2019年应该怎么投资？请看《财富》专家的建议

国民经济和股市的步调并非总是一致的，今年秋天的美股表现就给投资者上了深刻的一课。

美国GDP和就业的突飞猛进的增长，令近来美股市场的表现显得更加难看，此前备受青睐的一些个股也已陷入熊市的泥淖。对通胀和贸易摩擦的担忧是此轮股市震荡的主要原因，另一个原因则是本轮牛市已经持续了十年之久，市场普遍担忧拐点马上就要到来。那么在美股下行的大背景下，还有哪些公司能带来比较出色的回报呢？为了回答这一问题，《财富》杂志召开了一年一度的投资者圆桌会议。

今年我们邀请的专家有：帕纳索斯投资公司的产品经理洛里·基思（他的公司专门从事社会责任投资，托管资产达280亿美元）、T. Rowe Price公司的投资总监约翰·莱恩汉（托管资产达1.1万亿美元）、ARK投资公司的CEO凯瑟琳·伍德（她的公司主要投资“颠覆性创新”领域）、爱德华琼斯公司的投资策略师凯特·沃恩（该公司托管资产达1万亿美元）、Boldstart Ventures公司的创始人艾德·希姆（该公司为一家早期风投公司，主要关注科技基础设施和软件开发领域）。下文是他们的讨论内容摘编。

《财富》：当前，美国经济强势增长，失业率保持在较低水平，美国貌似已达到一个经济周期的顶峰。那么接下来会发生什么呢？是经济增长轻微放缓，还是会有更严重的事情发生？

凯特·沃恩：美国的经济增长率可能已经达到顶点了，比如今年二季度，美国的经济增长率已经达到了4%以上。不过，当前保持经济高增长和低失业率的许多因素仍然存在。我们认为，受关税因素影响，美国的经济增长将略有放缓。另外，明年减税因素的影响也不会有今年这样大了。不过我们不认为经济增长本身已经达到顶点。2019年可以被看作一段长期经济扩张的一部分。

《财富》：对于这样一种渐进式的变化，你是否已经做出了某些调整？

沃恩：随着本轮经济周期已进入下半场，我们需要拥有更多的固定收益以抵御波动。在证券方面，我会重点关注那些有定价权的公司。我们看到，高关税和经济中的一些短板和瓶颈已经带来了一些成本压力。在这种时期，那些有能力转嫁高成本的企业的处境会好得多。比如在医疗领域，像诺华制药这样的公司有能力继续提价，当然对这方面，我们也有一些监管方面的顾虑。

约翰·莱恩汉：通常看来，牛市并不是“老死”的，而是死于经济衰退或过度投机。目前我们并未看到二者中的任何一个因素，虽然我们已经开始看见这两个因素的一些危险信号。

从长期看，高收益、高分红的股票已经跑赢了大盘，是一个有吸引力的收益来源。我们认为，这些股票非常适合一个平衡的投资组合。目前已经有一些高收益股票吸引了我们，而且我们认为市场并未给予这些股票足够的认可——实际上，市场当前是在朝着经济下行的方向定价的。但我们并不认为明年经济就会下行，市场还是有一些真正的机会的。比如国际纸业（International Paper）的股息率达到了近5%，它有很大的周期性风险敞口。

另一支值得关注的个股是拉斯维加斯金沙集团（Las Vegas Sands），考虑到其在澳门和新加坡的地位，它的长期增长前景十分强劲。目前，投资者对中国的情况有很多担忧，但澳门的长期增长前景仍然是向好的。况且你还能拿到5%以上的股息。

《财富》：你刚刚提到了过度投机的问题。下面这个问题是给在座所有人的：你们认为，目前的估值相比于价值是否过高了？

The economy and the stock market don’t always march in lockstep, and investors got a sharp reminder of that fact this fall.

Parade-and-fireworks-worthy GDP growth and employment numbers shared the spotlight with an ugly market slide that took some previously beloved stocks into bear-market territory. Fears about inflation and trade tensions were among the culprits; so was the pervasive sense that the U.S. bull market, nearly 10 years old, can’t last much longer. So which companies will be able to deliver standout returns as the market’s mood gets more downbeat? To answer that question, Fortune convened our annual roundtable of investors.

This year’s panel included Lori Keith, portfolio manager at Parnassus Investments, which specializes in socially responsible investing and has $28 billion under management; John Linehan, chief investment officer for equity at T. Rowe Price, which has $1.1 trillion under management; Catherine Wood, CEO of ARK Invest, a firm whose investments focus on “disruptive innovation”; Kate Warne, investment strategist for $1 trillion financial services firm Edward Jones; and Ed Sim, founder of Boldstart Ventures, an early-stage venture capital firm specializing in tech infrastructure and software development. Here, edited excerpts from their discussion.

FORTUNE: With growth strong and unemployment low, it’s hard not to feel that we’ve reached the peak of an economic cycle. So what comes next? Is it a gentle slowdown or something more severe?

KATE WARNE: We may be at the peak growth rate, like we saw in the second quarter with growth above 4%. But many of the factors that have kept the economy growing and have kept the unemployment rate falling remain in place. We do expect growth to fade a bit as tariffs bite, and the impact of the tax cuts from this year won’t be as strong next year. But we don’t see this as some kind of peak. Think of 2019 as part of this long, extended expansion.

FORTUNE: Are there adjustments you’re making to adapt to that more gradual change?

WARNE: As we get late in the cycle, we need to own more fixed income to protect against volatility. On the equity side, I’d look at companies that have pricing power. We’re seeing cost pressures from higher tariffs and from some of the shortages and bottlenecks in the economy. Companies that can pass on whatever higher costs they see are much better positioned at a time like this. In the medical space, for example, you’ve got Novartis, which has the ability to keep raising prices, though of course we’ve got concerns about regulation on that.

