来源：少数派投资
投资的秘诀就是在价格远低于内在价值时投资，并且相信市场趋势会回升。——本杰明·格雷厄姆
与其说格雷厄姆是「华尔街教父」，倒不如说他是「烟蒂股投资」的代名词。
多数人眼中，这位「股神」的老师、《证券分析》的作者，是个只会捡便宜货、过时了的老家伙。而巴菲特发展了他理论，使得「以合理价格买入优秀公司」成为价值投资的最佳方式。
就这样，预设的共识将我们裹挟：
既然有更先进的理论，何必再看陈旧、「落伍」的东西？
于是，价值投资被等同于基本面分析，「买入好公司、陪伴其成长」成为很多人的圭臬。
对此，我们不妨多想一步：
格雷厄姆这位华尔街教父，为什么意识不到好公司的价值，却更愿意买一些便宜的垃圾呢？仅仅是因为时代局限、个人能力不足吗？
本文将结合《证券分析》，带大家重温经典，剖析那个被多数人误解了的格雷厄姆。
内在价值：敢于与多数人不同
格雷厄姆的投资理念以「内在价值」为基础。
多数人的眼中，这不过是个数值的概念。不少专业人士会用现金流折现算出一只股票的价值，然后据此判断股价的高低。
然而，《证券分析》中根本就没有提过，「内在价值」该如何计算，甚至直言臆测内在价值是一个极大的错误。格雷厄姆给出的定义是「事实证明合理的价值」。
他还特别强调：
「分析师没有必要精确估计出每股的实际价值便可得出结论」。
连具体算法都没有，意义何在？
关键就在于对「市场先生」的否定。
市场价格是多数参与者一致预期的体现。而格雷厄姆却认为，还应存在一个与之不同、且被事实证明更加合理的「内在价值」。这是独立思考的意识：对已有共识持怀疑态度，敢于与多数人不同。
他将市场，比作一位情绪不稳定、犯各种错误的先生，正是这位先生非理性的行为为我们创造了良好的投资机会。
投资应以可靠基础为支撑
我们也是市场参与者之一，凭什么说多数人是非理性的？
在格雷厄姆看来，敢于否定市场先生的底气在于「全面、彻底的分析」，他明确区分了投资与投机，并将「有据可依」作为投资的必然特征。
他认为：
「只要你的数据和推理是正确的，你就是对的」
对此巴菲特阐述为：
「只要你的前提正确，事实正确，逻辑正确，你最后就是正确的」。
格雷厄姆这样描述一个「合理的推荐」：
「它不仅必须要在市场上表现良好，还必须有合理的推理过程作基础……证券分析的专业标准要求所有的推荐者必须清楚注明推荐的类型，并形成推荐结果的分析推理过程。」
从而区分，到底是因为做了正确的工作，还是运气好。
这样做出的投资判断，才具备可重复性，能够在长期持续。
对「实力强劲公司」的投机
基于对客观事实和严密逻辑的苛刻要求，格雷厄姆对股票的成长前景始终抱以审慎态度。他对「好股票就是好投资」的观点提出了明确批判：
「将之称为‘对实力强劲公司的投机’也许更符合逻辑且有助于理解，这种‘投资’的结果与过去的那些投机行为并无二致，除了可能没有安全保障以外。」
对于市场上大家普遍看好的优秀公司，格雷厄姆看到其中「重复计算」的倾向：
「股价反映了一个良好的管理层带来的收益，也反映了‘良好管理’所带来的增益，这就导致了‘对同一个项目重复计入’，从而出现估值过高的情况。」
他认为证券分析主要是关注能以事实确定的价值，而非那些依赖对未来预期的价值。他将某一证券相关的重要事实分类列出，并用一种连贯一致且易于表达的方式表达出来。
这些重要的事实包括证券条款、行业特征、公司运营记录（资本、负债、利润、股利等及其管理层）、法律法规等，而不应该仅仅基于过去，简单外推业绩趋势将会延续。
他更加看重被人们忽视的投资，如抛弃的股票或债券、清算、破产、套利等。
不变的是对「确定性」的追求
格雷厄姆偏爱「烟蒂股」，正是因为他对确定性的看重。
未来难以预测，我们无法获得预判一家高成长公司未来经营情况的充分信息，分析过程中的逻辑链条断点、乃至思维跳跃无法避免。
如果我们没有找到明确的依据说明「多数人乐观程度远远不够」，那么与其说是投资，不如以下注来形容更为贴切。这是格雷厄姆竭力规避的。
巴菲特发展了老师的理论，但他仍以确定性为根基。
他将投资的「可把握度」延伸到了未来，这不是盲目的过度自信，而是通过能力圈的构建，在个别领域获得了超越市场多数人的理解能力，严格意义上，他不是传统二级市场基金经理，而已成为控制、经营多家企业的「产业资本家」。
这与多数人想当然地买入好公司有着天壤之别，也是我们学习巴菲特时，不应忽视的类比前提。
从格雷厄姆到巴菲特，变化的是投资的表面形式，不变的是对确定性的追求。
编辑/jayden
Source: Minority Investments
The secret to investing is to invest when the price is well below the intrinsic value and trust that the market trend will pick up. —Benjamin Graham
Rather than saying that Graham is the “Godfather of Wall Street,” he is more synonymous with “cigarette butts stock investment.”
