????2011年是“巴菲特百萬美元賭局”（The Million-Dollar Buffett Bet）十年之約的第四年，現(xiàn)在，這一年的結(jié)果已經(jīng)出來了。沃倫?巴菲特在這場(chǎng)投資收益的競(jìng)賽中賭定，一支標(biāo)準(zhǔn)普爾500指數(shù)基金的表現(xiàn)將超過與其打賭的紐約資產(chǎn)管理公司Protégé Partners所選5支對(duì)沖基金組合的平均回報(bào)率。

????目前的名次（我們很快就將揭曉）不可避免地會(huì)讓人想起這場(chǎng)十年之賭的第一年，也就是2008年，當(dāng)時(shí)的結(jié)果剛出來時(shí)巴菲特的反應(yīng)。

????那一年，雙方在市場(chǎng)中都遭遇了重創(chuàng)。但Protégé所選基金（根據(jù)賭局約定，這些基金的名稱從未公開披露過）平均“僅”下跌了23.9%。而巴菲特選出的Vanguard Admiral基金則下跌了37%.

????巴菲特當(dāng)時(shí)的位置遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)落在后面，他在接受《財(cái)富》（Fortune）雜志采訪時(shí)稱：“我只希望伊索的預(yù)言沒錯(cuò)，烏龜最終將戰(zhàn)勝野兔。”

????后來，事情的發(fā)展確實(shí)與龜兔賽跑的情節(jié)相似。巴菲特的指數(shù)基金“烏龜”在第二年和第三年連續(xù)兩年勝出，而且（我在這里首次披露）第四年也占據(jù)了上風(fēng)。倒不是說2011年的獲勝者有多么了不起：Admiral基金僅漲了2.08%，但那5支“基金中的基金”卻平均下跌了1.86%。

????這說明烏龜和野兔在第四年底都已氣喘吁吁，根本沒什么可值得慶賀的。Protégé仍然略微領(lǐng)先。但其“基金中的基金”四年來平均下跌了5.89%。Admiral基金則跌了6.27%。

????如果我們將這場(chǎng)賭約比作一場(chǎng)棒球比賽，四局后比分仍為0：0的平局，雙方都沒有得分，只能用力擊打，而所有觀看比賽的粉絲都興味索然。

????不過，這場(chǎng)賭局倒是催生了一項(xiàng)不錯(cuò)的投資——完全出乎巴菲特和Protégé的預(yù)料。這里補(bǔ)充一點(diǎn)背景信息：當(dāng)初的想法是為了確保能向獲勝者選定的慈善機(jī)構(gòu)提供100萬美元的資金。如果巴菲特勝出，這些錢將捐獻(xiàn)給奧馬哈的慈善機(jī)構(gòu)Girls Inc.；如果Protégé排在首位，受益者將是無保留援助兒童基金會(huì) （Absolute Returns for Kids）。

????為了確保賭約結(jié)束時(shí)能提供這100萬美元，巴菲特和Protégé分別出資約32萬美元購買了合計(jì)64萬美元的零息美國國債，預(yù)計(jì)到賭約結(jié)束時(shí)，這筆國債將價(jià)值100萬美元。這一擔(dān)保品由舊金山恒金基金會(huì)（Long Now Foundation）監(jiān)管；該基金會(huì)管理著很多下注方設(shè)立的“長(zhǎng)線賭約”。

????Results are in for 2011, the fourth year of the 10-year wager that is sometimes called, rather loosely, The Million-Dollar Buffett Bet. In this competition about investment performance, Warren Buffett is contending that an S&P 500 index fund will outscore the average return of five hedge funds of funds picked by his betting opponent, New York asset management firm Protégé Partners.

????The standings now -- which we will reveal in a minute -- inevitably bring to mind Buffett's reaction after the bet's first year, 2008.

????Both sides were clobbered in that market year from hell. But Protégé's fund-of-funds picks (whose names, by the terms of the bet, have never been publicly disclosed) were down, on the average, by "only" 23.9%. Vanguard's Admiral shares, which are Buffett's entry in the bet, lost a dismal 37%.

????From this way-behind position, Buffett was quoted in Fortune as saying, "I just hope that Aesop was right when he envisioned the tortoise overtaking the hare."

????And that's close to what has since happened. Buffett's index-fund tortoise won the second and third years and -- you are reading it here first -- also prevailed in the fourth. Not that the 2011 winner was much of a star: Admiral shares were up only 2.08%. But the five funds of funds, on the average, were down 1.86%.

????All of which leaves tortoise and hare gasping alongside each other at the end of four years -- and having absolutely nothing to cheer about. Protégé is still a bit ahead. But its funds of funds, on the average, are in the minus column for the period by 5.89%. Admiral shares are down 6.27%.

????If we really mix metaphors and think about this contest as a baseball game, what we have here is a 0-to-0 tie after four innings, with each side doing nothing but striking out and alienating every fan watching.

????The wager, however, has produced one sterling investment over the four years -- and that was made, without brilliance aforethought, by Buffett and Protégé themselves. A little background: The idea was to set terms that would deliver $1 million to a charity chosen by the winner. If Buffett triumphs, the money goes to Girls Inc. of Omaha; if it's Protégé on top, the beneficiary is Absolute Returns for Kids.

????To ensure that $1 million would be there at the end of the bet, Buffett and Protégé each put up roughly $320,000 to buy a zero-coupon Treasury security. The total of about $640,000 was used to purchase a bond that will be worth $1 million at the bet's conclusion. This collateral is being overseen by the Long Now Foundation of San Francisco, which administers "long bets" set up by any competitors wanting to memorialize a gamble.