Insightful Investor Podcast interviewed David Powers： Wasatch Culture Market Cycles Long-Term on May 13, 2025

《洞察投資者》播客採訪大衛·鮑爾斯：瓦薩奇文化市場週期長期展望於 2025 年 5 月 13 日

Welcome to the Insightful Investor Podcast, a weekly series that seeks to share industry, investment and market insights. Learn more about our show at insightfulinvestor.org. [MUSIC] Joining me today on the podcast is David Powers. Dave is a senior portfolio manager and team leader of global value at Wassatch Global Investors, which is a $25 billion equity manager based in Salt Lake City, that just hit its 50 year anniversary. And Dave has been at Wassatch for about a dozen years, but he's been managing value equities since 1997. Welcome, Dave. >> Thank you. Let's go back to the early years. What originally attracted you to investing? >> I've actually thought about this many times over the years. I think it all sort of went back years and years ago. We're growing up, I had a very close family. And we played a lot of car games, board games, sports. And I kind of believe that those experiences in some way laid a groundwork for the interest in investing. Every Sunday, my dad would go through the business section of the newspaper, record prices of stocks a year in mom-owned. And he would teach my brother and I a little bit about investing. I'm not sure I got it all at that point or it all registered, but I think it started to grow a bit when we bought our first Commodore 64 to date myself a bit here. Computer game, which was essentially called the stock market game, or I think something close to that. I played the game for hours and tried to advance as much of a fortune as I could. And frankly, I got a bit hooked. And so that's kind of, I think, how I got going.
歡迎收聽《洞察投資者》播客，這是一個每週系列節目，旨在分享產業、投資與市場見解。更多節目資訊請參閱 insightfulinvestor.org。[音樂]今天節目中與我一同參與的是大衛·鮑爾斯。戴夫是 Wasatch 全球投資公司的高級投資組合經理兼全球價值團隊負責人，這家位於鹽湖城、管理 250 億美元資產的股票投資機構剛慶祝成立 50 週年。戴夫在 Wasatch 任職約十二年，但自 1997 年起便開始管理價值型股票。歡迎你，戴夫。>> 謝謝。讓我們回溯早期歲月，最初是什麼吸引你進入投資領域？>> 這些年來我確實多次思考過這個問題。我想一切都可以追溯到很多年前。成長過程中，我有個關係緊密的家庭。我們經常玩車類遊戲、桌遊和運動。某種程度上，我相信這些經歷為投資興趣奠定了基礎。每週日，父親都會翻閱報紙商業版，記錄媽媽持有股票的年度價格。他會教導我和弟弟一些投資知識。 當時我不確定自己是否完全理解或記住了所有內容，但我認為這一切開始萌芽是在我們買了第一台 Commodore 64 電腦的時候——這讓我顯得有點年代感。那款電腦遊戲基本上叫做「股市遊戲」，或者類似的名稱。我玩了這個遊戲好幾個小時，試圖累積盡可能多的財富。坦白說，我有點上癮了。所以我想，這就是我如何開始的。

Well, were you going to take a game? I learned how to manipulate it. So I would say that versus skill. Great. Those fun. Interesting. Now, you were a college pitcher. And how would you say that experience helped shape your approach investing, especially regarding mental preparation and maybe even contrarian thinking? I love sports as a kid and baseball and pitching in particular.
那麼，你是打算玩遊戲嗎？我學會了如何操控它。所以我會說這更像是技巧而非運氣。很有趣。現在，你曾經是大學的投手。你會說這段經歷如何塑造了你的投資方式，特別是在心理準備和逆向思維方面？我從小就熱愛運動，尤其是棒球和投球。

