市场先生误判

2024 (explicit) · memo · 原文约 3433 词
译文与英文原文逐段对齐可在本页展开英文,也可打开发布者原址核对上下文。
打开来源正文

Memo to:

Memo to:

Oaktree Clients

Oaktree Clients

From:

From:

Howard Marks

Howard Marks

Re:

Re:

市场先生计算失误

Mr. Market Miscalculates

本杰明·格雷厄姆在 1949 年首次出版的《聪明的投资者》一书中,这位沃伦·巴菲特在哥伦比亚商学院的导师,引入了位他称之为“市场先生”的角色:

设想你在一家私营企业中持有一小部分股份,成本为 1000 美元。你的合伙人之一,名叫市场先生,确实非常殷勤。每天他都会告诉你他认为你的权益值多少钱,并据此提出要么买下你的股份,要么卖给你更多的股份。有时,他对价值的看法似乎合理,且符合你所了解的企业发展和前景。但往往,市场先生会让自己的热情或恐惧失控,他提出的价值在你看来近乎荒谬。

当然,格雷厄姆意在用市场先生来比喻整个市场。鉴于市场先生反复无常的行为,他每天为股票设定的价格可能会与公允价值偏离,有时甚至偏离得相当离谱。当他过度乐观时,你能以内在价值过高的价格卖给他;而当他过度恐慌时,你又能以基本面价值过低的价格从他那里买入。因此,他的错误判断为那些乐于利用这些机会的投资者提供了盈利机会。

In his book The Intelligent Investor, first published in 1949, Benjamin Graham, who was Warren Buffett’s teacher at Columbia Business School, introduced a fellow he called Mr. Market: Imagine that in some private business you own a small share that cost you $1,000. One of your partners, named Mr. Market, is very obliging indeed. Every day he tells you what he thinks your interest is worth and furthermore offers either to buy you out or to sell you an additional interest on that basis. Sometimes his idea of value appears plausible and justified by business developments and prospects as you know them. Often, on the other hand, Mr. Market lets his enthusiasm or his fears run away with him, and the value he proposes seems to you a little short of silly. Of course, Graham intended Mr. Market as a metaphor for the market as a whole. Given Mr. Market’s inconsistent behavior, the prices he assigns to stocks each day can diverge – sometimes wildly – from their fair value. When he’s overenthusiastic, you can sell to him at prices that are intrinsically too high. And when he’s overly fearful, you can buy from him at prices that are fundamentally too low. Thus, his miscalculations provide profit opportunities to investors interested in taking advantage of them. *

*

*

*

*

关于投资者的种种怪癖,值得说的话题很多,这些年来我已经分享了不少。但我们在八月第一周看到的市场急速下跌——以及随后的快速反弹——促使我把以前就此话题说过的内容整理一番,再加上我收藏里几张弥足珍贵的投资漫画,并补充几点新的观察。

先铺垫一下背景,我们回顾最近发生的事。由于新冠疫情、通胀飙升以及美联储快速加息,2022 年是股票和债券组合表现最糟糕的年份之一。市场情绪在 2022 年年中前后触底,投资者被一片悲观的前景压得喘不过气:“我们遭遇通胀,这很糟糕。而为遏制通胀而加息,必然带来衰退,这也很糟糕。”投资者几乎想不出什么利好。

后来气氛好转,到 2022 年年底,投资者围绕一个乐观叙事形成共识:经济增长放缓会令通胀回落,从而让美联储在 2023 年开始降息,进而带来经济活力与市场上涨。一轮显著的股市反弹就此启动,几乎不间断地上行直到本月。尽管 2022 年和 2023 年预期的降息至今没有兑现,但股市中的乐观情绪一路走高。标普 500 指数在截至 2024 年 7 月 31 日的 21 个月里上涨了 54%(不含股息)。那一天,美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔确认美联储正在接近降息,经济成长和股市进一步走高的前景似乎一切就绪。

