，但他仍然依据相同的价值折价法从事投资。他愿意接受绩效的上下震荡，而他恰好是一位精神极度集中的人。他的名字是查理·蒙格，他是我在柏克夏公司从事操作的长期合伙股东。当他自己经营合伙事业时，他的投资组合和我或任何先前所提到的人完全都不同。
Table 6 is the record of a fellow who was a pal of Charlie Munger‘s -- another non-business school type -- who was a math major at USC. He went to work for IBM after graduation and was an IBM salesman for a while. After I got to Charlie, Charlie got to him. This happens to be the record of Rick Guerin. Rick, from 1965 to 1983, against a compounded gain of 316 percent for the S&P, came off with 22,200 percent, which probably because he lacks a business school education, he regards as statistically significant.
表6的投资业绩属于查理的一位好朋友——另一位非商学系出身的人——他毕业于南加州大学的数学系。毕业之后，他进入IBM，曾经担任推销员的工作。在我网罗查理之后，查理又网罗他。他的名字是瑞克·吉林。从1965年到]983年，史坦普指数的复利成长率为316％，而瑞克的绩效为22200％，这或许是因为他缺乏商学教育背景，他可以视为具有统计上的显著性。
One sidelight here: it is extraordinary to me that the idea of buying dollar bills for 40 cents takes immediately to people or it doesn‘t take at all. It‘s like an inoculation. If it doesn‘t grab a person right away, I find that you can talk to him for years and show him records, and it doesn‘t make any difference. They just don‘t seem able to grasp the concept, simple as it is. A fellow like Rick Guerin, who had no formal education in business, understands immediately the value approach to investing and he‘s applying it five minutes later. I‘ve never seen anyone who became a gradual convert over a ten-year period to this approach. It doesn‘t seem to be a matter of IQ or academic training. It‘s instant recognition, or it is nothing.
在此撇开主题：以40美分的价格买进一美元的纸钞，人若不能够立即接受这项概念，就永远不会接受它。它就像注射药剂。如果它无法立即抓住这个人，则我认为即使你长期地说服他，并且展示各种记录，你也无法让他接受。这是很单纯的概念，但他们就是无法领悟。类似瑞克这样的人，他完全没有正式商学教育的背景，却可以立即领会价值投资法，并且在五分钟之后便加以利用。我从来不曾见过任何人，会在10年之后才逐渐地皈依这种方法。它似乎和智商或学术训练无关。它是顿悟，否则就是拒绝。
Table 7 is the record of Stan Perlmeter. Stan was a liberal arts major at the
表7是史坦.波尔米塔（Stan Perlmeter）的投资业绩。他毕业于密西根大学艺术系，是Bozell＆Jacobs广告公司的合伙股东之—。我们的办公室恰好于奥玛哈市的同一幢大楼。1965年，他认为我所经营的事业比他的行业要好，于是他离开广告业。再—次地，史坦于五分钟之内就接受了价值投资法。
Perlmeter does not own what Walter Schloss owns. He does not own what Bill Ruane owns. These are records made independently . But every time Perlmeter buys a stock it‘s because he‘s getting more for his money than he‘s paying. That‘s the only thing he‘s thinking about. He‘s not looking at quarterly earnings projections, he‘s not looking at next year‘s earnings, he‘s not thinking about what day of the week it is, he doesn‘t care what investment research from any place says, he‘s not interested in price momentum, volume, or anything. He‘s simply asking: what is the business worth?
史坦所持有的股票与华特的不同。他所持有的股票也和比尔不同。他们都是独立的记录。但是，史坦买进每—支股票时，都是因为他所获得的价值高于他所支付的价格。这是他惟一的考虑。他既不参考每一季的盈余预估值，也不参考明年的盈余项估值，他不在乎当时是星期几，也不关心任何的投资研究报告，他无视价格动能、成交量与其他类似的变数。他只提出一个问题：该企业值多少钱?