When you're young, you can kind of get by with some maybe some raw skill and throw a fastball by someone or a curveball, especially kids that are sort of not into the sport as much as maybe use maybe as you are. But as you get older and players give bigger and stronger and you need to kind of develop a strategy. And my towel was pretty good, but it wasn't enough. I had to start to think like a contrarian. Had the throw pitches where the batters weren't expecting them, either off speed, outside inside, fastball curve, all just something they weren't expecting. So the mental preparation of the strategy, particularly kind of as a contrarian, became a bigger part of the game. My career in some leagues and college was good, but it didn't last too long. I did develop skills so I think I used an investing today, including the willingness to take a chance and to be a contrarian. I sort of think a sports as a whole taught me a lot about how to win and lose and how to bounce back the next day. And investing, you have down days, it's a very humbling business, but you have to bounce back and say tomorrow's a new day and forget yesterday and sort of on emotionally. What is the rational thing to do from here? And I think a lot of that kind of started from baseball and pitching.
年輕時，你可能還能靠著一些天賦硬撐，比如用快速球或曲球三振對手，尤其是面對那些對運動沒那麼熱衷的孩子。但隨著年齡增長，球員們變得更高大強壯，你就必須發展出一套策略。我的投球其實不錯，但光這樣還不夠。我開始學著像個逆向思考者那樣投球——專投打者預料不到的球路，不論是變速球、外角內角、快速球或曲球，總之就是要出乎他們意料。因此，這種策略性的心理準備，特別是逆向思維，逐漸成為比賽中更關鍵的部分。我在某些聯盟和大學的表現不錯，但職業生涯並不長。不過我培養的技能，如今都運用在投資上，包括敢於冒險和逆向操作。整體而言，運動教會我如何面對輸贏，以及如何在隔天重新振作。投資這行常有挫敗的時候，是個讓人謙卑的領域，但你必須學會反彈，告訴自己明天又是新的一天，別讓情緒被昨天的表現牽著走。 從現在開始，理性的事情是什麼？我認為很多這類想法最初是從棒球和投球開始的。

It's interesting and I guess part of sports and investing is you live through this learning curve. And is your sense that the learning curve in investing is always steep or does it flatten over time? I don't think it ever flatten and I hope it never does because I really love this business and part of that is just learning every day. However, I think I would take a little bit different tilt on this and the context though, I think learning comes in these step changes. So sometimes there's big changes in learning. You learn a lot and that is sort of like a tackling company, you tackle a new industry. You put together a new portfolio.
這很有趣，我想運動和投資的一部分就是你會經歷這樣的學習曲線。你的感覺是投資的學習曲線總是陡峭的，還是隨著時間會變得平緩？我不認為它會變平緩，而且我希望它永遠不會，因為我非常熱愛這一行業，而其中的一部分就是每天學習。不過，我想我會從稍微不同的角度來看待這個問題，在這樣的背景下，我認為學習是呈階梯式變化的。所以有時候學習會有大的飛躍。你學到很多，這有點像是處理一家公司，你處理一個新的行業。你組建一個新的投資組合。

And those big all-home moments are great, but they're usually followed by sort of a gradual learning. I think in the beginning of my career, I would say that a lot of it, you start out with the science the math, what you come learned in school and then it later becomes the art and that becomes more important than that is what sort of continually involves. Being open-minded is the only way to succeed. I'm often telling this to young people, they just learn and listen, learn and be open-minded to changes. I mean, through almost 30 years of investing, I've had my shares of ups and downs and it's a homely business and a lot of what you learn and you grow from is your mistakes recognizing the blind spots, understanding what you know and maybe what you don't know becomes more important. But I think also you have to learn how to curb your ego. It's not OECC because that's why we kind of liked what we do, but you also have to surround yourself with really good people and that helps maintain and be very adaptable. So one thing that I've learned is through time, you know, you invest for decades, there's certain principles that are timeless and then there are other aspects of investing that change with time. So how do you balance being dogmatic with those principles, you feel our timeless and being adaptable with areas that may change with time? I think being dogmatic and adhering to the big objective is really important.
那些重大的全壘打時刻固然精彩，但通常伴隨著漸進式的學習歷程。回想職業生涯初期，我會說大部分時候你從科學與數學起步——那些學校教你的東西，後來逐漸轉化為藝術層面，而這部分會變得更加重要，且需要持續精進。保持開放心態是成功的唯一途徑。我常對年輕人這麼說：只管學習傾聽，保持開放態度接納改變。經過近 30 年的投資歷練，我經歷過大起大落，這本就是個需要謙卑的行當。你從錯誤中學習成長，辨識盲點，理解已知與未知領域——這些會愈發關鍵。但我認為還得學會克制自我，這並非老生常談（OECC），正因如此我們才熱愛這份工作。同時必須與優秀人才為伍，這能幫助你保持適應力。 因此，我學到的一件事是，經過時間的洗禮，你知道，投資幾十年後，有些原則是永恆的，而投資的其他方面則會隨著時間而改變。那麼，你如何平衡對那些你認為是永恆的原則的堅持，以及在可能隨時間變化的領域保持適應性？我認為堅持並遵循大的目標是非常重要的。