但同一天,日本央行宣布其短期利率上调幅度为 17 年来最大(加到了高达 0.25%!)。这震动了日本股市,而人们对日本股市的

There’s a great deal to be said about investors’ foibles, and I’ve shared much of it over the years. But the rapid market decline we saw in the first week of August – along with the rapid rebound – compels me to pull together what I’ve said previously on the subject, along with some priceless investing cartoons from my collection, and add a few new observations. To set the scene, let’s review recent events. As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, soaring inflation, and the U.S. Federal Reserve’s rapid interest rate increases, 2022 was one of the worst years ever for the combination of stocks and bonds. Sentiment reached its low around the middle of 2022, with investors depressed by the universally negative outlook: “We have inflation, and that’s bad. And the rate increases to fight it are sure to bring on a recession, and that’s bad.” Investors could think of few positives. Then the mood lightened and, late in 2022, investors coalesced around a positive narrative: the slow economic growth would cause inflation to decline, and that would permit the Fed to start lowering rates in 2023, leading to economic vigor and market gains. A significant stock market rally began and continued nearly uninterrupted until this month. Although the rate cuts anticipated in 2022 and 2023 still haven’t materialized, optimism has been in the ascendency in the stock market. The S&P 500 stock index rose by 54% (not counting dividends) in the 21 months which ended on July 31, 2024. That day, Fed Chair Jerome Powell confirmed that the Fed was moving closer to a rate cut, and things appeared to be on track for economic growth and further stock market appreciation. But that same day, the Bank of Japan announced its biggest increase in its short-term interest rate in over 17 years (to a whopping 0.25%!). This shocked the Japanese stock market, to which people had been

2024 年橡树资本管理有限合伙企业

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

版权所有

All Rights Reserved

这一升温已持续一年多。此外,重要的是,这一公告对参与“套息交易”的投资者造成了严重冲击。多年来,日本极低——甚至为负——的利率意味着人们可以在日本廉价借款,然后将借来的资金投资于当地及其他地方任何有望带来更高回报的资产,从而获得“正利差”(也就是“免费资金”)。这催生了高杠杆头寸的建立。奇怪的是,利率上调区区 25 个基点竟会迫使其中一些头寸被平仓。但事实确实如此,导致那些参与此类操作的人纷纷削减杠杆,从而引发各类资产中的被动抛售。

从次日开始,美国公布的经济数据喜忧参半。8 月 1 日,我们得知制造业采购经理人指数下滑,初请失业金人数上升。另一方面,企业利润率依然向好,生产率增长则意外上行。一天后,我们又得知就业增长放缓,招聘人数增幅低于预期。7 月底失业率为 4.3%,高于 2023 年 4 月 3.4% 的低点。按历史标准衡量,这仍然非常低,但根据突然流行起来的“萨姆规则”(别问我怎么回事;我以前也没听说过),自 1970 年以来,三个月平均失业率较之前 12 个月低点上升 0.5 个百分点或更多,从未在未伴随经济衰退的情况下发生过。大约在同一时间,沃伦·巴菲特的伯克希尔·哈撒韦宣布已出售其巨额苹果持仓中的相当一部分。总体来看,这些消息构成了三重打击。由此引发的从乐观到悲观的反复转变,掀起了一场显著的股市暴跌。标普 500 指数在 8 月 1 日、2 日和 5 日连续三个交易日下跌,累计跌幅达 6.1%。几十年来我反复目睹的那些错误再次上演,如此明显,以至于我忍不住要把它们一一列举出来。

市场波动背后是什么?

8 月前两天,我在巴西,那里的人们常常请我解释这场突如其来的崩盘。我让他们参考我 2016 年写的备忘录《沙发上的思考》。其核心观察是,在现实世界中,事物在“相当不错”和“不太景气”之间波动;但在投资中,感知常常在“完美无瑕”和“毫无希望”之间摇摆。这大概说出了你需要知道的 80%。如果现实变化如此之小,为何估值(证券价格理应反映估值)的变化如此之大?答案在很大程度上与情绪变化有关。33 年前,在我写的第二份备忘录中,我曾写道:

证券市场的情绪波动就像钟摆的摆动……在狂喜与沮丧之间,在庆祝积极进展与纠结于负面消息之间,因此在高估与低估之间来回摆动。这种振荡是投资世界中最可靠的特征之一,而投资者心理在极端状态停留的时间似乎远比在“快乐的中点”多得多。(《第一季度表现》,1991 年 4 月)

