????要讓牛市預期成為現實，處于歷史最高點的利潤就必須快速上升。為1560億美元投資基金提供策略建議的資產管理公司銳聯（Research Affiliates）聯合創始人許仲翔說：“股市要上漲，就得有‘這次情況不同，要采用新標準’等諸如此類的觀點相配合?！痹S仲翔指出，美國公司在盈利方面表現神勇的主要原因是金融危機之后削減了成本，而不是收入的增長。他認為：“公司潛心于自己的核心業務，保留了最有生產力的人員，其他的都已被摒棄。這不是增長。公司一直都沒有向新產品和新技術投入資金，而它們正是今后強勁增長的源泉?！睂嶋H上，過去兩年中，標普500指數的收入規模幾乎沒有提高，年收入水平一直保持在10萬億美元左右。

????最近，利潤也并不是一路飆升。四個季度以來，企業盈利一直持平，表明在利潤已經處于歷史最高點的情況下，實現大幅提升極為困難。面對令人氣餒的公司業績，評論人士稱，經濟復蘇的力度正在增大，將使利潤得以突破所謂的上限。許仲翔也認為，隨著GDP恢復增長，收入將提高。但這并不意味著利潤增速將超過正常水平。利潤率從歷史高點回落、并且至少部分抵銷銷售額增長的可能性很高。隨著各家公司擴大規模，它們需要雇傭更多員工，而這將推高成本。實際上，要實現增長，企業就得再將數百億美元資金用于資本投資，而這種情況還沒有出現。這些投資還會提高利息成本，增加折舊。

????利潤率最多能持平。研究機構EVA Dimensions分析師羅伯特?科溫說：“削減成本的時代已經結束?！币虼?，盡管沒有做出這樣的表態，但唱多者的唯一依據就是收入必須出現大幅增長。這個幅度要有多大呢？讓我們采用摩根大通的預期，也就是每股盈利將增長9%。通常，每股收益增長率比整體利潤低1個百分點左右，這是因為公司總是在發行新股。因此，如果每股收益上升9%，整個經濟的利潤水平就得提高10%。在利潤率不變的情況下，收入要增長多少才能實現這個目標呢？

????由于通脹率約為2%，10%的利潤增長就意味著“實際增長率”為8%左右。如果2014年美國GDP能增長3%-4%，人們就會非常滿意。而8%的“實際增長率”比這個數字高了4-5個百分點，不可能成為現實。

????許仲翔說：“處在高點的利潤還能上升，這個觀點的問題在于，這樣的利潤最終會消耗大部分經濟。更可能出現的情況是，利潤回歸平均值，而且再也不會超過這個水平?！彼慕Y論是，目前股價已經很高，只存在兩種可能性。一是現在投資者認為全球局勢穩定，樂于接受低回報。如果真是這樣，股市的實際回報率應在4%左右，股息收益率為2%，每股收益實際增長率為2%，也就是歷史平均水平。

????許仲翔認為，出現這種局面的可能性較小。他指出：“很不確定的因素是估值水平怎樣變化。如果市盈率回歸正常，也就是回到平均值，那么今后5年投資者的回報率將為負值。不一定會出現這種情況。投資者可能會交好運。但歷史可以借鑒，而且平均來說，在這樣的市盈率水平上，回報率會很低?！痹S仲翔估算，如果現在建倉，到2018年實際回報率為負的可能性為60%-65%。

????一個重要的限制條件是，人們幾乎不能、甚至根本無法通過高估值來判斷下一年的局勢。因此，我們大可無視那些喜歡進行短期預測的評論人士。他們會這樣說：“年中市場將陷入困境，隨后，牛市將在年末重新出現?！钡谶^去的5-10年中，在高點介入幾乎總會帶來令人失望的回報率。對華爾街來說，為“現在是建倉好時機”尋找依據從來沒有像今天這么困難過。華爾街人士在充當推銷員方面展現了令人吃驚的高超技藝。但投資者們，請不要相信他們的話。大家還是用以往的教訓和對市場的正確估算作為自己的投資指南吧。（財富中文網）

????譯者：Charlie??????

????For the bull case to win, earnings must rapidly rise from these already record levels. "For that to happen requires one of these, This-time-it's-different, new-normal arguments," says Jason Hsu, co-founder of Research Affiliates, a firm that oversees strategies for $156 billion in investment funds. Hsu notes that U.S. companies' heroic profit performance is chiefly the result of cost-cutting following the financial crisis, not revenue growth. "Companies are down to their core businesses and most productive people, all the rest is gone," he says. "It's not a growth story. Companies have not been investing in new products and technologies that would create strong growth in the future." In fact, over the past two years, S&P revenues have barely grown at all, remaining flat at around $10 trillion on an annual basis.

????Nor have earnings been surging of late. They've remained flat for the last four quarters, suggesting that it's extremely difficult to build big gains on top of already record results.

????In the face of daunting numbers, the pundits argue that the economic recovery now gaining momentum will allow profits to bust through what appears to be a ceiling. Hsu agrees that revenues will increase with renewed growth in GDP. But that doesn't mean profits will grow at faster than normal rates. It's highly possible that margins will fall from their historic highs, offsetting at least part of the increase in sales. Companies will need to hire more workers as they expand, driving up costs. Indeed, if they are to grow, companies will need to plough tens of billions in extra cash into capital investments, something that isn't happening yet. Those investments will raise costs of interest and depreciation.

????At best, margins will remain flat. "The era of cost-cutting is over," says Robert Corwin of research firm EVA Dimensions. Hence, the bulls -- without saying so -- are resting their entire argument on what must be huge increases in revenues. How big is huge? Let's take J.P. Morgan's prediction of 9% EPS growth. Usually, EPS grows about one point slower than overall earnings since companies are constantly issuing more shares. So if EPS waxes at 9%, profits in the overall economy need to grow at 10%. So at constant margins, what revenue growth is needed to hit that target?

????Profit expansion of 10% equates to "real growth" of 8% or so, since inflation is running around 2%. That's four to five points higher than the 3% to 4% GDP-increase figures that would be highly welcome for 2014. It won't happen.

????"The problem with the argument that profits can grow from already high levels is that they'd eventually absorb most of the economy," says Hsu. "More likely, they go back to the average, not soar above it forever." His conclusion is that at already high prices, only two possibilities exist. The first is that investors now think the world is a safe place, and are happy with low returns. If that's true, stocks should deliver around 4% real returns, the 2% dividend yield, and 2% real EPS growth that's the historic average.

????For Hsu, that's the less likely outcome. "The highly volatile component is what happens to valuations," he says. "If PEs go back to normal, revert to the mean, then investors will have negative returns over the next five years. That doesn't have to happen. They could get lucky. But history is the guide, and on average from these levels you can expect poor returns." But Hsu puts the chances that investors who buy now will suffer negative real returns by 2018 at 60% and 65%.

????An important proviso is that high valuations tell you little or nothing about what will happen over the next year. That's a good reason to ignore the pundits who love short-term predictions, such as "We'll go through a tough patch mid-year, and then the bulls will be back in charge late in the year." But buying in at high prices almost always yields disappointing returns over five or 10 years. Wall Street has never been more challenged to create arguments that it's a good time to buy stocks. It's performing an amazing feat of salesmanship. Don't believe it, investors. Let the lessons of history, and real market math, be your guide.