For instance, we are large-cap value managers, we deliver large-cap value portfolios and we never drift ever. And so that's one thing I think dogmatic is important. Another example might be that you have to develop and have a disciplined process and sort of consistently apply that. How we find ideas, how we perform the work, build our portfolios and retaining the structure, a structured framework increases performance, repeatability. However, the business is constantly evolving and as such, we have to remain adaptable. The world is getting more competitive and so sort of the day that day adaptability of pushing us to high grade and improve our process is also a place where you have to be adaptable and maybe not so much dogmatic and flexible.
例如，我們是大盤價值型基金經理，我們提供大盤價值型投資組合，而且我們從不偏離這一點。所以我認為堅持這一點很重要。另一個例子可能是，你必須發展並擁有一個有紀律的過程，並持續地應用它。我們如何找到想法，如何執行工作，建立我們的投資組合，並保持結構，一個結構化的框架可以提高表現的可重複性。然而，業務是不斷演變的，因此我們必須保持適應性。世界變得越來越競爭，所以日常的適應性推動我們提升和改進我們的過程，這也是你必須保持適應性，也許不是那麼堅持和靈活的地方。

You're flexible and you're day to day activities and how you do research, what technology you use, how you communicate with the team. I think those things are more the day to day flexibility and where you don't want to be as dogmatic. What's the big pieces I think you do? I've noticed there aren't a lot of firms that emit around 50 plus years as wash hatch has. And a lot of those come and go because they have a certain belief and that belief becomes dated and they fall out of favor and eventually they go out of business. It's really interesting how that has happened over time. I think you just have to be mature enough to sort of say where are we going, what's been working for us, how do we understand a changing environment and really make sure that you're willing to be open-minded and persistent and learning and adapt with the times.
你在日常活動和研究方式、使用的技術以及與團隊的溝通上都很靈活。我認為這些都是日常靈活性的體現，而不應該過於教條化。你認為哪些是重要的部分？我注意到很少有公司能像 Wasatch 那樣持續經營超過 50 年。許多公司來來去去，因為它們堅持某種信念，而這種信念隨著時間變得過時，它們逐漸失寵，最終倒閉。這種現象隨著時間的推移真的很有趣。我認為你必須足夠成熟，能夠思考我們的方向、對我們有效的方法，以及如何理解不斷變化的環境，並確保自己願意保持開放的心態、堅持不懈、持續學習並與時俱進。

You don't know at all, you want to get better, you want to do what you have to do and you have to be organized and understanding that the world is changing and you have to change a bit with it. It's a bit of a blend but that's kind of what makes it fun. That's right. Well, wash hatch has a very interesting culture. I'd like to ask you a few questions about your organization. You've been around for 50 years to just celebrate it, it's anniversary. But what do you believe is this secret to the firm's longevity and success beyond being adaptable? Well, I think a big piece of it is the firm is independent. It's a hundred percent employee owned and I think this allows management and research to invest long-term.
你完全不知道，你想要變得更好，你想要做你必須做的事，而且你必須有條理，並理解世界正在改變，你也必須隨之做些調整。這有點像是混合體，但這正是讓事情變得有趣的地方。沒錯。嗯，Wasatch 擁有非常有趣的文化。我想請教幾個關於你們組織的問題。你們已經成立 50 年，剛剛慶祝了這個里程碑。但除了適應力強之外，你認為公司長壽和成功的秘訣是什麼？嗯，我認為很大一部分原因是公司是獨立的。它百分之百由員工持有，我認為這讓管理和研究能夠進行長期投資。