情绪波动在很大程度上改变了投资者对事件的认知,导致价格疯狂波动。当价格像本月初那样崩盘时,并不是因为经济状况突然变糟,而是因为经济状况被人为视为变糟。有几个因素促成了这一过程:

warming for over a year. In addition, and importantly, the announcement played havoc with investors who had engaged in “the carry trade.” For years, Japan’s infinitesimal – and often negative – interest rates have meant that people could borrow cheaply in Japan and invest the borrowed funds in any number of assets, there and elsewhere, that promised to return more, for a “positive carry” (aka “free money”). This led to the establishment of highly levered positions. It seems odd that a quarter-point increase in interest rates could require some of these positions to be unwound. But it did, leading to motivated selling in a variety of asset classes as those who had engaged in the practice moved to cut their leverage. Starting the next day, the U.S. announced mixed economic news. On August 1, we learned that the Manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index had dipped and initial jobless claims had risen. On the other hand, corporate profit margins continued to look good, and gains in productivity surprised to the upside. A day later, we learned that employment gains had moderated, with hiring rising less than had been expected. The unemployment rate stood at 4.3% at the end of July, up from a low of 3.4% in April 2023. This was still very low by historical standards, but, according to the suddenly popular “Sahm Rule” (don’t complain to me; I’d never heard of it either), since 1970, an increase in the three-month average unemployment rate of 0.5 percentage points or more from the low of the prior 12 months has never occurred without the economy already being in recession. Around the same time, Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway announced that it had sold off a good part of its massive holding of Apple shares. In all, this news constituted a triple whammy. The resulting flip-flop from optimism to pessimism set off a significant stock market rout. The S&P 500 fell on three consecutive trading days – August 1, 2, and 5 – by a total of 6.1%. The replay of the mistakes I’ve witnessed for decades was so obvious that I can’t resist cataloging them below. What’s Behind the Market’s Volatility? On the first two days of August, I was in Brazil, where people often asked me to explain the sudden collapse. I referred them to my 2016 memo On the Couch. Its key observation was that in the real world, things fluctuate between ‘pretty good’ and ‘not so hot,’ but in investing, perception often swings from ‘flawless’ to ‘hopeless.’ That says about 80% of what you need to know on the subject. If reality changes so little, why do estimates of value (that’s what security prices are supposed to be) change so much? The answer has a lot to do with changes in mood. I wrote over 33 years ago, in only my second memo: The mood swings of the securities markets resemble the movement of a pendulum. . . . between euphoria and depression, between celebrating positive developments and obsessing over negatives, and thus between overpriced and underpriced. This oscillation is one of the most dependable features of the investment world, and investor psychology seems to spend much more time at the extremes than it does at a “happy medium.” (First Quarter Performance, April 1991) Mood swings do a lot to alter investors’ perception of events, causing prices to fluctuate madly. When prices collapse as they did at the start of this month, it’s not because conditions have suddenly become bad. Rather, they become perceived as bad. Several factors contribute to this process: • • •

情绪账本一边的事情被高度关注,

另一边的则容易被忽视,

同样地,人们倾向于按主流叙事来解读事物。

heightened awareness of things on one side of the emotional ledger, a tendency to overlook things on the other side, and similarly, a tendency to interpret things in a way that fits the prevailing narrative.

2024 年橡树资本管理有限合伙企业

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

2

2

版权所有,保留一切权利。

All Rights Reserved

这意味着,在好年景里,投资者一门心思盯着利好,对利空视而不见,凡事都往好处想。等到钟摆掉头,他们又反着来,结果天翻地覆。

支撑经济学的一个重要理念是理性预期理论,《投资百科》这样解释:

理性预期理论……假设个体的决策建立在三个主要因素之上:人的理性、可得信息,以及过往经验。

如果证券价格真是理性、冷静评估数据的结果,那么一条负面消息大概会让市场小幅下挫,下一条再跌一点,如此递进。但实际我们看到的是,乐观的市场能把单条坏消息当耳边风,直到坏消息攒成一大堆,临界点一到,多头缴械,溃败开场。鲁迪格·多恩布什那句关于经济学的名言在这里再贴切不过:“……事情拖得比你预期的更久,然后发生得比你想象的更快。”或者如我的合伙人谢尔顿·斯通说的:“气球泄气的速度远比充气时快。”

这个过程呈现出的非线性特征,说明背后起作用的东西和理性相去甚远。具体而言,就像生活里许多别的方面一样,认知失调在投资者心理中扮演着重要角色。人脑天生倾向于无视或排斥与既有信念相冲突的新信息,而投资者对此尤其擅长。

既然聊到非理性这个话题,我一直想找机会分享下面这张 2022 年 6 月 13 日的截图:

What this means is that in good times, investors obsess about the positives, ignore the negatives, and interpret things favorably. Then, when the pendulum swings, they do the opposite, with dramatic effects. One important idea underpinning economics is the theory of rational expectations, described by Investopedia as follows: The rational expectations theory . . . posits that individuals base their decisions on three primary factors: their human rationality, the information available to them, and their past experiences. If security prices were really the result of the rational, dispassionate evaluation of data, presumably one piece of negative information would move the market down a little, and the next such piece would move it down a bit more, and so forth. But instead, we see that an optimistic market is capable of ignoring individual pieces of bad news until a critical mass of bad news builds up, at which time a tipping point is reached, the optimists surrender, and a rout begins. Rudiger Dornbush’s great quote about economics is highly applicable here: “. . . things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.” Or as my partner Sheldon Stone says, “The air goes out of the balloon much faster than it went in.” The non-linear nature of this process suggests something very different from rationality is at work. In particular, as in many other aspects of life, cognitive dissonance plays a big part in investors’ psyches. The human brain is wired to ignore or reject incoming data that is at odds with prior beliefs, and investors are particularly good at this. While we’re on the subject of irrationality, I’ve been waiting for an opportunity to share the following screenshot from June 13, 2022:

2024 年橡树资本管理有限合伙企业

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

3

3

保留所有权利。

All Rights Reserved

这是市场上艰难的一天:由于美联储和其他央行采取行动,利率上升,资产价格因此承受巨大压力。但请看这张表。每个国家的股票指数都大幅下跌。每种货币相对美元都贬值。每类大宗商品都在跌。唯一上涨的是债券收益率……这意味着债券价格也跌了。那一天,难道就没有一个资产或国家没有贬值吗?黄金呢,它不是应该在经济困难时期表现好吗?我要说的是,在市场大幅波动时,没有人会做理性分析或加以区分。他们只是一股脑地把孩子和洗澡水一起倒掉,主要是因为心理上的摇摆。正如那句老话所说:“危机时刻,所有相关性都趋近于 1。”

此外,表中的数据还表现出极端行情中常出现的另一个现象:传染效应。美国市场出了点问题。欧洲投资者把这视为麻烦的迹象,于是抛售。亚洲投资者察觉到有负面情况在酝酿,于是在隔夜交易中抛售。而当美国投资者第二天早上进场时,他们被亚洲的负面发展吓到了,这印证了他们悲观的情绪倾向,于是也抛售。这很像小时候玩的传话游戏:消息在链条中传递时可能被误传,但仍然会引发没有根据的行动。

当心理剧烈摇摆时,毫无意义的言论也可能被赋予分量。因此,在本月早些时候的三天下跌中,有人观察到外国投资者卖出日本股票的数量超过了买入,投资者对此的反应仿佛这件事意义重大。但如果外国投资者净卖出,那日本投资者必然净买入。这两种现象中,难道有哪一种应该被看得比另一种更重要吗?如果有,是哪一个?

