巴菲特1992年关于价值、成长、dcf估值的讨论(中英文对照)

巴菲特1992年关于价值、成长、dcf估值的讨论

本文是巴菲特1992年致股东的信，讨论了价值、成长、估值等一系列的话题。

巴菲特认为以较低的pb/pe/高股息买入的公司未必就是投资，较高的pb/pe就未必不是投资。关键是看公司未来创造的现金流，然后是一定的折现率折算到现在。Dcf在数学公式上的计算并不复杂，但是在实践中确是难度陡增，因为即使是经验老道的资深投资者在估算公司未来的“息票”时也容易发生错误。

此外，巴菲特认为最好的business是能够产生高回报的公司，原因是这类business会受益于股利发放和股份回购。

下面是中英文对照，方便学习：

或许你又会问，那么到底应该如何决定价格够不够吸引人呢? 在回答这个问题时，大部分的分析师通常都会选择两种看起来对立的方法，"价值法"与"成长法"，事实上有许多投资专家会将这两种方法交替运用，就像是轮流换穿衣物一样。

But how, you will ask, does one decide what's "attractive"? In answering this question, most analysts feel they must choose between two approaches customarily thought to be in opposition: "value" and "growth." Indeed, many investment professionals see any mixing of the two terms as a form of intellectual cross-dressing.

我们觉得这种观念似是而非(为此我个人必须承认，好几年前我也是采用这种方法)，基本上我们认为这两种方法本为一体，在计算一家公司的价值时，成长当然是一件很重要的因素，这个变量将会使得所计算出来的价值从很小到极大，所造成的影响有可能是正面的，也有可能是负面的。

We view that as fuzzy thinking (in which, it must be confessed, I myself engaged some years ago). In our opinion, the two approaches are joined at the hip: Growth is always a component

in the calculation of value, constituting a variable whose importance can range from negligible to enormous and whose impact can be negative as well as positive.

此外，我们也认为所谓的”价值投资”根本就是废话，若是所投入的资金不是为了换取追求相对应的价值的话，那还算是投资吗? 明明知道所付出的成本已经高出其所应有的价值，而只是寄望在短期之内可以用更高的价格卖出根本就是投机的行为。(当然这种行为一点都不会违法，也不违反道德，只是就我们的观点来说，只是在玩吹气球游戏而已)。

In addition, we think the very term "value investing" is redundant. What is "investing" if it is not the act of seeking value at least sufficient to justify the amount paid? Consciously

paying more for a stock than its calculated value - in the hope that it can soon be sold for a still-higher price - should be labeled speculation (which is neither illegal, immoral nor - in our view - financially fattening).

不管适不适当，“价值投资”这个名词常常被人引用，一般而言，它代表投资人以较低的股价/净值比或是本益比或是高的股利收益率买进投资标的，很不幸的是，就算是具备以上所有的特点，投资人

还是很难确保所买到的投资标的确有此价值，从而确信他的投资是依照取得企业价值的原意在进行；相对地，以较高的股价/净值比或是本益比或是低的股利收益率买进投资标的，也不一定就代表不是一项有”价值”的投资。

Whether appropriate or not, the term "value investing" is widely used. Typically, it connotes the purchase of stocks having attributes such as a low ratio of price to book value, a low price-

earnings ratio, or a high dividend yield. Unfortunately, such characteristics, even if they appear in combination, are far from determinative as to whether an investor is indeed buying something for what it is worth and is therefore truly operating on the principle of obtaining value in his investments. Correspondingly, opposite characteristics - a high ratio of price to book value, a high price-earnings ratio, and a low dividend yield - are in no way inconsistent with a "value" purchase.

同样的企业成长本身而言，也很难保证就一定代表价值，当然成长通常会对价值有正面的影响，有时是相当重要的一项前提，但这种影响却不是绝对。例如投资人以往将大笔的资金投入到国内的航空