What such is a very good place to be a portfolio manager? I get management support, I get resources, I too have a long-term investment horizon and this is very consistent and I can consistently apply the philosophy and the process and that is I think a real different chair. It's very nice. It's coming every day and you're sort of in line with how the firm sort of operates and it gives you the best chance to do well for your clients. As an advisor, one of the key questions I often seek to answer when evaluating investment managers is, it's a very basic one, what business are they in? Everyone says they're in the business of generating returns for their clients, but their actions often suggest that they're actually in the business of gathering assets.
什麼樣的地方才是投資組合經理人的理想歸屬？在這裡，我不僅能獲得管理層的支持與充足資源，更擁有長期投資視野，這種環境與我的理念和操作流程高度契合，我認為這正是真正與眾不同的關鍵所在。每天來到這裡都令人愉悅，你能感受到與公司運作節奏的完美同步，這為你提供了為客戶創造最佳績效的絕佳機會。作為顧問，我在評估投資經理時經常思考一個核心問題——雖然聽來基礎卻至關重要：他們真正從事的是什麼業務？所有人都宣稱自己專注於為客戶創造收益，但實際行為往往暴露出他們真正從事的其實是資產規模的累積。

How does wash action do you think about this seemingly inherent conflict? Oh, wash, never emphasizes asset gathering. Matter of fact, for some of the funds we close because that's the right thing to do for the clients. It helps performance, it's the right thing to do from that context. Performance, performance always comes first. There's no pressure to raise asset. And I think it goes back to wash action being 100% employee earned, which is sort of the emphasis is on focusing on performance and doing the best that we can for clients. So there's no pressure to just go out and gather assets.
你如何看待這種看似內在的衝突？噢，華夏（Wash）從不強調資產聚集。事實上，我們會關閉某些基金，因為這對客戶來說是正確的做法。這有助於績效表現，從這個角度來看，這是正確的決定。績效、績效永遠是第一位的。我們沒有募集資產的壓力。我認為這可以回溯到華夏行動（Wash action）是 100%由員工持有，這在某種程度上強調了專注於績效表現，並為客戶盡我們所能做到最好。因此，我們沒有壓力去單純地募集資產。

And that's related to being long term. I suppose because if you're perhaps if you're owned by a public company or you're more short-term focus on the revenues per quarter or per year, obviously gathering assets is the quickest way to increase revenues, but long term, it's probably not the best for performance. I think the view is that if we can perform, it'll all come together. And so and not to sort of cloud the issue. And so there isn't any forcing on how there's no pressure to meet something quarterly. There's no pressure from management to say, hey, you need to improve your returns today. There's a belief and a support that with a long term investing profile and if we consistently prior process, good returns will happen, investors will be happy and the assets will grow naturally over time. And so it's really goes back to a core belief of the long term investment staying independent and good things will happen long term. Would you describe the culture there? Particularly the ethos that I've read about the disagreeing without being disagreeable. And this approach, you call multiple eyes and how all of this fosters better investment outcomes over time. I'll put this short broad terms. I think there's a belief that if we bring bright people together, we're going to have better decision making through a more thorough vetting process.
這與長期投資的理念息息相關。我認為，如果你是由上市公司持有，或是更注重每季或每年的收入，那麼快速累積資產顯然是增加收入的最快途徑，但長期來看，這對績效可能不是最好的。我們的觀點是，只要我們能表現出色，一切自然水到渠成。因此，我們不會讓這些問題模糊焦點，也沒有任何強制性的季度目標壓力。管理層不會施壓說「嘿，你今天必須提升回報率」，而是相信並支持長期投資的理念——只要我們持續遵循既定的流程，良好的回報終將實現，投資者會感到滿意，資產也會隨著時間自然增長。這一切歸根結底，是對長期投資、保持獨立性以及相信好事終會發生的核心信念。 你能描述一下這裡的文化嗎？尤其是那種「異見相左卻不失和氣」的風氣。這種你們稱之為「多方審視」的做法，以及這一切如何隨著時間推移促成更好的投資成果。 我用簡短的概括來說。我認為有一種信念是，如果我們將聰明的人聚集在一起，通過更徹底的審查過程，我們將做出更好的決策。