从理性分析角度看,让事情更加复杂的是,投资世界中的大多数进展都可以根据当时的主导情绪,被解读为正面或负面。

This was a tough day in the markets: interest rates were rising thanks to the actions of the Fed and other central banks, and asset prices were under significant pressure as a result. But take a look at the table. Every country’s equity index was down significantly. Every currency was down relative to the dollar. Every commodity was down. Only one thing was up: bond yields . . . meaning bond prices were down, too. Wasn’t there one asset or country whose value didn’t decline that day? What about gold, which is supposed to do well in difficult times? My point here is that, during big market moves, no one performs rational analysis or makes distinctions. They just throw out the baby with the bathwater, primarily because of psychological swings. As the old saying goes, “in times of crisis, all correlations go to 1.” Further, the data in the table exhibit an additional phenomenon that’s often present during extreme moves: contagion. Something goes wrong in the U.S. market. European investors take that as a sign of trouble, so they sell. Asian investors detect that something negative is afoot, so they sell overnight. And when U.S. investors come in the next morning, they’re spooked by the negative developments in Asia, which confirm their pessimistic inclinations, so they sell. This is a lot like the game of telephone we played when I was little: the message may be miscommunicated as it’s passed down the chain, but it still encourages ill-founded actions. When psychology is swinging radically, meaningless statements can be given weight. Thus, during the three-day decline earlier this month, it was observed that foreigners sold more Japanese stocks than they bought, and investors reacted as if this meant something. But if foreigners sold on balance, Japanese investors must have bought on balance. Should either of these phenomena be treated as more significant than the other? If so, which one? Further complicating things in terms of rational analysis is the fact that most developments in the investment world can be interpreted both positively and negatively, depending on the prevailing mood.

2024 年橡树资本管理有限合伙公司

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

4

4

版权所有,保留所有权利。

All Rights Reserved

还有一则经典漫画,用更少的文字一语道破了这种模糊性。它极其适用于引发这篇备忘录的那场市场震动。

Another classic cartoon sums up this ambiguity in fewer words. It’s highly applicable to the market tremor that inspired this memo.

还有一个误判来源,是投资者倾向于乐观和一厢情愿。投资者整体——尤其是股票投资者——从定义上说,必然是乐观主义者。除了对未来抱有正面预期(或强烈渴望财富增长)的人,谁愿意今天掏出真金白银,只因为将来有可能拿回更多?

沃伦·巴菲特已故的搭档查理·芒格,经常引用古希腊政治家狄摩西尼的话:“世上再没有比自欺更容易的事。因为人心里想要的,他也就信以为真。”一个绝佳的例子是“金发姑娘思维”:相信经济既不会强到引发通胀,也不会弱到陷入衰退。事情有时确实如此——眼下可能就是这种情况——但概率远没有投资者设想的那么高。

偏向乐观的预期,会助长投资者的激进行为。如果这种行为在好年头得到回报,通常会有更多激进接踵而至。很少有投资者意识到:其一,好消息的延续可能有尽头;其二,一轮上涨可能强到过头,使下跌成为必然。

多年来,我一直引用巴菲特的话,警告投资者收敛热情:“当投资者忘掉公司利润平均增长 7% 这个事实时,他们往往会陷入麻烦。”换句话说,如果企业利润增速平均为 7%,那么当股票一段时间内每年上涨 20%(就像整个 90 年代那样)时,投资者难道不该开始担心吗?我觉得这句话太精彩了,便去问巴菲特他何时说过。可惜,他回答说他没说过。但我仍认为这是一个重要的警示。

那次记错了出处,让我想起约翰·肯尼斯·加尔布雷思对金融狂热最重要成因之一的一针见血的表述:“金融记忆的极度短暂。”正是这种特质,让乐观的投资者敢于激进操作,而不会因知道此类行为在过去的后果而困扰。而且,它让投资者轻易忘记过去的错误,只凭最新奇迹般的事态发展就兴冲冲地投入。