JOHN LINEHAN: Typically bull markets don’t die from old age. But they will die from either a recession or speculative excess. And right now we really don’t see either, although you start to see warning signs in both.

Over the longer term, higher-yielding ¬dividend-paying stocks have outperformed the market and have offered an attractive source of return. We think they are very attractive for a balanced portfolio. Right now we’re attracted to some of the higher-yielding stocks, which we think the market isn’t properly giving investors credit for—in fact, the market is actually pricing in a downturn. But if we don’t believe a downturn’s going to occur over the next year, there’s some real opportunities. International Paper, which pays almost a 5% dividend yield, has broad cyclical exposure.

Another would be Las Vegas Sands, which has very strong secular growth prospects, given its position in Macau and Singapore. There’s a lot of investor concern around what’s going on in China—rightly so. But the secular dynamics are there longer term for Macau. And you’re also getting paid over 5% to wait.

FORTUNE: You mentioned speculative excess. Open question for the table: Are you seeing valuations you associate with prices going too far?

艾德·希姆：从风险投资的角度来看，我从1996年就开始做风投了，也见过一些过度定价的例子，后期投入市场的资金绝对是惊人的。今年第三季度，美国国内的风险投资总额达到280亿美元，其中单轮1亿美元以上的融资占了至少一半，有些估值的定价达到了2019年收益数字的15到20倍，这让我开始有些担心了。在我看来，这就是过度投机的标志。我有点担心2020年左右会发生什么。

《财富》：IPO市场是否也存在定价过高的问题？

凯瑟琳·伍德：在公开市场上，现在有一种转向被动策略的趋势。与此同时，在私有市场上，也就是上市前的企业，却有寻求创新的趋势。现在很多投资者涌向了私有市场。所以我们认为，在证券市场上最被低估的部分就是公开证券市场上的创新。很多IPO之所以没有达到预期的效果，就是因为他们在上市前的私人市场上刚刚完成了几轮“上涨”。但是我们在公开市场上也看到了一些非常值得入手的股票。

我这样说，可能很多人会嘲笑我。不过我们可以拿特斯拉作例子。从长期来看，特斯拉基本上是一家做“交通即服务”的公司。目前它的估值是往绩销售收入的两倍。也就是说它的估值是450亿美元，销售额是200亿美元。如果特斯拉保持私有化，它的估值会比现在高得多。

《财富》:不论国民经济表现如何，你们都在寻找能推动强劲业绩的因素。

洛里·基思：对我们公司来说，我们在投资时必须要考虑环境、社会和政府治理等社会责任因素。如果一家公司只是基本面不错，我们并不会投资给它。同理，如果一家公司只是积极履行社会责任，而没有稳健的业务基本面，也不会成为我们的投资重点。我们是理念与业绩并重的。

以前的社会责任投资就是要避开那些“行为不端者”——也就是那些涉足酒精、烟草、核能、赌博和武器制造等领域的公司。但现在我们已经达到了一个转折点，大家意识到，对社会责任的关注，也能对一家企业的长期业绩产生重大的积极影响。

《财富》：是否投资特斯拉，肯定是个艰难的决定，因为它的核心愿景是环境利益，但是从社会治理方面看，它也有它的问题……

沃恩：我们没有关注特斯拉，有一部分原因是它的债务评级是“垃圾”级。在它的债务评级上调到“投资”级之前，我们都不会关注它。总而言之，我们在投资所有公司时，要先考虑它的信用评级，然后才去看其他因素。我们宁可晚一些投资，或者不要那么高的回报率，也要等到它的现金流稳定了，它的债权人安心一些了，再考虑投资的问题。

伍德：很多创新型商业领袖，无论是杰夫·贝索斯、史蒂夫·乔布斯还是埃隆·马斯克，都曾经因为证券市场的短视思维而感到沮丧。不过他们不理解的是，我们为什么不能理解他们。

特斯拉的优点，在于它在芯片技术、电池技术和数据收集上领先行业整整三年。此外则是“交通即服务”的理念，很多公司才刚刚开始思考这一理念。

《财富》：而且你不一定非得每年卖出1000万辆Model 3汽车才能从这项技术中赚钱。

伍德：如果以收入来衡量，特斯拉Model 3才是美国销量第一的汽车。别忘了，它从来没有打过广告。他们只不过是做了正确的事。

《财富》：凯瑟琳，你曾提到了一个我们很感兴趣的矛盾，即市场的短期思维会削弱长期的管理目标。就此，我想听听大家的意见：你们持有的哪些长期资产曾被短期的噪音打败了？

莱恩汉：我们的交易率大概是每年20%。当我们做出一笔投资时，我们实际上考虑的是一个五年的投资周期。

有很多公司，市场既没有反映出它的业务价值，也没有反映出它的长期资产价值。这通常发生在围绕这些企业出现一些争议的时候。比如富国银行的股价曾遭遇重创，市盈率相比行业其他机构显著缩水。但如果你退后一步，站在未来三到五年的大背景下看，它的业务还是非常强劲的，而且采取了一种非常防御性的业务模式。从历史上看，它的估值一直比较高。我们认为，随着时间的推移，围绕着富国银行的问题是可以被纠正的。

陶氏杜邦是另一家我们非常关注的公司，市场特别关注它对周期性下行的风险敞口。不过吸引我们的是，这家公司未来18个月里将分拆成三个独立的部门。比较一下这三家部门相对于行业内其他公司的估值，你会发现，陶氏杜邦的股价要显著低于它们。因此总体而言，它也是非常值得关注的。