So we believe in discussing the issues, the stocks, the facts, whatever the case may be, the interest in very professional manner. And we really try to encourage input from all others. You get great ideas that way. So sort of, I guess directly answering the question, we emphasize team over any single individual and this really isn't the place for a superstar. We don't really believe in the superstar PM model. So it's really all about team and trying to get different inputs with people with different experiences and skill sets in trying to get to the best answer. But do it in a way that's professional and enjoyable. And I suppose ultimately what you're seeking is whatever the truth is.
因此，我們相信以非常專業的方式討論問題、股票、事實，無論情況如何。我們真的努力鼓勵來自其他人的意見。這樣你會得到很棒的想法。所以，我想直接回答這個問題，我們強調團隊勝過任何單一個體，這裡真的不適合超級明星。我們不太相信超級明星基金經理模式。所以這完全是關於團隊，並嘗試獲得來自具有不同經驗和技能組合的人的不同意見，以嘗試找到最佳答案。但要以一種專業且愉快的方式來進行。我想最終你所尋求的是無論真相是什麼。

And that, I think you can reach easier if you approach it from multiple perspectives rather than one angle at the problem. And you do that by having collaboration and learning from one another. And I'll said, you're 100% correct and well said. Thank you. So given that, is there a risk that if you have too many inputs or a process that's more consensus-driven that you can dilute the alpha and dilute the unique insights? Well, what such is known for small cap growth, but it's actually a great place to be a value investor where the patients and the discipline is rewarded. I've been doing this for more than 10 years at Wasatch and I'm able to apply the process consistently the whole time.
我認為，若能從多個角度而非單一面向來探討問題，你會更容易達成目標。而這需要透過團隊合作與相互學習來實現。你說得完全正確，表達得非常好，謝謝。既然如此，是否會存在一種風險：當你接收過多意見或採用過於共識導向的流程時，可能會稀釋超額報酬（alpha）與獨特見解？雖然小型成長股是我們的強項，但其實這裡也是價值投資者的絕佳舞台——耐心與紀律終將獲得回報。我在 Wasatch 從事這項工作已超過十年，期間始終能貫徹這套投資方法。

So the inputs were able to manage that quite well. We've ever really good team that I work with. And there isn't a lot of bureaucracy here as a whole. So almost all the time, I am able to focus on the research and portfolio performance. I'm not distracted. So I'm not sure you can say that everywhere. So there's a lot of other stakeholders and bureaucracy in places. We're fortunate enough that we're just generally straightforward and almost all the time to just sit in there working on the portfolios and really trying to get the best performance. There's not a lot of undue distractions.
因此，投入能夠很好地管理這一點。我與一個非常優秀的團隊共事，整體而言這裡沒有太多官僚主義。所以幾乎所有時間，我都能專注於研究和投資組合的表現，不會分心。我不確定是否每個地方都能這樣說。在其他地方，往往有許多其他利益相關者和官僚主義。我們很幸運，通常都很直接，幾乎所有時間都能專注於投資組合的工作，真正努力追求最佳表現，沒有太多不必要的干擾。

