经济学人财经 | 投资大亨唱衰石油股

Inessential oils

石油可能不再那么重要

A contrarian investor on the dangers of investing in oil stocks

投资大亨唱衰石油股

LATE LAST year Jeremy Grantham, an investor routinely described as “legendary”, spoke about ESG (environmental, social and governance) investing at a conference in London. His presentation was slick; his accent floated somewhere in the mid-Atlantic (Mr Grantham is English but has lived in America for ages). “I love S and G,” he began. “But E is about survival.”

去年年末，传奇投资者杰里米·格兰瑟姆于伦敦的一场会议上谈到了ESG投资 (环境，社会和公司治理)。他依旧伶牙俐齿，时而夹杂着些许大西洋中部口音（尽管格兰瑟姆先生是英国人，但已在美国生活了许久）。“虽然我偏好社会和公司治理两大因素，但环境因素决定着生存（才是根本）。”他这样开场道。

注：

1.Jeremy Grantham

格兰瑟姆的核心投资哲学可以被简明扼要的表述为“均值回归理念”。他相信所有类别的资产和市场都将会从过高或过低回归历史均值水平。当市场偏离历史均值水平时，他的公司都将会以均值回归为投资定位来建立头寸。

2.Mid-Atlantic: 大西洋中部地区口音（兼备英美发音特征的口音）

Three-letter abbreviations have been a constant in Mr Grantham’s professional life. He is the G in GMO, which stands for Grantham, Mayo and van Otterloo, the fund-management group he co-founded. His firm has a distinctive philosophy: it favours companies with low share prices relative to measures of fundamental worth, such as cash flows or the value of assets. Mr Grantham owes much of his public profile to his decrying of stockmarket bubbles.

ESG三字缩写可以说伴随了格兰瑟姆先生的职业生涯。GMO公司名字中的G就是指他，（GMO代表Grantham, Mayo和van Otterloo） 格兰瑟姆是这家资产管理公司的联合创始人）。公司秉承着独特的投资理念:相较于现金流或者资产价值等一些内在价值标准来衡量公司，它更青睐于低股价的企业。公众对格兰瑟姆的形象认知很大程度上源自于其对股市泡沫的抨击。

注：
Decry: 公开谴责，强烈抨击

This sort of hard-headed, long-termist approach also informs Mr Grantham’s views on environmental policy. And his conclusion is that investors should avoid owning oil stocks.

格林瑟姆这种冷静且注重长期收益的投资方法也影响他对环境政策的看法。他在演讲中总结到：投资者应避免持有石油类股票。

注：

hard-headed:practical and able to make difficult decisions without letting your emotions affect your judgment. eg:a hard-headed business tycoon.

It is a call that raises hackles. Committees that set investment policies for pension funds fear that if they shun oil stocks it will be harder to reach their financial goals. Mr Grantham checked the data to find out whether, and how much, omitting the stocks of any industry over three decades would have hurt a hypothetical investor. He created synthetic portfolios that left out each of the ten broad stockmarket sectors and compared their returns with the market as a whole.

此呼吁引发了质疑。养老资金投资政策委员会担心：若抛掉石油类股票，他们就很难完成其财务目标。格林瑟姆先生对数据进行了核查，以确定在过去三十年中，忽略任何一个行业的股票是否会损害假设投资者的收益，以及具体会损害多少。他通过依次剔除十大股市板块中的其中一个板块，分别建立投资组合，然后将每个组合的收益再与市场整体收益进行比较。

注：

Hackles:erectile hairs along an animal’s back, which rise when it is angry or alarmed.

The results were surprising: it made hardly any difference. The s&p index returned an average of 9.71% annually between 1989 and 2017; the index excluding energy stocks returned 9.74%. The range of returns, from the worst portfolio to the best, was just 0.5 percentage points.

测算结果令人惊讶：几乎无任何区别。1989年至2017年期间，标准普尔指数年均回报率为9.71％；剔除能源股的指数回报率为9.74%。最差和最佳投资组合之间的回报率差异（上下限之间的差异）仅为0.5个百分点。

This finding seemed like it might be a fluke. But a further check, going back to 1925, had a similar outcome. The spread between the best and worst portfolios was 0.54 percentage points; there was hardly any gap between the portfolio with energy stocks and without them (see chart). This is worth knowing, whatever your views on esg. The market, it seems, has done rather a good job over time of pricing stocks so that no broad industry group yields abnormal returns.

这一发现看上去似乎只是个偶然情况。但进一步追溯至1925年，测算（依旧）得到了类似的结果。最佳和最差投资组合之间的回报率差异仅为0.54个百分点；覆盖能源行业与剔除能源行业的投资组合之间回报率几乎没有任何区别（见图表）。无论对于ESG的看法如何，这都值得了解。长期来看，市场似乎在股票定价方面一直表现得相当不错，没有一个行业大类产生（过高或过低的）异常回报。

注：

1.fluke：a stroke of luck侥幸、幸运

2.ESG：Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) refers to the three central factors in measuring the sustainability and societal impact of an investment in a company or business. ESG投资是环境（Environmental）、社会责任（Social）、公司治理（Governance）的缩写，是提倡责任投资和弘扬可持续发展的新兴投资方式。即在投资过程中除了要考察企业的基本面和财务指标，还要将环境、社会责任和公司治理因素纳入考虑范围，

Mr Grantham believes that oil might yet prove an exception. Oil demand has already peaked in rich countries and, as climate fears grow and green technologies become cost-effective, it will eventually peak worldwide. But not everyone is keenly focused on this prospect. Scepticism regarding climate science is common in America. To the extent that sceptics are investors, and are betting on business as usual, at least some of the risks facing Big Oil may not be in the price.