基思：我想强调的一家公司是赛莱默（Xylem），它是全球最大的水处理基建公司。最近由于成本上涨的原因，它在股市上有些失宠了。而且由于它在中国有工厂，中美贸易争端也对它造成了伤害。不过我们认为这些问题都是暂时的，因为考虑到水处理和水质问题的长期趋势，机会还是非常巨大的。

以美国现有的基础设施为例，光是美国自己的市政工程就需要巨大的资本支出。而在国际上，围绕水处理系统建设也有很多项目和商机。赛莱默公司在这个市场占据了主导份额，有很强的定价权。

ED SIM: From a venture capital perspective, I’ve been in the business since 1996, and I’m seeing some excessive pricing. The amount of capital being invested in the market in the late stages is absolutely incredible. [Financing rounds of] greater than $100 million accounted for at least half of the $28 billion of U.S. domestic venture capital investment for Q3. So when I’m seeing pricing around 15 to 20 times 2019 revenue numbers, I start getting worried a bit. That, in my mind, is a sign of excess in the markets. And I fear what may happen, let’s say, in 2020.

FORTUNE: Is the IPO market also overpriced?

CATHERINE WOOD: In the public markets there’s been a move toward passive strategies. And at the same time, there’s been a search for innovation in the private space, the pre-IPO world. You have this crowding into the private world. So we think the most undervalued part of any equity market is innovation in the public equity market. We do see many IPOs that fall flat because they’ve just had one or two too many “up” rounds in the private space. But we see incredible bargains in the public space.

Many people will make fun of me when I say this, but you have Tesla, for example, which we think, long run, is primarily a mobility-as-a-service play. Right now, it’s selling for two times trailing revenues, so it’s valued at $45 billion vs. $20 billion in sales. Had Tesla remained private, it would have a much higher valuation.

FORTUNE: You’re all looking for factors that drive strong performance regardless of the economy.

LORI KEITH: For us, it’s really important to consider environmental, social, and governance [ESG] factors. We’ll never put capital to work in a company that has only a good fundamental story. By the same token, if it is only a positive ESG story without strong business fundamentals, that would not be a focus for us as an investment. We’re really all about the idea of delivering on principles and performance.

Historically, [ESG investing] has mostly meant screening out the bad actors—companies that have exposure to things like alcohol, tobacco, nuclear power, gambling, and weapons manufacturing. But today, we’re hitting an inflection point where we’re recognizing that a positive emphasis on ESG factors has a material impact on the long-term performance of a company.

FORTUNE: Tesla must be a tough call right now because environmental benefits are central to its mission, but governance-wise, it’s had issues …

WARNE: We don’t follow Tesla. But part of the reason is, their debt’s junk rated. We wouldn’t look at it until it becomes investment grade. In general with companies, we’d look at the credit rating before we even look at other characteristics. We’d rather be later and not have quite as high returns but wait until the cash flows are more stable and bondholders can be a little more comfortable.

WOOD: What we’ve seen with visionary leaders leading innovation, whether it’s Jeff Bezos or Steve Jobs or Elon Musk, is behavior that is really born out of the frustration associated with short-term thinking in the ¬equity markets. And they just don’t understand how we can’t understand.

If you look at the investment itself, what’s going to make Tesla move is a three-year lead in chip technology, battery technology, and data collection. And there’s also the concept that is going to get it catapulted into the world: mobility as a service, which many companies are just starting to think about.

FORTUNE: And you don’t necessarily have to sell 10 million Model 3s a year to make money from that technology.

WOOD: The Tesla Model 3 is the No. 1 selling car in the United States if you measure by revenue. Think about that. It’s never advertised. They’re doing something right.

FORTUNE: Catherine, you touched on a conflict that preoccupies us at Fortune, which is when long-term management goals are undercut by short-term thinking in the markets. I’d love to hear from everybody: What are long-term holdings of yours that are being beaten up by short-term noise?

LINEHAN: Our turnover is about 20% a year. And when we make an investment, we are really thinking about a five-year investment time horizon.

There are a number of companies where we think that the market’s not reflecting either the franchise value or the asset value of the company for the long term. That often occurs when companies are undergoing some controversy. Wells Fargo has been very beaten up, and you’ve seen its multiple compress significantly relative to its peers. But if you take a step back and think in the context of three to five years from now, it’s still got a very strong franchise, a very defensive business model. It historically has traded at a premium valuation. And we think over time, the issues surrounding Wells Fargo are correctable.

Another name we like a lot would be DowDuPont, where the market’s very focused on its exposure to a cyclical downturn. We’re attracted to the fact that the company’s going to split into three different segments in the next 18 months. If you look at comparable peer valuations for each one of those companies, DowDuPont trades at a very significant discount to that. As a sum-of-the-parts story, it is very compelling.

KEITH: One company I’d highlight is Xylem, the largest pure-play water infrastructure company globally. It’s become a little bit out of favor due to headwinds from cost inflation. It’s also been hurt by tension over tariffs with China because it does manufacture there and sells into that market. But we think those are transitory issues, because when you look at the long-term trends associated with water treatment, water quality, we’re seeing a tremendous opportunity.

Take the existing infrastructure here in the United States. There’s a very long-tail runway of capital spending that needs to occur in our own municipalities. Internationally, there’s a significant opportunity for greenfield projects around creating new water systems. And with Xylem having the dominant share in this market, they have very strong pricing power.

