上周一，知名私募股權(quán)投資人托尼·詹姆斯在CNBC上對(duì)股市發(fā)表了與眾不同而且極為悲觀的看法。他的觀點(diǎn)已在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上引發(fā)了熱議，而且值得進(jìn)一步探討。在電視商業(yè)節(jié)目中幾乎聽不到這樣的分析，因?yàn)閴艛噙@些節(jié)目的是永遠(yuǎn)樂觀向上的華爾街分析師、交易員和市場(chǎng)策略分析師，而他的話恰恰是投資者需要聽到的“逆耳忠言”。

作為黑石集團(tuán)總裁兼首席運(yùn)營(yíng)官，詹姆斯周一上午參加了CNBC早間節(jié)目Squawk Box。其目的是簡(jiǎn)要介紹自己的新書，該書內(nèi)容是倡導(dǎo)通過政策來實(shí)施鼓勵(lì)勞動(dòng)者為退休存錢。主持人不可避免地詢問了詹姆斯對(duì)始于上周的股市拋售大潮有何看法。在探討市場(chǎng)的短短2分12秒時(shí)間里，詹姆斯說廣泛獲得認(rèn)可的高股價(jià)依據(jù)，以及今后還會(huì)大漲的預(yù)期都是一廂情愿，他還用幾條關(guān)鍵理由進(jìn)行了解釋。

股票估值過高

主持人問：“你是說股市估值過高嗎？”詹姆斯答道：“是的?！苯酉聛硭嬲f：“今年某個(gè)時(shí)候股市很可能回調(diào)10-20%?！边@讓主播貝基·奎克、安德魯·羅斯·索金和嘉賓主持凱文·奧利里大吃一驚。

為什么股票價(jià)值高估了這么多而且容易急劇下跌呢？詹姆斯說：“如果你問人們[對(duì)股市的看法]，他們說的并不是股票估值合理，而是如果你真的想獲得回報(bào)，股市是唯一的去處。”一位主播隨后提出了通常的看法，那就是因?yàn)檫@些年來利率一直處于極低水平，股票看來是唯一能獲取出色回報(bào)的途徑，即便在股價(jià)很高的情況下。

利率或許很快就會(huì)上升

顯然，詹姆斯對(duì)“唯一途徑”的說法并不感冒。要想知道原因，就讓我們暫時(shí)后退一步。投資者期望通過持有股票獲得的回報(bào)取決于兩個(gè)因素：一個(gè)是能和股票相提并論的無風(fēng)險(xiǎn)債券剔除通脹因素后的利率，另一個(gè)則是股票風(fēng)險(xiǎn)溢價(jià)（ERP），也就是人們要求的超過國(guó)債的那部分額外收益率，用于補(bǔ)償持有股票的不確定性。如果實(shí)際利率和ERP大幅上升，股價(jià)就可能下跌，原因是投資者給未來收益打的折扣實(shí)際上要高得多。

詹姆斯謹(jǐn)慎地表示利率或許很快就會(huì)猛漲。他說：“經(jīng)濟(jì)已經(jīng)上行了一段時(shí)間。如果你擔(dān)心利率和通脹，[新的減稅措施]帶來的刺激可能讓我們轉(zhuǎn)而向加息邁進(jìn)?！泵绹?guó)10年期國(guó)債收益率已升至2.8%的四年高點(diǎn)。詹姆斯其實(shí)是在說，實(shí)際利率上升將壓低目前的極高估值?？赡芩€加了句話——當(dāng)市場(chǎng)開始波動(dòng)，就像剛剛出現(xiàn)的情況那樣，投資者持有股票時(shí)要求的ERP就會(huì)比現(xiàn)在高得多。

實(shí)際上，當(dāng)前看好股市所依據(jù)的假設(shè)是：目前極低的實(shí)際利率和股票略高于債券的收益率將一直持續(xù)下去。但情況并非如此，實(shí)際利率和ERP都一直在變，而且它們只有一個(gè)方向，那就是上漲，這推動(dòng)股價(jià)向反方向發(fā)展。

