Not only that, but the Nifty Fifty would have had better tax efficiency than an index fund. When dealing with excellent businesses, the ghost ship approach, historically, has won in the long-run but how many investors are willing to stick with 30 or 40 years of near total passivity in a lifetime that, for most people, will last only 80 years or so? Again, it's an issue for behavioral economics.
不仅如此,Nifty Fifty比指数基金的税收效益更好,从历史角度来看“幽灵船”的方法针对好的投资产品具有长期优势,但有多少投资者愿意一辈子几乎完全被动地等上30或40年呢?大多数人只能活80岁左右。再强调一下,这是行为经济学的问题。
All else equal, though, try and avoid investments that are priced to perfection with no margin of safety because a mere blip in operating performance could cause a long-term, catastrophic loss in principal as fickle speculators flee to hotter securities.
然而其他的都一样,你要尽量避免定价完美但利润没有保证的投资,因为操作时的一点波动,都会对本金造成长期的巨大损失,因为变化无常的投机者会转向更热门的证券市场。
Even then, if you are going to consider it, stick solely to the bluest of the blue chips. You can probably get away with overpaying for a company like Johnson and Johnson if you're going to hold it for the next 50 years - nobody knows the future but the odds seem to favor it - whereas I wouldn't be so keen on doing it for a firm like Facebook.
【大公司不一定是好的投资之选】相关文章:
★ 中国哲学的起源
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15