希姆：我本身并不是一个公开市场投资者，不过我对一支个股非常熟悉，那就是沃尼奇公司（Vonage）的股票。我之所以认为它很有趣，首先是因为它有一个像AOL一样的现金流业务（即基于互联网的语音电话服务），此外它还有一个增长速度极快的业务，主要由API（即应用编程界面）驱动。沃尼奇公司还收购了一家名叫Nexmo的公司，此次收购给API业务带来的增长是相当惊人的。总之，如果有人能看出这些业务的价值，就能够挖掘到这些价值。

《财富》：凯瑟琳，你认为接下来几年，对大企业影响最大的技术挑战有哪些？

伍德：我们的投资主要集中在颠覆性创新上，这就是我们所做的事。从目前来看，市场价值达数万亿美元的技术平台已经有五个。比如DNA测序技术，目前已经发展出了基因编码技术（Crispr）和其他一些技术突破。此外，随着协作机器人的出现，机器人技术也取得了长足发展，所以泰瑞达（Teradyne）显然是值得关注的。能源存储方面的大佬当然是特斯拉，它也是这一领域的领军者。在人工智能行业，英伟达是首屈一指的人工智能芯片公司。此外还有区块链技术。

这些平台实际上正在融合，你从自动出租车网络上就能看见这种趋势。无人驾驶汽车实际上也是机器人，而且它们还有人工智能技术的加持。中国将成为最大的单一市场。百度已经被中国政府视作首选的无人驾驶平台。所以无论在中国这个大市场上发生什么，他们都能分得一杯羹。腾讯公司拥有特斯拉5%的股份，所以它对无人驾驶领域的动向也非常了解。

《财富》：最近，很多人对中国经济放缓感到担忧。凯特，目前中国对你的投资思路有何影响？

沃恩：目前，新兴市场指数整体处于熊市。所以如果有哪里跌了20%，你可能会想，它究竟是会继续下跌呢，还是抄底的机会到了？

很多人看了阿根廷或者土耳其这样的国家，就以为“噢，所有新兴市场国家都是这样的。”实际上，新兴市场上已经变得越来越以中国为中心、越来越以科技为中心了。如果你也像我们一样，认为这种增长会持续下去，那么新兴市场在你看来就是一个机会。你不用担心它在短期内走低。我们建议你可以持有新兴市场基金或ETF指数基金，不过我们不会挑选个股去投资。

很多人对贸易战和关税问题非常悲观，他们担心局面进一步恶化。其实你需要的只是几个好消息，形势很可能会快速好转，股市表现可能不久就会好得多。

《财富》：约翰，面对技术革命的冲击，哪些企业适应的最好？

莱恩汉：在高市值企业里，已经很难找到颠覆性的公司了，倒是有很多被颠覆的公司。不过多数情况下，市场对于这些潜在的颠覆者持“疑罪从无”的看法，也不愿意去真正理解他们的业务模式。

UPS公司在从B2B到B2C战略的转型过程中也出现了一些混乱。不过大家都能看出，以后市场对快递包裹的需求只会继续增加。对于UPS，承运数量并不是问题，问题在于定价。我认为这个问题是可以纠正的。

如果我们将眼光转向电动汽车，我们会发现，它将把汽车行业对碳氢化合物的需求从石油转向天然气。而这则会对能源存储和电池行业产生巨大影响。泛加公司（TransCanada）是天然气运输行业的领军者之一，不过从很多估值标准来看，它的股价都处于近10年来的最低点。市场对它的举债水平比较担心，但它仍然有独特的继续增长的空间。

《财富》：艾德，这也是你的重点研究方向之一。

希姆：科技是驱动这些选择的根本动力。以沃尔玛为例，我认为他们做了一件非常正确的事，那就是通过收购Jet.com获得了一位优秀的科技创业人。之后他们还收购了四五家公司来对抗亚马逊。

SIM: I’m not a public market investor per se, but one stock that I know pretty well is Vonage. And I think it’s interesting because there’s an AOL-like cash flow part of the business that’s residential [voice over Internet]. But there’s another, super-fast-growing part of the business, which is driven by APIs [application programming interfaces, platforms for building new software]. Vonage bought a company called Nexmo, and the growth on the API side from Nexmo is absolutely incredible. There’s value to be had if someone can figure out the different value of the pieces there.

FORTUNE: Catherine, what are the biggest technological changes you see hitting larger companies over the next couple of years?

WOOD: We’ve centered our portfolio around disruptive innovation. That’s all we do. And there are five multitrillion-dollar platforms evolving right now. DNA sequencing, which is leading to Crispr and other breakthroughs. Robotics, which is being turbocharged now by collaborative robots, so that’s Teradyne. You’ve got energy storage, that’s certainly Tesla; they’re leading the charge, so to speak, there. There’s artificial intelligence—Nvidia is the artificial intelligence chip company. And then there’s blockchain technology.

These platforms are actually converging. You can see it in autonomous taxi networks. Autonomous vehicles are robots. Energy storage: The taxis will be electric. And they will be powered by artificial intelligence. China is going to be the biggest market. Baidu has been deemed by the Chinese government the autonomous driving platform of choice. So they’re going to get a slice of everything that happens in that very large market. And ¬Tencent is a 5% owner in Tesla, so it’s got its nose under the tent there.

FORTUNE: There’s been a lot of concern of late about a slowdown in China’s economy. Kate, how does China shape your thinking right now?

WARNE: The emerging-markets indexes overall are in a bear market. So anytime something hits that 20% decline, you need to say: Is this going further, or is this a buying opportunity because the valuations have gotten cheap?

Many people are looking at places like Argentina or Turkey and saying, “Oh, all emerging markets are this way.” Well, no, ¬emerging markets have really shifted to be more China-focused, more tech-focused. And if you see that growth continuing, as we do, then emerging markets look like an opportunity. You don’t worry too much about the fact that they could go lower short term. We recommend owning funds or broad-based ETFs. We don’t try to pick individual winners.