Table 8 and Table 9 are the records of two pension funds I‘ve been involved in. They are not selected from dozens of pension funds with which I have had involvement; they are the only two I have influenced. In both cases I have steered them toward value-oriented managers. Very, very few pension funds are managed from a value standpoint. Table 8 is the Washington Post Company‘s Pension Fund. It was with a large bank some years ago, and I suggested that they would do well to select managers who had a value orientation.
表8与表9的投资业绩记录分别属于我参与的两家退休基金，它们并非是从我所参与的十几种退休基金中选择出来的，他是唯一两家我能够影响其投资决策的退休基金。在这两家基金中，我引导他们转变为价值导向的投资管理人，只胡非常少数的基金是基于价值进行投资管理的。表8是华盛顿邮报公司退休基金（the Washington Post Company‘s Pension Fund）的投资业绩记录。几年之前，他们委托一家大型银行管理基金，后来，我建议他们聘请以价值为导向的基金经理，这样能够使投资业绩更好。*本段采用刘建位的翻译
As you can see, overall they have been in the top percentile ever since they made the change. The Post told the managers to keep at least 25 percent of these funds in bonds, which would not have been necessarily the choice of these managers. So I‘ve included the bond performance simply to illustrate that this group has no particular expertise about bonds. They wouldn‘t have said they did. Even with this drag of 25 percent of their fund in an area that was not their game, they were in the top percentile of fund management. The Washington Post experience does not cover a terribly long period but it does represent many investment decisions by three managers who were not identified retroactively.
正如你在投资记录中所看到的那样，从他们更换基金经理之后，其整体投资业绩在所有基金中一直名列前茅。华盛顿邮报公司要求基金经理人至少保持25 %的资金投资于债券，而债券未必是基金经理人的投资选择。因此，我在表中也将其债券投资业绩包括在内，而这些数据表明他们其实并没有什么特别的债券专业技巧，他们也从未这样吹嘘进自己，虽然有25%的资金投资于他们并不擅长的债券领域，从而拖累了他们的投资业绩，但其基金管理业绩水平仍然名列前一百名之内。华盛顿邮报公司退休基金的投资尽管并没有经过一个很长的市场低迷时期的考验，但仍然足以证明三位基金经理的许多投资决策并非后见之明。*本段为编辑增加，采用刘建位的翻译
Table 9 is the record of the FMC Corporation fund. I don‘t manage a dime of it myself but I did, in 1974, influence their decision to select value-oriented managers. Prior to that time they had selected managers much the same way as most larger companies. They now rank number one in the Becker survey of pension funds for their size over the period of time subsequent to this "conversion" to the value approach. Last year they had eight equity managers of any duration beyond a year. Seven of them had a cumulative record better than the S&P. The net difference now between a median performance and the actual performance of the FMC fund over this period is $243 million. FMC attributes this to the mindset given to them about the selection of managers. Those managers are not the managers I would necessarily select but they have the common denominators of selecting securities based on value.
表9的投资业绩属于FMC公司退休基金，我本人没有管理过这家基金的一分钱，但我的确在1974年影响了他们的决策，说服他们选择以价值为导向的基金经理。在此之前，他们采取与其他大型企业相同的方式来选择基金经理。在他们转向价值投资策略之后，其投资业绩目前在贝克退休基金调查报告（the Becker survey of pension funds）中超越其他同等规模基金而名列第一。1983年时，该基金共有8位任职1年以上的基金经理，其中7位累积投资业绩超过标准普尔指数。在此期间，FMC基金的实际业绩表现与基金平均业绩表现的净回报差额是2.43亿美元，FMC将此归功于他们与众不同的基金经理选择倾向，这些基金经理未必会是我个人中意的选择，但他们都具有一个共同的特点，即基于价值来选择股票。*本段采用刘建位的翻译
So these are nine records of "coin-flippers" from Graham-and-Doddsville. I haven‘t selected them with hindsight from among thousands. It‘s not like I am reciting to you the names of a bunch of lottery winners -- people I had never heard of before they won the lottery. I selected these men years ago based upon their framework for investment decision-making. I knew what they had been taught and additionally I had some personal knowledge of their intellect, character, and temperament. It‘s very important to understand that this group has assumed far less risk than average; note their record in years when the general market was weak. While they differ greatly in style, these investors are, mentally, always buying the business, not buying the stock . A few of them sometimes buy whole businesses. Far more often they simply buy small pieces of businesses. Their attitude, whether buying all or a tiny piece of a business, is the same. Some of them hold portfolios with dozens of stocks; others concentrate on a handful. But all exploit the difference between the market price of a business and its intrinsic value.