格兰瑟姆先生相信石油可能会是一个例外。在发达国家，石油的需求目前已达峰值，并且随着气候变化的恐慌情绪蔓延，环保科技更具成本效益，最终，全球石油需求都将到达峰值。但并不是每个人都能敏锐地关注到这个前景。关于气候科学的怀疑主义在美国非常普遍。鉴于持怀疑态度的人是投资人，而他们像往常一样进行商业押注，至少石油巨头公司面临的一些风险可能并没有体现在其股价上。

注：

Big Oil:石油巨头,一般指世界上资本或企业规模巨大的石油集团公司，而最大的五至六家石油集团公司，亦被称为“石油超级巨头”（英语：supermajor或super major），包括英国石油公司、埃克森美孚公司、荷兰皇家壳牌、雪佛龙石油公司、康菲石油公司和道达尔石油公司等等，有时也被描述为形成影响美国国会的石油帮集团的一部分。

石油巨头的政经影响力，特别是在美国，常与能源产业游说团体有关，亦产生企业贪腐案例，如里根政府期间，石油巨头的游说团体成功地使美国能源部减少60%的人力。石油巨头为上亿元的资本避税和石油开发展开博弈。（来源：Eudic词典）

Investors might, for instance, miscalculate the speed of transition to greener energy. Advances in materials science and battery technology are making electric vehicles a cost-effective alternative to petrol-fuelled cars, Mr Grantham reckons. Other potential hazards face oil companies, including increased regulation and costly lawsuits. In other industries, such as tobacco, firms have been forced to pay up when found to have knowingly sold harmful products. He thinks the oil industry faces a similar reckoning. 

比如说，投资人们可能会错误计算该行业转型到清洁能源的速度。格兰瑟姆先生认为，材料科学和电池技术的进步已经使电动汽车替代传统汽车（靠油驱动）成为一个更有成本效益优势的选择。其他石油企业面临的潜在威胁，包括日益增加的法规和昂贵的诉讼。对于如烟草这样的行业来说，当企业被发现故意销售有害产品时，必须支付罚款。他认为，石油行业未来会面临同样的命运。

Is there also a moral case for disinvestment? An argument against is that oil firms are best placed to speed the transition to solar and wind power. They have experience of managing big projects in difficult terrain. And many would say that dumping oil stocks is a pointless salve to the eco-warrior’s conscience. Bill Gates, a software mogul and philanthropist, has argued that people should not waste idealism and energy on a policy that will not cause any reduction in the use of fossil fuels. What matters are incentives set by governments: tax breaks to fund research in green energy; tax rises to discourage carbon use. But this misses the point, says Mr Grantham: “You have to make the oil industry a pariah for bad behaviour.” Only then will politicians feel the need to act.

另外从道德层面出发有撤资的理由吗？一种反对的声音是说石油公司能更好地加速向太阳能和风能的过渡，因为他们有在条件艰苦地区管理大型项目的经验。而且很多人认为抛售石油公司股票对于环保卫士的良心是一种毫无意义的安慰。软件大亨和慈善家比尔盖茨主张人们不应该浪费理想主义和精力在一项并不会（实质性）减少化石燃料使用的政策上。重要的应该是政府制定的激励措施：减税以资助绿色能源研究；增税以减少碳使用。但格兰瑟姆（Grantham）先生认为这忽略了一个要点，“你必须让石油行业因其不良行为而被唾弃”，唯有这样，政府才会感受到行动的必要性。

A lot of finance types quietly suspect that greenery is anti-capitalism in metastatic form. Mr Grantham is clearly not of this anti-business persuasion. That makes it far harder to dismiss his arguments out of hand. “This is the first time that a major industry has been put on notice that it is going out of business, even if it may take a long time,” he says. His arguments pose a challenge to investors: do you really want to go along for such a bumpy ride?

很多金融圈人士默默怀疑绿色主义是一种变相的反资本主义。格兰瑟姆（Grantham）先生明显不是这种反商业的人，这使得他的观点很难被轻易忽略。他说“这是首次对一个重要行业的出局进行提醒，即使这可能需要相当长的时间。”他的言论对投资者提出了挑战：你真的想经历一段坎坷不平的投资旅程吗？

翻译组：

Chao，牛津大学Dphil，TE爱好者

Jerry,  男，金融专业研究生，经济学人铁粉

Vivifang，女，外币债券交易员，经济学人粉丝

Ashley，女，金融硕士，爱宠物 爱英语，爱旅游，经济学人粉丝

校对组：

Martina，女，爱电影爱生活，爱金融经济

Emily，食物链底端金融民工，经济学人粉丝