Many people are very pessimistic about trade and tariffs—they’re worried about contagion. All you need is some good news there, and you see probably a very rapid rebound and a much better price performance.

FORTUNE: John, which companies are adapting best to the onslaught of technological disruption?

LINEHAN: In large-cap value land, it’s very difficult to find companies that are disrupters, and we have plenty that are disruptees. But oftentimes, the market is unwilling to give these companies the benefit of the doubt or truly understand the business model.

UPS is a company that’s faced a lot of dislocation around transitioning from a ¬business-to-business to a business-to-¬consumer strategy. But I think we can all agree that the demand for delivery of packages is only going to increase. With UPS, the issue isn’t so much a volume issue, it’s a pricing issue. And we think that’s correctable.

If we move into electrified vehicles, it is going to transfer demand for hydrocarbons from oil or crude oil to natural gas. And moving those hydrocarbons is going to become a critical element of the energy storage and battery part of this story. TransCanada, a midstream pipeline company that is one of the leaders in transporting natural gas, is trading at 10-year lows on many valuation metrics. The market’s worried about the money it has borrowed. But there is a unique opportunity to continue to grow.

FORTUNE: And Ed, this is a big focus of yours.

SIM: Technology is the underlying theme driving some of those choices. Like Walmart, for example: I thought they did an amazing job of buying a technology entrepreneur in Jet.com. And they’ve acquired four or five companies since then to combat Amazon.

聪明的公司不会狂妄地说：“这件事我要自己做。”聪明的公司会说：“我怎么才能和整个生态系统合作？我怎样才能买到能推动颠覆式创新的技术和工程师？”

这就是为什么我们非常感兴趣的另一个领域也在为工程师们进行软件投资。从另一个角度想，每家“《财富》美国500强”公司都必须是一家技术公司，否则五年后你就无法再跻身500强。那么你要怎样推动创新呢？要么购买，要么就只能自己构建软件。

我认为Pivotal Software公司是一个非常有趣的例子。他们打造了一个多云平台，大银行、保险公司和“《财富》美国500强”企业都可以在上面快速部署他们的软件。因此，如果你在这个基础上进行构建，并且雇佣自己的工程师，你就可以实现产品迭代，在技术上跟上竞争对手的步伐。

莱恩汉：沃尔玛的眼光是很长远的。他们对Jet.com进行投资者，宁愿账面数字难看些，在短期招来市场的怒火，也要使自己在长期处于一个更有利的位置。有些公司通过好的管理也有能力做到这一点，但有些公司则没有这个能力。

希姆：有件事非常搞笑。有一次我跟一家已经上市的大型连锁超市的几名负责人谈话，他们说，每次亚马逊宣布什么事（比如隔日送达的快递服务），他们的股票就会上涨3%到4%。而我们如果宣布什么事，我们的股价就会下跌3%、4%甚至5%，这让我们感到非常苦恼。

沃恩：这太令人沮丧了。说到被颠覆的行业，我想谈谈迪士尼。通过收购21世纪福克斯，迪士尼的规模得以进一步扩大，另外他们还有娱乐业和主题公园的业务。这样他们就有了足够的现金来推动转型，使公司有能力长期在数字媒体领域展开大规模的竞争。

刚才艾德谈到了对零售业，我也想谈谈达乐公司（Dollar General）的例子。随着亚马逊的强势崛起，几乎人人都认为传统零售已死，然而达乐公司是个例外。很多城市居民可能从来没有去过达乐的门店，因为它主要分布在农村地区，它在全美开有15,000多家门店，它有一半的销售额是用现金结账的。不过在农村网购的话，你不可能下单后几小时就收到包裹，而是要过三天才能收货。

达乐公司卖出的四分之三的商品是食材。这意味着它的顾客都是回头客，这些顾客的收入不高，没钱充亚马逊Prime的会员去收免费快递。当然，他们的市场的某些领域也会发生转型。但是相比亚马逊的业务模式，达乐的业务也是很具有可持续性的。

伍德：我们最不愿看见的，就是我们投资的公司被一家“巨无霸”企业收购。但过去一两年，在医疗领域，为了全人类的利益，我们认为收购也未尝不是一件好事。比如Kite和Juno公司在嵌合抗原受体T细胞免疫疗法（CAR-T）和肿瘤免疫领域有很深的研究——简单地说，就是释放人体自身免疫系统的潜能来对抗癌症。

后来Kite公司被吉利德（Gilead）收购了。我一开始不太开心，但当我看到吉列德的全球规模时，我觉得他们是真的可以很快地满足这个巨大的、尚未被满足的市场需求的。后来新基生物制药公司（Celgene）收购了Juno。这两家公司的股价都没有反映出这笔收购的意义有多重大。我们认为，CAR-T技术在全球范围内将带来至少2500亿美元的盈利机会。

我觉得，那些较为传统的生物科技股的投资者可能并不理解这种疗法将带来怎样的突破，以及它将以多么快的速度影响他们的投资回报。

《财富》：大型制药公司和许多大公司一样，都有一个共同的问题——信任问题。比如Facebook，由于数据隐私等问题，今年夏天以来，它的股价已经下跌了30%左右。洛里，你在投资决策时，是怎样衡量品牌公共形象的影响的？

基思：这个问题我们要花很多时间去评估。一个企业的品牌形象，与它的产品和服务的品质，与它和所有利益相关方及消费者的关系有很强的内在联系。能建立起这样的信任和品牌形象，也就有了定价权。