One more source of miscalculation is investors’ tendency toward optimism and wishful thinking. Investors in general – and equity investors in particular – must, by definition, be optimists. Who other than people with positive expectations (and/or a strong desire for increased wealth) would be willing to part with money today based on the possibility of getting back more in the future? Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett’s late partner, routinely quoted the ancient Greek statesman Demosthenes, who said, “Nothing is easier than self-deceit. For what each man wishes, that he also believes to be true.” One great example is “Goldilocks thinking”: the belief that the economy will be neither strong enough to bring on inflation nor weak enough to lapse into recession. Things sometimes work out that way – as may be the case right now – but not nearly as often as investors posit. Expectations that incline toward the positive encourage aggressive behavior on the part of investors. And if this behavior is rewarded in good times, still more aggressiveness usually ensues. Rarely do investors realize that (a) there can be a limit to the run of good news or (b) an upswing can be so strong as to be excessive, rendering a downswing inevitable. For years, I quoted Buffett as having warned investors to temper their enthusiasm: “When investors lose track of the fact that corporate profits grow at 7% on average, they tend to get into trouble.” In other words, if corporate profit growth averages 7%, shouldn’t investors begin to worry if stocks appreciate by 20% a year for a while (as they did throughout the 1990s)? I thought it was such a good quote that I asked Buffett when he said it. Unfortunately, he answered that he hadn’t. But I still think it’s an important warning. That inaccurate recollection reminds me of John Kenneth Galbraith’s trenchant reference to one of the most important causes of financial euphoria: “the extreme brevity of the financial memory.” It’s this trait that allows optimistic investors to engage in aggressive behavior, untroubled by knowledge of what such behavior led to in the past. Further, it makes it easy for investors to forget past errors and invest blithely on the basis of the newest miraculous development.

2024 年橡树资本管理有限合伙公司

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

5

5

版权所有,保留一切权利。

All Rights Reserved

最后,如果投资世界中存在像万有引力那样恒定不变的规则,可以指望它总能带来同样的结果,那么市场或许会稳定得多。但这样的规则并不存在,因为市场的根基不是自然法则,而是投资者心理这座流沙。

举个例子,有一条流传已久的格言,说我们应该“闻风而动买入,见报兑现卖出”。也就是说,利好消息预期的出现是买入信号,因为预期往往还会继续攀升。而当消息真正落地时,这一过程就结束了,因为推动上涨的动力已经兑现,再无新的利好能把市场推得更高。但就在一个月前那种无忧无虑的氛围里,我告诉我的合伙人布鲁斯·卡什,也许当时的主导心态已经变成了“闻风而动买入,见报照买不误”。换句话说,投资者表现得好像任何时候都是买入的好时机。理性地说,一个人不应该把利好事件的可能性算两次——既在事件可能性出现时算一次,又在事件实际发生时再算一次。但狂喜情绪往往会让人失去理智。

另一个缺乏有意义指导准则的例子,可以从我档案里最旧的一则剪报中看出端倪:

持续的板块轮动和轮换模式表明,应日益重视在相对弱势时买入股票,在相对强势时卖出股票。这与早期某些阶段强调相对强势行之有效形成了鲜明对比。(洛布·罗兹公司,1976 年)

Finally, the investment world might be less unstable if there were immutable rules – like the one governing gravity – that could be counted on to always produce the same results. But there are no such rules, since markets aren’t built on natural laws, but rather the shifting sands of investor psychology. For example, there’s a long-running adage that says we should “buy on rumor and sell on news.” That is, the introduction of favorable expectations is a buy signal, because expectations often continue to rise. That ends when the news arrives, however, because the impetus for gains has been realized and no further good news remains to take the market higher. But in the carefree environment of a month ago, I told my partner Bruce Karsh that maybe the prevailing attitude had become “buy on rumor and buy on news.” In other words, investors were acting as though it was always a good time to buy. Rationally, one shouldn’t price in the possibility of a favorable event twice: both when the possibility of the event is introduced and when the event occurs. But euphoria can get the better of people. Another example of the absence of meaningful guidelines can be seen in this excerpt from one of the oldest clippings in my file: A continuing pattern of consolidation and group rotation suggests that increasing emphasis should be placed on buying stocks on relative weakness and selling them on relative strength. This would be a marked contrast to some earlier periods where emphasizing relative strength proved to be effective. (Loeb, Rhoades & Co., 1976)

2024 年橡树资本管理有限合伙企业

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

6

6

版权所有。

All Rights Reserved

简而言之,有时涨幅最大的东西应当预期继续领涨,而有时涨幅最小的东西则应当预期涨势最猛。对此,你们中很多人可能会回应“那还用说”。说到底,投资者能遵循的有效规则少之又少。卓越的投资始终归结于精确的分析和独特的洞察力,而非对公式和条条框框的机械遵从。

