为什么买苹果股票会亏钱

    但格雷厄姆更喜欢采用的“平均盈利”测试却指向相反的方向，认为苹果股票估值处于危险的高位。16倍的市盈率意味着，要想股价持续上涨，苹果就需要在2012财年营收417亿美元的基础上，盈利实现大幅增长。投资者仍在预期苹果股票年收益率在8.3％左右（6.3％的收益率<相当于其市盈率15.9的倒数>加上2％的预期通胀率）。去年8月份，苹果从遵循不派息政策转为每年向股票持有者派发100亿美元股息。在9月份股价达到最高位时，这笔股息所对应的股息率为1.5％。因此，投资者预计从苹果未来的盈利增长中再获得每年6.7％的收益（预期8.3％的收益率减去1.5％的股息率）。

    考虑到苹果最近几年业绩激增而连创纪录的情况，这近7％的增长要求听起来似乎是轻而易举就能做到的事情。但问题是，在苹果股价处于705美元的高位时，市场预期苹果能够在业绩增速早已巨大以及盈利早已巨大的基础上，进一步实现显著的增长。到2017年，苹果将需要实现580亿美元的盈利，才能给股票持有者提供8％以上的收益，而届时其市值将飙升至9,000多亿美元。

    那么，如果投资者当时也权衡苹果过往业绩的话，情况会是怎样呢？过去五年里，苹果按照前四个季度计算的平均盈利为161亿美元。过去的三年里，这个数字是220亿美元。

    这两个数字都没有对苹果未来的盈利潜力给予一个明确的看法。但它们强烈表明，苹果股票在去年9月份绝对不便宜，而是一个极其昂贵、风险很大的赌注。即便采用220亿美元这个平均盈利数据来计算，苹果经调整后的市盈率也达到30倍。处于这么高的估值水平，一旦苹果出现任何令人失望的业绩，都会导致它的股票因遭到抛售而急剧暴跌。而这恰恰是现在出现的情况。

    华尔街宣称苹果已达到一个全新的盈利起始平台，其净利润将从这个基础上进一步飙升——这正是格雷厄姆的预测方法指出错误的那种思维方式。去年10月份，晨星（Morningstar）、美林（Merrill Lynch）、摩根大通（JP Morgan）、摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）、德意志银行（Deutsche Bank）和高盛集团（Goldman Sachs）都把苹果股票2013年的目标价格设置在714美元至880美元的区间内，而当时苹果股价已跌至600美元左右。这些预期的苹果目标价格都超过了该股9月份达到的最高价位，而且它们的平均值为776美元。

    为了证明自己的观点，华尔街各大公司都预测苹果盈利将会大幅增长，他们预期的盈利涨幅从8.2％至23％不等，平均值为10％。

    但通过查看苹果的10K年度财报，投资者自然会犯愁，推动这家科技巨头的盈利超越400亿美元的超高利润率是否会像分析师所预言的那样，不仅是完全可以重复的，甚至是可以显著超越的呢? 2012财年期间，iPhone及相关产品在苹果营收总额中占据了51％的份额，在扣除研发开支及企业日常管理费用前的毛利率中贡献了56％的份额——比iPad和iPod高出20个百分点。

    这么高的利润势必会吸引竞争对手，而且结果几乎总是昙花一现。现在，iPhone正面临三星（Samsung）Galaxy智能手机的挑战，引起了市场的高度关注。根据平均盈利测试来判断，我们甚至不能明确从其最高价位已下跌近30％的苹果股票目前是否已经估值便宜了。没有什么比重新阅读本•格雷厄姆存在已久的投资智慧更能揭露华尔街极端狂热的预期。（财富中文网）

    译者：iDo98

    The "average earnings" test preferred by Graham pointed in the opposite direction, towards danger. The 16 multiple meant that Apple would need to generate substantial earnings increases, over and above the $41.7 billion, to keep the stock rising. Investors were still expecting an annual return of around 8.3% (that's the earnings yield of 6.3% plus 2% anticipated inflation). In August, Apple went from a no-dividend policy to paying out $10 billion a year to shareholders. At the September peak, that dividend represented a 1.5% yield. So investors expected an additional 6.7% (the 8.3% expected return minus the 1.5% yield) from growth in future earnings.

    The nearly 7% growth requirement sounds like a snap, given Apple's explosive record. The problem is that, at $705 a share, the market was anticipating significant increases on top of already gigantic increases and gigantic earnings. By 2017, Apple would need to earn $58 billion to hand shareholders that 8%-plus return, and its valuation would soar to over $900 billion.

    So what's the picture if investors had also weighed Apple's past performance? Over the past five years, Apple's average earnings, based on four trailing quarters, is $16.1 billion. Over the past three years, the figure is $22 billion.

    Neither number gives a definitive view of Apple's future earnings potential. But they indicate strongly that Apple's stock in September was not cheap at all, but an extremely pricey, risky bet. Even using the $22 billion number, its adjusted PE was 30. At those levels, any disappointment causes a steep sell-off. And that's precisely what happened.

    The Wall Street pitch was that Apple had reached a new earnings threshold, and that profits would soar from there -- just the kind of prediction that the Graham method debunks. In October, Morningstar, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs placed target prices of between $714 and $880 a share for 2013 on Apple's stock, which had already declined to around $600. Those projected prices all exceed the September peak, and average $776.

    To support their view, the Wall Street firms all forecast big gains in earnings, ranging from 8.2% to 23%, and averaging 10%.

    But reviewing Apple's 10K, investors would naturally fret whether the fantastic margins that propelled the tech colossus to over $40 billion profits were not just repeatable, but eminently beatable, as the analysts were forecasting. For fiscal 2012, the iPhone and related products accounted for 51% of Apple's revenues, and generated gross margins, before R&D and corporate overhead, of 56%, 20 points higher than the iPad and iPod.

    Margins that high are a magnet for competitors, and almost always prove ephemeral. Now, the iPhone is facing a highly-publicized challenge from Samsung's Galaxy. It's not even clear that Apple is a bargain now after its almost 30% fall, based on the average earnings test. There's nothing like re-reading old Ben Graham to keep a check on Wall Street's wild expectations.