像高乐氏（Clorox）这样的公司在打造消费者信任的产品和品牌上就做得很好，所以它才能够在市场上攫取这样大的利润份额。他们的可回收材料包装业务做得很大，这也满足了消费者购买绿色产品的愿望，从而也使他们拥有了定价权。

希姆：我们最近一直在投资与GDPR有关的公司（也就是那些致力于帮助企业满足欧盟最新的数据隐私保护标准的公司），比如像BigID这样的公司原本籍籍无名，但它现在已经拉到了4000万美元的融资。他们可以让大企业知道自己有哪些用户隐私数据，这些隐私数据存储在哪里，以及企业能够怎样管理和保护这些数据。这些都是为这样一个时刻做准备——总有一天，我们作为个人用户可以发问：“我的数据在哪儿？你掌握了我的哪些数据？”然后我们还可以说：“我有被你遗忘的权利。把我从你所有的表单上删除。”

我认为未来五年里，有些科技公司肯定会成为这方面的领头羊。到时候，这些公司会说：“你的数据归你所有，但是我想付钱去访问这些数据。”现在，我已经看到好几百家公司试图通过区块链等技术颠覆现有格局。这个领域的颠覆性创新一定会发生的。

基思：我们确实生活在一个毫无隐私的环境里。我们的一切数据都以用户反馈的形式被赤裸裸地公开，供那些企业访问。

伍德：Facebook、谷歌和推特都是聚集了大量用户数据的公司，他们才是数据的实际拥有者和使用者。我很关注这些聚集大量数据的公司将会被如何颠覆掉，因为用户现在已经非常不开心了，这你从品牌排名上就能看出来，它也是衡量一只股票表现好坏的最佳指标之一。如果它的品牌排名上浮了，那么它的股票大概率也在升值。最近Facebook的品牌排名显著下跌，而且它要恢复起来也很困难。

莱恩汉：一旦你失去了公众的信任，等着你的只能是监管部门的大棒了。在金融危机后，金融行业也失去了公众的信任，结果美国出台了《多德弗兰克法案》（Dodd-Frank）和一大批监管政策。目前，围绕金融行业已经有了125,000多项不同的监管政策，而科技行业的监管政策只有27,000多项。我们认为，科技领域的一大现实风险，就是严酷的监管环境或将出现。

《财富》：各位专家，你们认为2019年最大的风险和机遇是什么？

沃恩：我们会看到更多的市场波动，而最大的风险就是投资者会做错事。因为他们不会有我们刚才所谈论的长期眼光，只要股市一下跌，他们就会第一时间卖出。

至于明年最大的机会，我认为并不在美国。美国市场的估值已经很高了，而世界其他地方则要低得多。我们都可以列出一长串我们认为做错了的事情，但实际你需要的只是几件做对了的事情，而其他国家则可以做得比美国更好。我认为这种情况明年很有可能发生。

They didn’t have the hubris to say, I’m going to do this myself. The smarter companies are going to be the ones that say, How do I partner with the ecosystem? How do I go out and buy the technology and the engineers that I need to have to drive this disruption?

That’s why the other area we’re very excited about is investing in software for engineers. If you think about it, every Fortune 500 company has to be a technology company, or you won’t be in the Fortune 500 in five years. How do you actually drive that innovation? You’ve got to buy, or you’ve got to build software.

Pivotal Software I think is super interesting. They are driving a multi-cloud platform so that large banks and insurance companies and Fortune 500s can actually deploy their software as quickly as Google does. And so if you build on that foundation, and you hire the engineers, you can iterate and keep up with your technology competition.

LINEHAN: Walmart took a very long-term horizon. When they made the investment in Jet.com, they were willing to take numbers down, incur the wrath of the market in the short term to position themselves better in the longer term. Some companies have the ability to do that with good governance, and some don’t.

SIM: It’s funny, I was talking to a large grocery store chain, a public company, and they said it really bothers us that every time Amazon announces something, let’s say, like a next-day delivery service, their stock goes up by 3% to 4%. And if we tried to do something, our stock would go down by 3%, 4%, 5%.

WARNE: Super-frustrating. On the subject of disrupted industries, I was going to talk about Disney. It’s extraordinarily well positioned as they gain scale with the 21st Century Fox acquisition, as well as the fact that they’ve got the entertainment business with their theme parks. Together that gives them the cash flow to be able to make that transition, to be able to fund over a longer time the transition to compete at scale in digital media.

To Ed’s point about retail, I wanted to talk about Dollar General. So we’ve got Amazon on the rise—everybody thinks that retail is dead. But think about the fact that this company, which many people in an urban area have never been to, is mainly rural: It’s 15,000 locations across the country. Half of their business is in cash. And because they’re in rural areas, you’re not in a situation where you’re waiting a few hours for online delivery; you’re getting delivery over three days.

And about three-quarters of what they sell is staples. That means people who are repeating their purchases, and they may not have the income to do Amazon Prime and get free delivery. So yeah, you can think about areas of their market that will be transformed. But we think they really have something that’s pretty sustainable against the Amazon-type model.

WOOD: One of our nightmares is to have one of our companies acquired by a behemoth. But there have been instances in the health care space, in the last year or so, where for the good of mankind, we think acquisition is great. Kite and Juno had expertise in CAR T therapies, immuno-oncology, basically unleashing an individual’s own immune system against cancer.

So Gilead bought Kite. I wasn’t happy in the beginning, but when I saw their global scale, I said, They could really serve this huge, unmet need very quickly. And then Celgene bought Juno. Neither of those stocks’ prices reflects how important this is. We think CAR T technology is going to be at least a $250 billion revenue opportunity globally.