以上这9项投资业绩记录都来自于“格雷厄姆一多德都市” 的“铜板投掷者”，是我根据他们的投资决策架构，在多年前便选定了他们。我了解他们所接受过的训练，而且知道他们的智慧、个性和脾气。我们务必了解，这群人只承担了一般水准以下的风险；留意他们在股市疲弱期间的记录。他们的投资风格虽然大不相同，但心态上始终恪守：买进的标的是企业，而非企业的股票。他们当中有些人偶尔会买下整个企业，但是他们经常只是购买企业的—小部分。不论买进整体或一部分的企业，他们所秉持的态度完全相同。在投资组合，有些人持有几十种的股票；有些人则集中少数几支股票。但是，每个人都受惠于企业市场价格与其内含价值之间的差值。
I‘m convinced that there is much inefficiency in the market. These Graham-and-Doddsville investors have successfully exploited gaps between price and value. When the price of a stock can be influenced by a "herd" on Wall Street with prices set at the margin by the most emotional person, or the greediest person, or the most depressed person, it is hard to argue that the market always prices rationally. In fact, market prices are frequently nonsensical.
我相信市场上存在着许多没有效率的现象。这些来自于“格雷厄姆一多德都市”的投资人成功地掌握了价格与价值之间的缺口。华尔街的“群众”可以影响股票价格，当最情绪化的人、最贪婪的或最沮丧的人肆意驱动股价时，我们很难辩称市场价格是理性的产物。事实上，市场经常是不合理的。
I would like to say one important thing about risk and reward. Sometimes risk and reward are correlated in a positive fashion. If someone were to say to me, "I have here a six-shooter and I have slipped one cartridge into it. Why don‘t you just spin it and pull it once? If you survive, I will give you $1 million." I would decline -- perhaps stating that $1 million is not enough. Then he might offer me $5 million to pull the trigger twice -- now that would be a positive correlation between risk and reward!
我想提出有关报酬与风险之间的重要关系。在某些情况下，报酬与风险之间存在着正向关系。如果有人告诉我“我有一支六发弹装的左轮枪，并且填装一发子弹。你可以任意地拨动转轮，然后朝自己扣一次扳机。如果你能够逃过一功，我就赏你100万美元。”我将会拒绝这项提议——或许我的理由是100万美元太少了。然后，他可能建议将奖金提高为500万美元，但必须扣两次扳机——这便是报酬与风险之间的正向关系!
The exact opposite is true with value investing. If you buy a dollar bill for 60 cents, it‘s riskier than if you buy a dollar bill for 40 cents, but the expectation of reward is greater in the latter case. The greater the potential for reward in the value portfolio, the less risk there is.
在价值投资法当中，情况恰巧相反。如果你以60美分买进一美元的纸钞，其风险大于以40美分买进一美元的纸钞，但后者报酬的期望值却比较高。以价值为导向的投资组合，其报酬的潜力愈高，风险愈低。
One quick example: The Washington Post Company in 1973 was selling for $80 million in the market. At the time, that day, you could have sold the assets to any one of ten buyers for not less than $400 million, probably appreciably more. The company owned the Post , Newsweek , plus several television stations in major markets. Those same properties are worth $2 billion now, so the person who would have paid $400 million would not have been crazy.