樂觀派對(duì)減稅的期望太大

去年12月美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)通過大規(guī)模削減公司稅法案，股市再次得到有力提振。但詹姆斯認(rèn)為，大幅削減公司稅帶來的初始收益中，有很大一部分可能不會(huì)流入利潤(rùn)中，反而會(huì)成為新的支出。換句話說，稅率從35%降至21%帶來的這部分初始收益可能迅速在公司競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中消耗殆盡。這有可能（也應(yīng)該）有助于經(jīng)濟(jì)，但未必對(duì)股東有好處。

詹姆斯說：“我覺得市場(chǎng)高估了一件事，那就是減稅將帶來的利潤(rùn)增長(zhǎng)。許多公司高管都在說減免的稅額里給股東的會(huì)有多少，用于研發(fā)的會(huì)有多少，提高工資的會(huì)有多少。市場(chǎng)認(rèn)為所有這一切都會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)換成利潤(rùn)?！?

事實(shí)卻非如此。最有可能的情況是，減稅鼓勵(lì)公司投資和擴(kuò)張，因?yàn)樾峦顿Y的回報(bào)率將上升。和35%的稅率相比，21%的稅率會(huì)讓比以前多得多的投資看起來可以盈利。但要實(shí)現(xiàn)增長(zhǎng)，公司就需要在廠房、專利和收購(gòu)方面投入重金，并在這個(gè)過程中把大量資金花在員工、研發(fā)和客戶服務(wù)上。隨著成本上升，資本回報(bào)率將回到正常水平。稅收是一項(xiàng)成本，如果某個(gè)既定行業(yè)中大家的成本都突然下降，大多數(shù)收益就會(huì)流向消費(fèi)者和企業(yè)員工。削減公司稅預(yù)示著盈利能力極高的新時(shí)代是華爾街的神話。

令人震驚的警告還是常識(shí)？

美國(guó)股市已從1月底的高點(diǎn)回落4%。如果再下滑16%，也就是按詹姆斯預(yù)測(cè)的下跌區(qū)間高端計(jì)算，標(biāo)普500指數(shù)就會(huì)回調(diào)到2300點(diǎn)，過去12個(gè)月的漲幅就會(huì)被一掃而空。

20%的跌幅將使標(biāo)普500指數(shù)的市盈率從目前逾24倍的高點(diǎn)降至19倍，接近1990年以來的平均值。但仍不會(huì)有人大張旗鼓地推薦買入股票，原因是公司業(yè)績(jī)接近歷史最高點(diǎn)，也就是說市盈率中的分母，或者說“公司收益”處于較高水平。因此，即便按照詹姆斯設(shè)想的最糟糕情景，股價(jià)依然偏高。

對(duì)看好股市的人來說，聽到詹姆斯的話就像一頭扎進(jìn)冰水里。得意的投資者應(yīng)對(duì)這番“警世之言”表示歡迎，并且遵從詹姆斯的警告。在托尼·詹姆斯和華爾街集體思維的對(duì)決中，勝者顯然是詹姆斯。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Charlie

審稿：夏林

?

Tony James, a renowned private equity investor, presented a highly contrarian, sharply negative view on the stock market on CNBC on Monday. His call has already set the Internet abuzz, but it’s worth a closer look. It’s the kind of analysis you seldom hear on TV business shows, where the coverage is dominated by Wall Street analysts, traders and market strategists who are relentlessly upbeat. And it’s exactly the tough talk that investors need to hear.

On Monday morning James, the president and COO of Blackstone, appeared on CNBC’s early morning show Squawk Box. He was there chiefly to discuss his new book, which advocates policies encouraging workers to save for retirement. Inevitably, the hosts asked James for his perspective on the big selloff that began the previous week. In just two minutes and 12 seconds of discussion on the markets, James made several crucial points explaining why widely accepted justifications for today’s lofty prices, and forecasts of big gains to come, amount to wishful thinking.