In short, sometimes the things that have gone up the most should be expected to continue to go up the most, and sometimes the things that have gone up the least should be expected to go up the most. To which many of you might respond “duh.” Bottom line: there are few effective rules for investors to follow. Superior investing always comes down to skillful analysis and superior insight, not adherence to formulas and guidelines. *

*

*

*

*

多变的心理、扭曲的认知、过度反应、认知失调、快速蔓延的传染效应、非理性、一厢情愿、健忘,以及缺乏可靠的原则。这一长串毛病,共同构成了市场极端高低点及其间剧烈波动的主因。本·格雷厄姆说过,长期来看,市场是一台称重机,衡量每项资产的价值并给出合理定价。但在短期内,它只是一台投票机,驱动它的投资者情绪波动剧烈,几乎不含理性,给出的每日价格也常常与智慧没多大关系。

与其重新发明轮子,不如复述一下我在过去两份备忘录里说过的话:

尤其是在下跌行情中,许多投资者把智慧赋予市场,指望市场告诉他们正在发生什么、该怎么办。这是你能犯的最大错误之一。正如本·格雷厄姆指出的,日常市场不是基本面分析师,它是投资者情绪的风向标。你不能太拿它当回事。市场参与者对基本面真实状况的了解有限,买卖背后可能存在的任何理性,都被情绪波动掩盖了。把最近全球下跌解读为市场“知道”艰难时期将至,那是错的。(《这并不容易》,2015 年 9 月)

我的结论是,市场不会逐日评估内在价值,在危机期间更做不好。因此,市场价格波动对基本面的说明作用有限。即便在最好的时期,当投资者由基本面而非心理驱动时,市场显示的也只是参与者认为的价值,而非真实价值。价值这东西,市场并不比普通投资者知道得更多。而普通投资者的建议显然帮不了你成为高于平均水平的投资者。

基本面——经济、公司或资产的前景——不会逐日大变。所以,每日价格变化主要关乎(a)市场心理的变化,从而(b)持有或抛售意愿的变化。每日价格波动越剧烈,这两点就越成立。大幅波动表明心理正在根本性转变。(《市场知道什么?》,2016 年 1 月)

市场随其最动荡参与者的任性而波动:这些人在消息好、热情高涨时,愿意以较之前价格大幅溢价买入;在消息坏、悲观蔓延时,愿意以较之前价格大幅折价卖出。因此,正如我在《躺在沙发上》里写的,市场每隔一阵子,就需要去看一次心理医生。

Volatile psychology, skewed perception, overreaction, cognitive dissonance, rapid-fire contagion, irrationality, wishful thinking, forgetfulness, and the lack of dependable principles. That’s quite a laundry list of ills. Together, they constitute the main cause of extreme market highs and lows and are responsible for the volatile swings between them. Ben Graham said that, in the long run, the market is a weighing machine that assesses the merit of each asset and assigns an appropriate price. But in the short term, it’s merely a voting machine, and the investor sentiment that moves it swings wildly, incorporating little rationality and assigning daily prices that often reflect little in terms of intelligence. Rather than try to reinvent the wheel, I’ll repeat some of what I’ve said in two past memos: Especially during downdrafts, many investors impute intelligence to the market and look to it to tell them what’s going on and what to do about it. This is one of the biggest mistakes you can make. As Ben Graham pointed out, the day-to-day market isn’t a fundamental analyst; it’s a barometer of investor sentiment. You just can’t take it too seriously. Market participants have limited insight into what’s really happening in terms of fundamentals, and any intelligence that could be behind their buys and sells is obscured by their emotional swings. It would be wrong to interpret the recent worldwide drop as meaning the market “knows” tough times lay ahead. (It’s Not Easy, September 2015) My bottom line is that markets don’t assess intrinsic value from day to day, and certainly they don’t do a good job during crises. Thus, market price movements don’t say much about fundamentals. Even in the best of times, when investors are driven by fundamentals rather than psychology, markets show what the participants think value is, rather than what value really is. Value is something the market doesn’t know any more about than the average investor. And advice from the average investor obviously can’t help you be an above average investor. Fundamentals – the outlook for an economy, company or asset – don’t change much from day to day. As a result, daily price changes are mostly about (a) changes in market psychology and thus (b) changes in who wants to own something or un-own something. These two statements become increasingly valid the more daily prices fluctuate. Big fluctuations show that psychology is changing radically. (What Does the Market Know?, January 2016) The market fluctuates at the whim of its most volatile participants: those who are willing (a) to buy at a big premium to the former price when the news is good and enthusiasm is riding high and (b) to sell at a big discount from the former price when the news is bad and pessimism is rampant. Thus, as I wrote in On the Couch, every once in a while, the market needs a trip to the shrink.