So we're able to consistently apply it a philosophy in a process. It's great. Starting at a very high level is your sense that public equity markets are relatively efficient or do you feel like there are corners of the market that are less efficient? Yeah, so there are definitely corners of the market that are less efficient. I think over the long term, very long term, large cap equities can be somewhat efficient as there's enough a lot of research coverage. There's a lot of eyes looking and a lot of information and it's regurgitated. So there's a lot of efficiency long long term. However, the nice thing is a human behavior can be very emotional and dry stock price movement with a tendency to overact providing great opportunities. And what I've also noticed over time is that the holding periods among investors on average have shortened. This is good for us. We truly are long term whether it's less efficiency. So essentially, we are looking for undiscovered long term value. Set another way. As a traditional value manager, we see mispriced opportunities. Due to excessive pessimism and law expectations. These opportunities are usually found in parts of the market or corners of the market that are less efficient. So for us, we embrace the inefficiency of the market.
所以我們能夠持續地將一套哲學應用於流程中，這很棒。從一個非常高的層面來看，您認為公開股票市場相對有效率，還是您覺得市場中有某些角落較缺乏效率？是的，市場中確實存在一些效率較低的角落。我認為長期來看，非常長期，大型股可能會相對有效率，因為有足夠多的研究覆蓋。有很多人在關注，資訊量龐大且不斷被重複消化。因此，長期而言存在許多效率。然而，有趣的是人類行為可能非常情緒化，股價波動往往會過度反應，這提供了絕佳的機會。隨著時間推移，我還注意到投資者的平均持有期間縮短了。這對我們來說是好事。無論效率高低，我們確實是長期投資者。所以本質上，我們在尋找未被發現的長期價值。換句話說，作為傳統的價值型管理者，我們看到了因過度悲觀和低預期而產生的錯誤定價機會。 這些機會通常出現在市場中效率較低的部分或角落。因此，對我們來說，我們擁抱市場的低效率。

But we think they're particularly thinking long term. We can find stocks that aren't fully priced, which is great. It sounds a little counterintuitive what you said. I'd like to ask it in a different way. The part about the inefficiency lies in being a long term investor. The reason I say it sounds counterintuitive is because we're all taught be a long term investor. That's the way people are investing for a long time. I agree that the time horizon for most people has gotten shorter. It's really interesting. Maybe it's not counterintuitive, but it's interesting that being a long term investor is where the inefficiency lies because so much focus is on short term results. Would you elaborate on that? Great question. Great, great pick-up too. What I think happens is there's always sort of concerns that get extrapolated into the short term. Investors tend to walk away. They leave it. They kind of over-select. Our advantage is to look out. What's going on today, but what kind of effect does that have on the stock idea long term? And it's usually sort of looking out long term is where we can find that value that's being mispriced because of issues today. I sort of think about the short term over-sell over-reaction ignored. We're not looking here. We're looking somewhere else and sort of looking and saying, OK, that's what's being discounted today. But there is value in sort of a term or those issues going away that the long term is really where sort of looking past that is where the opportunity is. So when I talk and thinking long term, that's kind of the philosophy of the mindset of being able to take advantage of some short term over-corrections. It seems like if you're investing in large cap value, that's a reasonable approach because large cap tends to be more efficient than small cap. You have more people following the companies. And then as a value oriented investor, you're focused on buying something at a discount which oftentimes comes when there's an over-reaction to some negative news. Yes, that's correct. That's exactly what we sit in patiently sort of wait for those opportunities, which is sometimes out of favor, sometimes on sexy, but is actually where we can find a lot of good value and that's where that's where we go to work. And Joseph talked about how you combine, you can talk about it high level, how you combine both bottom up and top down analysis in your investment process.
但我們認為他們特別著眼於長期。我們能找到尚未完全反映價值的股票，這很棒。你說的聽起來有點反直覺。我想換個方式問。關於效率不足的部分在於成為長期投資者。我說這聽起來反直覺的原因是我們都被教導要做長期投資者。這是人們長期以來的投資方式。我同意大多數人的投資視野變得更短了。這真的很有趣。也許這並不反直覺，但有趣的是，成為長期投資者正是效率不足所在，因為太多焦點都放在短期結果上。你能詳細說明這點嗎？好問題。也抓得很準。我認為發生的情況是，總有些擔憂會被外推到短期。投資者傾向於避開。他們放棄了。他們有點過度篩選。我們的優勢是看得更遠。今天發生了什麼事，但這對股票的長期構想會產生什麼樣的影響？通常來說，放眼長期正是我們能找到因當前問題而被錯誤定價的價值所在。 我大致認為短期的過度賣出和過度反應可以忽略。我們不在這裡尋找機會，而是看向其他地方，觀察並說，好吧，這就是今天被低估的部分。但從某種角度來看，這些問題的消失是有價值的，長期來看，真正越過這些問題的地方才是機會所在。所以當我談論並思考長期時，這是一種能夠利用某些短期過度修正的心態哲學。看起來，如果你投資於大型價值股，這是一個合理的方法，因為大型股往往比小型股更有效率。有更多人關注這些公司。然後作為一個價值導向的投資者，你專注於以折扣價買入某些東西，這通常是在對一些負面消息過度反應時出現的。是的，沒錯。這正是我們耐心等待的機會，有時不受青睞，有時不那麼吸引人，但實際上我們可以在那裡找到很多好價值，這就是我們投入工作的地方。 約瑟夫談到了你如何結合，你可以從高層次談談，在你的投資過程中如何結合自下而上和自上而下的分析。