Stocks are overvalued

Asked, “Are you saying the stock market is overvalued?” James replied, “Yes,” then proceeded to shock anchors Becky Quick and Andrew Ross Sorkin and guest host Kevin O’Leary by warning, “We could easily see a 10% to 20% correction at some time this year.”

Why are shares so overpriced and vulnerable to a steep fall? “If you ask people [about stocks], they don’t make the case that stocks are fairly valued,” said James. “They make the case that if you want any return, it’s the only place to go.” An anchor then expressed the conventional view that since interest rates have remained extremely low for years, stocks–even at high prices–look like the only alternative offering decent returns.

Rates may spike soon

Clearly, James isn’t buying the “only-place-to-go” argument. To understand why, let’s step back for a moment. The returns investors expect for owning equities depend on two factors: The inflation-adjusted rate on risk-free bonds that compete with stocks; and what’s known as the equity risk premium (ERP), the extra margin that folks demand–over and above the yield on Treasuries–to compensate for the uncertainty of holding stocks. If the real rate and the ERP rise substantially, equity prices are likely to fall, since in effect, investors are applying a much higher discount rate to future earnings.

James cautioned that rates may soon jump. “The economy has been picking up for a while,” he said. “If you’re worried about interest rates and inflation, the stimulus [from the new tax cuts] could be the thing that tips us over to a rate spike.” The yield on the 10-year Treasury has already surged to 2.8%, a four-year high. James is essentially saying that rising real rates will undermine today’s giant valuations. He might have added that when markets turn volatile–and they just did–investors are going to demand a much higher ERP to own stocks.

In reality, the present-day bull case relies on the assumption that today’s slender real rates and the narrow extra margin stocks offer versus bonds are a permanent fixture. They’re not; both real rates and the ERP are constantly changing. And they’re headed just one way, up, pushing stock prices in the opposite direction.

The bulls are betting too much on the tax cut

Stock prices got another big boost after Congress enacted a huge package of corporate tax cuts in December. But James argues that much of the initial bounty from the sharp reduction in corporate taxes could flow not to profits, but to new spending. In other words, companies could quickly compete away the early extra profits flowing from the reduction in rates from 35% to 21%. That could (and should) be helpful to the economy, but it won’t necessarily boost shareholders.

“One thing I think the market is over-estimating is the amount of added earnings that the tax cut will bring,” said James. “One of the things that lots of executive are talking about is how much of the tax cut goes to shareholders, how much of it goes to R&D, to higher wages. The market’s thinking it all goes to earnings.”

It won’t. The most likely outcome: the cuts encourage companies to invest and expand because the rates of return on new investment will rise. A lot more investments will look profitable at 21% than at 35%. But to grow, companies will need to invest heavily in plants, patents and acquisitions, and in the process spend a lot more on workers, R&D and customer service. As costs rise, returns on capital will return to normal levels. Taxes are a cost, and if everyone’s costs in an given industry suddenly fall, the benefits will mostly flow to consumers and workers. It’s a Wall Street myth that lower corporate taxes herald a new era of sumptuous profitability.

Shocking warning, or common sense?

Stock prices have tumbled by 4% from the highs of late January. If the S&P 500 drops by another 16%, the high end of James’s prediction, the index would retreat to 2300. All the gains of the past 12 months would vanish.

A 20% decline would lower the P/E on the S&P 500 from it’s current, highly elevated status of over 24 to 19, around its average since 1990. Stocks still wouldn’t be a screaming buy, because earnings are near historic peaks, meaning that the denominator, the “E,” is inflated. So even under James’s most dire scenario, stocks would remain expensive.

For the bulls, listening to James is like getting doused in ice water. Complacent investors should welcome the jolt and heed his warning. In the contest of Tony James versus Wall Street group-think, James is the clear winner.