In the eyes of most people, the teacher of the “stock god” and the author of “Securities Analysis” is an old guy who only picks up bargains and is out of date. Buffett, on the other hand, developed his theory to make “buying a good company at a reasonable price” the best way to invest in value.
Just like that, the preconceived consensus threatened us:
Since there are more advanced theories, why should we look at old, “outdated” stuff again?
As a result, value investment was equated with fundamental analysis, and “buying a good company and growing with it” became a priority for many people.
We might as well think a little more about this:
Why is Graham, the godfather of Wall Street, unaware of the value of a good company, but is more willing to buy cheap trash? Is it simply because of the limitations of the times and lack of personal ability?
In conjunction with “Securities Analysis,” this article will take you back to the classics and analyze Graham, who has been misunderstood by most people.
Intrinsic value: Dare to be different from most people
Graham's investment philosophy is based on “intrinsic value.”
In the eyes of most people, this is just a numerical concept. Many professionals use cash flow discounts to calculate the value of a stock, and then judge the stock price based on this.
However, “Securities Analysis” doesn't mention at all how to calculate “intrinsic value”, or even bluntly saying that guessing intrinsic value is a huge mistake. Graham defined it as “value proven to be reasonable.”
He also placed particular emphasis on:
“There is no need for analysts to accurately estimate the actual value of each share in order to draw conclusions”.
There isn't even a specific algorithm, what's the point?
The key is the denial of “Mr. Market.”
Market prices reflect the unanimous expectations of most participants. Graham, on the other hand, believes that there should also be an “intrinsic value” that is different from that and has been proven more reasonable by facts. This is the sense of independent thinking: skeptical about existing consensus and daring to be different from most people.
He compared the market to a man who was emotionally unstable and made all kinds of mistakes. It was this man's irrational behavior that created good investment opportunities for us.
Investments should be supported by a reliable foundation
We are also one of the market participants, why do you say most people are irrational?
In Graham's view, daring to deny Mr. Market's motivation lies in “comprehensive and thorough analysis”. He clearly distinguished between investment and speculation, and made “evidence to rely on” as an inevitable characteristic of investment.
In his opinion:
“As long as your data and reasoning are correct, you're right”
Buffett explained this as follows:
“As long as your premise is correct, the facts are correct, and the logic is correct, you will be right in the end”.
Graham described a “reasonable recommendation” this way:
“It must not only perform well in the market, but must also be based on a reasonable reasoning process... Professional standards for securities analysis require that all recommenders clearly indicate the type of recommendation and form an analytical reasoning process for recommendation results.”
This distinguishes whether it's because you did the right job or because you were lucky.
The investment judgments made in this way are repeatable and sustainable over the long term.
Speculation on “powerful companies”
Based on strict requirements for objective facts and strict logic, Graham has always been cautious about the growth prospects of stocks. He made a clear critique of the idea that “good stocks are good investments”:
“It's probably more logical and understandable to call it 'speculation on powerful companies'. The results of this' investment 'are no different from those speculations in the past, other than the possibility of no security.”
Graham sees a trend of “double counting” among excellent companies that are generally optimistic about in the market:
“The stock price reflects the benefits brought by a good management team, as well as the gains brought by 'good management', which led to 'double counting of the same project', leading to overvaluation.”
He believes that securities analysis mainly focuses on values that can be determined by facts, rather than values that rely on expectations about the future. He classified the important facts relating to a particular security and expressed them in a consistent and easy-to-express manner.
These important facts include securities terms, industry characteristics, company operating records (capital, liabilities, profits, dividends, etc., and their management), laws and regulations, etc., and should not be based only on the past; simply extrapolating performance trends will continue.
He places more value on investments that people overlook, such as abandoned stocks or bonds, liquidation, bankruptcy, arbitrage, etc.
What has not changed is the pursuit of “certainty”
Graham's preference for “cigarette butts” is precisely because he values certainty.
The future is difficult to predict. We cannot obtain sufficient information to predict the future business situation of a high-growth company. Logical chain breakpoints and even jumps in thinking during the analysis process are unavoidable.
If we don't find any clear evidence that “most people aren't optimistic enough,” then it's more appropriate to describe it as an investment than an investment. Graham tried his best to avoid this.
Buffett developed his teacher's theory, but he still used determinism as his foundation.
He extended the “certainty” of investment to the future. This is not blind excessive self-confidence, but through the construction of a circle of ability, he has obtained comprehension skills that surpass most people in the market in individual fields. Strictly speaking, he is not a traditional secondary market fund manager, but has become an “industrial capitalist” who controls and operates many enterprises.
This is very different from most people taking good companies for granted. It is also an analogy premise that we should not ignore when we study Buffett.
From Graham to Buffett, what has changed is the superficial form of investment; what has not changed is the pursuit of certainty.
Editor/jayden