我可以举一个简单的例子：在1973年，华盛顿邮报公司的总市值为8千万美元。在这一天，你可以将其资产卖给十位买家之一，而且价格不低于4亿美元，甚至还能更高。该公司拥有华盛顿邮报、商业周刊以及数家重要的电视台。这些资产目前的价值为4亿美元，因此愿意支付4亿美元的买家并非疯子。
Now, if the stock had declined even further to a price that made the valuation $40 million instead of $80 million, its beta would have been greater. And to people that think beta measures risk, the cheaper price would have made it look riskier. This is truly
现在，如果股价继续下跌，该企业的市值从8千万美元跌到4千万美元，其bate值也上升。对于用bate值衡量风险的人来说，更低的价格使它受得更有风险。这真是仙境中的爱丽丝。我永远无法了解，用4千万美元，而非8千万美元购买价值4亿美元的资产，其风险竟然更高。事实上，如果你买进一堆这样的证券，而且稍微了解所谓的企业评价，则用8千万美元的价格买进4亿美元的资产，这笔交易基本上没有风险，尤其是分别以800万美元的价格买进10种价值4000万美元的资产，其风险更低。因为你不拥有4亿美元，所以你希望能够确实找到诚实而有能力的人，这并不困难。
You also have to have the knowledge to enable you to make a very general estimate about the value of the underlying businesses. But you do not cut it close. That is what Ben Graham meant by having a margin of safety. You don‘t try and buy businesses worth $83 million for $80 million. You leave yourself an enormous margin. When you build a bridge, you insist it can carry 30,000 pounds, but you only drive 10,000 pound trucks across it. And that same principle works in investing.
另外，你必须有知识，而且能够粗略地估计企业的价值。但是，你不需要精密的评价知识。这便是本杰明·葛拉厄姆所谓的安全边际。你不必试图以8000万美元的价格购买价值8300万美元的企业。你必须让自己保有相当的缓冲。架设桥梁时，你坚持载重量为3万磅，但你只准许1万磅的卡车穿梭其间。相同的原则也适用于投资领域。
In conclusion, some of the more commercially minded among you may wonder why I am writing this article. Adding many converts to the value approach will perforce narrow the spreads between price and value. I can only tell you that the secret has been out for 50 years, ever since Ben Graham and Dave Dodd wrote Security Analysis , yet I have seen no trend toward value investing in the 35 years that I‘ve practiced it. There seems to be some perverse human characteristic that likes to make easy things difficult. The academic world, if anything, has actually backed away from the teaching of value investing over the last 30 years. It‘s likely to continue that way. Ships will sail around the world but the Flat Earth Society will flourish. There will continue to be wide discrepancies between price and value in the marketplace, and those who read their Graham & Dodd will continue to prosper.
有些具备商业头脑的人可能会怀疑我撰写本文的动机：更多人皈依价值投资法，将会缩小价值与价格之间的差距。我只能够如此告诉各位，自从本杰明·格雷厄姆与大卫·多德出版《证券分析》，这个秘密已经流传了50年，在我奉行这项投资理论的35年中，我不曾目睹价值投资法蔚然成风。人的天性中似乎存在着偏执的特色，喜欢把简单的事情弄得更复杂。最近30年来，学术界如果有任何作为的话，乃完全背离了价值投资的教训。它很可能继续如此。船只将环绕地球而行。但地平之说仍会畅行无阻。在市场上，价格与价值之间还会存在着宽广的差值，而奉行格雷厄姆与多德理论的人也会繁荣不绝。
备注：正文不附表格，可参考查询文末所附的英文PDF文件
精彩的英文版(配漫画、照片和表格)PDF文件
THE SUPERINVESTORS OF GRAHAM-AND-DODDSVILLE
By The Columbia Business school Magazine
http://www.tilsonfunds.com/superinvestors.pdf
参考资料：
* 英文来源http://www.tilsonfunds.com
《THE INTELLIGENT INVESTOR》 (The Fourth Revised Edition)
*中文翻译：《巴菲特投资策略全书》、《投资与投机-拉近巴菲特与索罗斯》、罗伯特.P.迈斯《全面解读巴菲特》、VALUE杂志2006年4月号：刘建位编译:巴菲特最著名的演讲――价值投资为什么能够持续战胜市场
封面照片