So my philosophy has been formed by almost 30 years of experience and I started out as an analyst and then there's a portfolio manager running several different value strategies and even as a director research one year. And from all of those experiences, my investment philosophy, I would say, is generally remain consistent but the investment process has evolved and grown. It fills softly, I may fundamentally driven traditional value manager. I seek opportunities where future, inflection, improvement, and/or risk reduction are not discounted in the current price. So essentially what I'm looking for is what can go right, that isn't discounted in the current price. So the stock picking is a big piece of backbone of the process but the macro awareness is also important and I think adds to success. Let me explain here.
我的投資哲學是由近 30 年的經驗形成的，我最初是一名分析師，後來成為一名管理多種不同價值策略的投資組合經理，甚至有一年擔任研究總監。從所有這些經歷中，我的投資哲學可以說大體上保持一致，但投資過程已經演變和成長。我是一個基本面驅動的傳統價值型經理人，我尋找的是未來轉折、改善和/或風險降低的機會，而這些在當前價格中未被充分反映。基本上，我在尋找的是那些可能變好但當前價格未反映的事情。因此，選股是這個過程的重要支柱，但對宏觀的認識也很重要，我認為這有助於成功。讓我在此解釋一下。

So cyclicals are heavily macro influenced and a big part of the opportunity set and big parts of value indexes. So we have to have a bit of a top down view and it's important. We're not forecasters. We do not believe that we're very good at getting that exactly correct but we do believe and sort of combining the bottoms up and the top down and that sort of leaves me into the investment cycle as a whole and understanding styles and regimes. We try to understand where we are and where we're going which helps us position for potential opportunities. So essentially we're trying to anticipate where the puck is going and get into the right stocks ahead of time. So it's a combination of both the bottoms up and the top down and we think that combination kind of helps us in performance and portfolio construction. Are there times or environments where the macro perspective and determining what regime you're in takes precedence over the bottom up analysis and vice versa? They typically work in tandem. We don't really walk in and say today we're going to focus on bottoms up or top down but it's a continue process.
因此，週期性股票深受宏觀經濟影響，既是機會組合的重要部分，也是價值指數的主要組成。所以我們必須具備一定程度的自上而下視角，這點很重要。我們並非預測者，也不認為自己擅長精準掌握這點，但我們相信結合自下而上與自上而下的方法，這讓我整體看待投資週期，並理解風格與體制。我們試圖理解當前所處位置與未來走向，這有助於我們布局潛在機會。基本上，我們試圖預測冰球的動向，並提前進駐正確的股票。這是自下而上與自上而下方法的結合，我們認為這種結合有助於提升績效與投資組合建構。是否存在某些時機或環境，讓宏觀觀點與判斷所處體制的重要性凌駕於自下而上分析，反之亦然？它們通常是相輔相成的。我們不會一進門就說今天要專注自下而上或自上而下，這是一個持續的過程。