I don’t think investors in those more traditional biotech stocks understand what a breakthrough this therapy is and how quickly this is going to impact their bottom lines.

FORTUNE: Big Pharma has a problem it shares with a lot of big businesses—a trust problem. Look at Facebook: Its stock price is down about 30% since the summer, based on concerns over data privacy and breaches. Lori, how do you factor a brand’s public image into an investment decision?

KEITH: It’s something that we spend a lot of time trying to assess. It’s really intrinsic to the quality of the company and their products and services and how they’re relating to their constituents, all the stakeholders, and their consumers directly. When you have companies that can establish that trust and brand, that gives you pricing power.

So a company like Clorox, they’ve done a great job in terms of delivering products and brands that consumers trust, and that enables the company to capture a disproportionate share of the profit pool in its category. They’ve been big on recycled packaging. Things like that really relate to their customers’ desire to buy green products. And that’s allowed them to have pricing power.

SIM: We’ve been investing in GDPR-related companies [that are helping meet Europe’s new data privacy standards], companies like BigID, which came out of nowhere and has already raised $40 million. They’re helping large enterprises figure out what private data they have, where it’s located, and how they manage it and secure it. This is prepping for the time when we as individuals should be able to say, “Where’s my data—what do you have on me?” And then, “I have the right to be forgotten. Remove me from all of your lists.”

I think in the next five years, there’s an opportunity for some of these tech companies to lead the charge and be the company that says, “You own your data, and I’ll pay you to get access to the data.” And I’m seeing hundreds and hundreds of companies try to use the blockchain and other technologies to disrupt what’s already out there. It’s going to happen, for sure.

KEITH: We really do live in this glass-door environment. Everything is out in the open in terms of feedback from customers directly that you can obtain access to.

WOOD: Facebook, Google, Twitter, these are data aggregators. They actually do own the data, use the data. I’m looking around the corner at how these data aggregators are going to be disrupted because people are really unhappy. You can see it in the ranking of brands. That’s one of the best indicators of how well or poorly a stock is going to do. If it’s moving up, it tends to be associated with an appreciating stock. Facebook has moved down dramatically. And it is going to be difficult to recover.

LINEHAN: When you lose public trust, then a natural residue of that will be regulation. The financial industry lost the public trust after the great financial crisis, and the result was Dodd-Frank and a tremendous amount of regulation. Right now, there are over 125,000 different regulations associated with the financial industry. There are just about 27,000 with the technology industry. We think that one of the real risks within technology is the emergence of a stiff regulatory environment.

FORTUNE: Panelists, where do you see the greatest risks and the greatest opportunities for 2019?

WARNE: We’re going to see more market volatility, and the greatest risk is that investors will do the wrong thing. They won’t take the long view that all of us have been talking about, and they’ll sell at the first moment of stocks going down.

I see the greatest opportunity outside the U.S. Valuations are high here; they’re a lot lower in the rest of the world. We could all give a long list of things that we see going wrong, but all you need is a few things going right, and the rest of the world does better. I think that’s very likely to happen next year.

希姆：上市公司的网络安全风险绝对是巨大的。我认为明年可能会有一些公司遭到黑客攻击，并损失巨大价值。

说到机会，我个人坚信，不管我们经历的是一个怎样的经济周期，“《财富》美国500强”企业都需要对软件进行投资。所以我要做的就是那些为软件开发者提供支持的公司。微软已经买下了开源项目托管平台Github；Atlassian、Twilio和 SendGrid等公司也将为新一代的企业提供支持，帮助他们对抗各行各业的亚马逊式的巨头。

伍德：2008年以来，我们看到有2万亿美元的资金流向了债务和债务基金，而从证券市场则流出了2000亿美元左右。不过我认为风险并不在股市。尽管市场上已经有很多避险行为，不过好消息是，以任何尺度看，我们现在都谈不上泡沫。

不过即便对于那些在股市中感觉相当良好的人来说，如果他们紧跟的是被动指数，这些指数也很可能存在价值陷阱。所以我认为通过公共市场创新敞口对冲这一风险是很重要的。

至于最大的机会，当然是“颠覆性创新”了。但同时我认为，中国依然是一个巨大的机会。中国的个体消费者不是那么重视隐私，这是一种文化差异。所以从人工智能发展的角度看，他们可以做到一些我们做不到的事。

莱恩汉：我认为地缘政治是明年的一大风险。这个世界显然是不安全的。我们看到一些言论的火药味儿越来越浓了，因此我认为，明年出现政策失误的可能性很大。

另一个则是通胀的风险。美国的财政赤字马上就要突破1万亿美元了，消费者债务和政府债务都接近了有史以来的最高水平。不过由于利率较低，偿债的成本并不算高。如果你发现利率升高了，那么在某些时候，它对经济的影响可能是非常有害的。

作为一名价值型经理人，我在寻找机会的时候总是考虑什么东西更便宜。目前可以真正称得上“便宜”的投资机会少之又少。所以，你不妨寻找一些最近表现不佳的公司进行投资。但是我们必须要对它的业务模式有信心，同时它也要有能力承受长期压力。

基思：我们显然已经进入了一个市场周期的后半段。我们已经看到了通胀的迹象——虽然物价未必会急剧上涨，但已经开始上涨了。我们已经看到了工资的通胀成本，另外油价也在上涨。这些都引发了对收益增长放缓的担忧。自从2009年以来，我们只经历了市场周期的上升期，大家似乎都忘了经济还有周期这回事。

我们希望确保我们投资的是高质量的公司，它们能有广泛的竞争力，越来越好的产品，以及顺应科技发展趋势的服务。另外，管理良好、具有正面社会形象的公司也必然能在长期跑赢大盘。

《财富》：感谢大家。

SIM: Cybersecurity risk for public companies is absolutely massive. I think there’ll probably be some companies out there in the next year that get hacked and lose tremendous value.