2024 橡树资本管理有限合伙公司

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

7

7

保留所有权利

All Rights Reserved

需要指出的是,正如我的合伙人约翰·弗兰克所言,与每家公司的股东总数相比,推动股价在泡沫中上涨或暴跌中下跌的其实只需要很少一部分人。一家一个月前还值 100 亿美元的公司,如今股价所隐含的估值是 120 亿美元或 80 亿美元,这并不代表整家公司会按这个价格易手,成交的只是极小的一部分。即便如此,少数情绪化的投资者就能把价格推到远超合理水平的位置。

最糟糕的做法,是在其他投资者陷入这些非理性的癫狂时跟着下场。远为更好的选择,是站在场边,带着几分玩味地看着这一切,心里有底,因为你知道市场是如何运作的。但更好的是看清市场先生的过度反应究竟是什么,然后顺着他来——在他急于买入时把股票卖给他,不管价格多高;在他拼命想脱手时从他手里买进。当年本·格雷厄姆在介绍市场先生时,我在第 1 页引用了这段话:

如果你是一位审慎的投资者或明智的商人,你会让市场先生每天报价的决定你对这 1000 美元企业权益的看法吗?只有当你同意他的看法,或者你想和他做交易时,你才会。他报出高得离谱的价格时,你尽可以高高兴兴地卖给他;他的价格很低时,你同样高高兴兴地从他那里买进。但其余时间,更明智的做法是,依据公司关于经营和财务状况的完整报告,形成你自己对这些持仓价值的判断。

换句话说,投资者的首要任务是在价格偏离内在价值时留意到这一点,并想清楚该如何应对。靠情绪?不。靠分析?是的。

2024 年 8 月 22 日

It’s important to note that, as my partner John Frank points out, in comparison to the total number who own each company, it takes relatively few people to drive prices up during bubbles or down during crashes. When shares in a company that was worth $10 billion a month ago trade at prices implying a valuation of $12 billion or $8 billion, it doesn’t mean the whole company would change hands at these prices; just a tiny sliver. Regardless, a few emotional investors can move prices much more than should be the case. The worst thing you can do is join in when other investors go off on these irrational jags. It’s far better to watch with bemusement from the sidelines, buttressed by an understanding of how markets work. But better still to see Mr. Market’s overreactions for what they are and accommodate him, selling to him when he’s eager to buy regardless of how high the price is, and buying from him when he desperately wants out. Here’s how Ben Graham followed the introduction of Mr. Market that I included on page 1: If you are a prudent investor or a sensible businessman will you let Mr. Market’s daily communication determine your view of the value of your $1,000 interest in the enterprise? Only in case you agree with him, or in case you want to trade with him. You may be happy to sell out to him when he quotes you a ridiculously high price, and equally happy to buy from him when his price is low. But the rest of the time you will be wiser to form your own ideas of the value of your holdings, based on full reports from the company about its operations and financial position. In other words, it’s the primary job of the investor to take note when prices stray from intrinsic value and figure out how to act in response. Emotion? No. Analysis? Yes. August 22, 2024

待翻译的段落内容为“2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.”,这是一家公司的名称,其中未包含需翻译的叙述性文本。根据术语表,Oaktree Capital Management 无固定译名,保留英文原文。因此,译文直接输出该名称。

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

2024 Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

8

8

版权所有。

All Rights Reserved