百度等8大高估值股票绑架纳斯达克

    挺纳斯达克的人不可能一直被打压：他们坚称，最近的抛盘是一时反应过激，甚至提供了更好的买入机会。4月10日，纳斯达克综合指数大跌130点，跌幅3.1%，成为自2011年11月9日大跌3.9%以来的最大单日跌幅。

    这么大幅度的重新估值理所应当。假以时日，纳斯达克指数将一如既往地涨涨跌跌，但整体轨迹应该是下行。实际上，此次大跌损失最大的正是那些纳斯达克指数中最昂贵的那些股票。相对于其他股票，这些股票为纳斯达克指数过去的上涨做出了更多贡献。但现在市场已经走到了一个新的里程碑。

    这些被狂热高估的股票主要可以分为两类：社交网络和生物科技。让我们先看看这其中8家公司所经历的疯狂上涨。它们基本上就是市场中市值最大的那些股票：社交网络类股票包括Facebook 、谷歌（Google）和来自中国的百度（Baidu）；生物科技类股票包括Alexion、Gilead、Celgene 、Biogen 和Amgen。

    2013年年初，这8只股票的总市值约为5,700亿美元，占纳斯达克100指数当时总市值3.1万亿美元的18%。（纳斯达克100指数由市值最大的前100家公司股票构成。）

    自那以来，纳斯达克100指数一路高奏凯歌，至暴跌前一天的4月8日，累计涨幅39%。但这8只大涨股的总市值跃升了80%以上，涨幅超过该指数整体涨幅的两倍还多。其中，Alexion上涨了66%，Celgene上涨了88%，Gilead上涨了92%，Biogen上涨了104%，而Facebook更是飙升了122%。仅Amgen增幅为相对温和的40%——未能与整体市场拉开较大差距。

    截至4月8日，这8只股票的市值从占纳斯达克100指数的18%膨胀至近四分之一，提升超过6个百分点。

    而且，这些股票估值变得非常非常昂贵。Facebook和Alexion的市盈率分别升至了97倍和113倍。唯一一家市盈率低于28倍（谷歌市盈率水平）的公司是Amgen，为17倍。

    过去4个季度，这8家公司公布的利润总和为280亿美元，而市值总和超过1万亿美元。因此，这8家公司若整体来看，市盈率为37倍。

    如果投资者希望持有这些股价大幅波动的股票能带来8%的年度回报，这些公司将需要连续8年每年收益增长15%，实现期间利润增长两倍。这种情况不太可能发生。

    纳斯达克的这个问题凸显出了市值加权指数存在的明显弱点。由于这8家领跑公司的股价走势领先于指数的其他成份股，投资者持有的投资越来越多地向这些最昂贵股票转移。如果人们在这个阶段不断向纳斯达克指数基金投资，每一次投资实质上都是在按照越来越高的比例买入这些高价股票。

    这种情况与沃伦•巴菲特（Warren Buffett）的价值投资策略相悖。纳斯达克投资者如今持有过多的高价股，纯粹是“自讨苦吃”。眼下，这个疯狂的市场正在调转方向，完全是合乎情理的事情。（财富中文网）

    The Nasdaq boosters can't be kept down: The recent selloff, they insist, is a frenzied overreaction that's serving up even better buys. On April 10, the Nasdaq composite index fell 130 points, or 3.1%, marking its largest one-day loss since Nov. 9, 2011, when it fell 3.9%.

    The sharp re-pricing is well-deserved. Over time the Nasdaq will careen through spikes and valleys as usual, but the overall trajectory should be downward. In fact, the big losers in the sudden rout are precisely the stocks that grew into the most extravagantly expensive corner of the index. That group, more than any other, made the Nasdaq soar. Now it's a millstone.

    The wildly overpriced stocks fall into two main areas, social networking and biotech. Let's examine the fantastic run experienced by eight companies in those categories. They're mostly the ones with the highest market caps: In social networking, the group comprises Facebook (FB), Google (GOOG), and Baidu (BID) of China; the biotech players are Alexion (ALXN), Gilead (GILD), Celgene (CELG), Biogen (BIIB), and Amgen (AMGN).

    At the start of 2013, the total value of those eight stocks stood at around $570 billion, accounting for 18% of the Nasdaq 100's aggregate market cap of $3.1 trillion. (The Nasdaq 100 consists of the 100 largest companies in the overall index, ranked by market cap.)

    Since then, the Nasdaq has gone on a tear, rising by 39% by April 8, the day before the selloff. But the combined value of the eight high-flyers jumped by more than 80%, more than double the overall gain in the index. Alexion rose 66%, Celgene 88%, Gilead 92%, Biogen 104%, and Facebook 122%. Only Amgen -- it gained a relatively modest 40% -- failed to beat the market by a wide margin.

    By April 8, the value of those eight stocks had swelled from 18% of the Nasdaq 100's total market cap to almost one-quarter, an increase of over 6 percentage points.

    And they became really, really expensive. The price-to-earnings ratios grew to 97 at Facebook and 113 at Alexion. The only company with a multiple below 28 (the number for Google) was Amgen at 17.

    Over their past four quarters, the eight companies have posted combined earnings of $28 billion, vs. a combined market value of more than $1 trillion. Hence, the group, taken as a whole, is selling at 37 times profits.

    If investors seek an 8% annual return from holding these volatile stocks, these companies will need a growth spurt in earnings of 15% annually for eight years, so that their profits would triple over that period. It's unlikely to happen.

    The Nasdaq problem underscores a glaring weakness in cap-weighted indexes. As the prices of our eight sprinters outraced the rest of the index, a bigger and bigger share of an investor's holdings shifted to the most expensive stocks. If you kept adding money to a Nasdaq fund over that period, you were simply buying increasing portions of the overpriced stuff with every purchase.

    That's the opposite of a Warren Buffett-style value strategy. Nasdaq investors are now stuck with far too much money in pricey shares that are cruisin' for a bruisin'. This crazy market is finally making a turn that makes perfect sense.