On the opportunity side, I’m a huge, huge believer, no matter what economic cycle we go through, that Fortune 500s need to invest in software. So I’m all about picks and shovels: investing in the companies powering the developers. Look at Microsoft buying GitHub. Look at Atlassian, Twilio, SendGrid, all those types of companies I think are going to power the next wave of companies fighting off the Amazons of the world.

WOOD: Since 2008, we’ve seen $2 trillion of inflows into bonds and bond funds, and we’ve seen roughly $200 billion of outflows from equity. I think the risk is not being in stocks. And with all the risk aversion out there, the good news is, we are not in a bubble by any stretch of the imagination.

But even those who are in stocks right now and feel really comfortable, if they are in passive indexes, those indexes are piling up with value traps. So I really think being exposed or getting a hedge against that with exposure to innovation in the public markets is important.

Greatest opportunities? Of course you know I’m going to say “disruptive innovation.” But I do think, again, China. Individuals in China do not expect privacy. It’s a different culture. So from an A.I. point of view, they are going to be able to do things that we cannot.

LINEHAN: I think one of the big risks for 2019 is going to be geopolitical. We clearly live in a world that is not safe. We are seeing the heated rhetoric increase, and I believe as a result there is a greater likelihood of a policy error occurring.

Another risk is the potential for inflation. We’re going to be running a trillion-dollar deficit. Consumer and government debt is close to all-time highs. But the cost of debt service is not all that high because we have very low interest rates. If you see interest rates creep higher, the impact on the economy at some point could be very injurious.

As a value manager, I always think of opportunity in the context of what’s cheap. And right now there’s very little that’s actually that cheap. So I’d say finding select companies that have underperformed—where we feel comfortable with the business model and with the ability to withstand secular pressures—that would be a good place to start.

KEITH: We’re certainly into the latter stages of a late market cycle. We’re starting to see inflation—not necessarily picking up dramatically but starting to pick up. We’re seeing inflationary costs around wages, and oil prices are rising. So all those things raise concerns about earnings growth slowing. We’ve only been in one part of the market cycle since 2009, and people forget that we do still have cycles.

We want to make sure that we’re investing in quality companies that have wide competitive moats, increasingly relevant products, and services that play into technological trends. And well-managed companies with very socially responsible profiles are going to be able to outperform over the long run.

FORTUNE: Thanks, all.

2019年投资者应感到高兴和担忧的三件事

三件值得高兴的事

技术升级

大公司的竞争力取决于他们适应技术变化的速度。在这一趋势的推动下，一些小公司能把软件及相关服务卖给大客户（如Vonage和Pivotal Software等），而大企业则会开展技术收购（如沃尔玛）。

环境改善

能够削减自己和其他人的环境足迹的公司（如高乐氏、赛莱默等）将更容易获得客户忠诚度和定价权。市场对低碳、零碳能源的需求将使很多公司（如特斯拉、泛加等）取得更好的成绩。

中国

贸易摩擦和地缘政治因素导致中国市场有所下滑，但中国的几大科技巨头（如百度、腾讯）都有光明的前景。那些经济上依赖中国的新兴市场国家可能也将迎来利好。

三件值得担忧的事

通胀

对投资者来说，经济强势增长也有不利的一面。工资和能源成本的上涨，意味着支出的增加，从而可能侵蚀利润。

股价泡沫

即使在今秋的一轮暴跌之后，标普500指数的市盈率仍然在22倍以上。这个数字对于一些增长潜力巨大的公司并不算高，但也有很多公司达不到这个标准。

数据灾难

Facebook股价今年的暴跌充分说明，当用户对一家公司的数据处理方式失去信任时，将给企业带来怎样的后果。2019年，网络安全和数据隐私可能将成为让很多投资者头疼的问题。

Three Things Investors Should Feel Excited About for 2019, and Three Things They Should Worry About

GET EXCITED ABOUT…

Tech Upgrades

Big companies’ competitiveness depends on how quickly they adapt to technological change. That trend should boost small companies that provide software and related services to bigger clients (Vonage, Pivotal Software) and big ones making smart tech acquisitions (Walmart).

Cleaner Living

Companies that shrink their own and other people’s environmental footprints (Clorox, Xylem) increasingly command greater customer loyalty and pricing power. And demand for lower- and zero-carbon energy will help many companies (Tesla, TransCanada) outperform.

China

Trade tensions and geopolitics have driven down China’s markets, but the country’s tech giants (Baidu, Tencent) have promising outlooks. And the emerging markets whose economies revolve around China’s could get a big boost from good news.

WORRY ABOUT…

Inflation

A strong economy has a downside for investors: Upward pressure on wages and rising fuel costs mean higher expenses that threaten profits.

Bubbly Stock Prices

Even after this autumn’s selloff, the price-to-earnings ratio of the S&P 500 stood above 22. Companies with great growth potential can justify those kind of prices, but many can’t clear that bar.

Data Disasters

The abrupt plunge that Facebook’s stock took this year offers a cautionary tale about the backlash that can occur when customers lose trust in how a company handles data. Cyber¬security lapses and privacy problems are likely to create plenty of other headaches for investors in 2019.

（财富中文网）

本文的另一版本登载于2018年12月1日刊的《财富》杂志，作为《2019年投资者指南》的一部分。

译者：朴成奎

A version of this article appears in the December 1, 2018 issue of Fortune, as part of the “2019 Investor’s Guide.”