So how you sort of find ideas can be through the stock ideas or they can be through as we're sort of noticing what's going on in the macro world, the top down. We have a lot of experience to sort of looking at cycles and so we've really tried to leverage the combination of the cycle and then also where we are from the stocks. That being said, there are days where we're sort of saying, hey we think we're going in this direction, let's get ahead and let's start looking for stocks there and there's times we'll start to look at stocks and say, hey this is a good idea. We can find something better than what we are ready on within a space. But generally we're doing this in tandem and we're talking about this as in tandem as a team and we're thinking about portfolio construction and we're thinking about where we want to invest geographically in our size, position and the combination of this is sort of spewing ideas from sometimes on the bottom up and sometimes from the top down.
那麼你如何找到投資點子呢？可以透過股票想法，或是像我們這樣觀察宏觀世界的動態，也就是由上而下的方式。我們在觀察市場週期方面擁有豐富經驗，因此我們確實試圖結合週期分析與個股選擇。話雖如此，有些時候我們會說：「嘿，我們認為市場正朝這個方向發展，讓我們超前部署，開始尋找相關股票。」也有時候我們會先看到某些股票，然後說：「嘿，這是個不錯的點子。我們能在這個領域找到比現有持股更好的標的。」但通常我們會同時進行這兩種方式，團隊也會同步討論，同時考量投資組合的建構、我們希望投資的地理區域、部位規模，這些因素綜合起來，有時會從下而上、有時從上而下地產生投資靈感。

But it's kind of in the conversations of brings it all together. When you're doing the bottom up analysis, it's obviously informed by your top down visas well because you're thinking about where earnings may be in the future, or you're thinking about how the company may be changing its vision or changing its strategy. So it's all I guess all the cup is saying. Yeah, I mean all the stocks generally have that you're searching when you kind of get into a stock, you're looking for those ideos, secratic opportunities that maybe aren't well understood in the rest of the market. But we have to combine sort of the external environment and is it a cyclical stock where we in the cycle is it just the sort of a steady, steady, gross stock, what's going on but it's cheaply priced. So we have to combine the two and understand. So a lot of the work is on the company individually, but it's also trying to combine and understand how the external market affects that company and then how that company fits into the overall portfolio. So again, it's kind of a back and forth. We don't really believe you can sort of do one without the other. And we find value in being able to do both. We generally had success and sort of thinking more broadly in sort of the top down and the bottom up and in sort of position better within portfolios. One thing interesting that I've observed the last couple decades as an allocator is there are certain investment managers who only focus on bottom up and they might do well for a time and then the environment completion shifts and it's a new regime and then they have a hard time understanding why they're not doing as well as they were for a decade or longer. And so you can see the that blind spot that comes from not even looking at the macro at all, particularly when you go through those major inflection points. Exactly. And so I think you have to be aware of both of those and you really can reward your client by making those turns well. So strictly looking at either one or the other, you could look at top down but then you've got to find a really good ideas that aren't priced or discounted correctly. You could look at just the bottom up but those turns are fairly sizable. And so the inflections as the way we sort of talk about it can be very meaningful. And if you're sort of not aware that you might be moving in that direction, you could miss quite a lot. So we would totally agree with that. It's sort of the combination of the two is really what helps long-term, particularly in portfolio construction. Is there anything specific that you look for in, I think the way you term it is low expectation excessively discounted stocks, anything that maybe others tend to miss? Yeah, I mean I guess to simply again we kind of look for what can go right. So we're sort of looking at a stock that's kind of down out of favor and in sort of maybe ignored. And I was trained as an accountant. I build big deep models including detailed segment houses. I don't think I or we are any better at forecasting anybody else but the exercise helps us get insights into the companies growth and profitability drivers.
但在這些對話中，它某種程度上將一切整合在一起。當你進行自下而上的分析時，顯然也受到自上而下視角的影響，因為你會思考未來的盈利可能在哪裡，或者公司在如何改變其願景或策略。所以我想這就像杯子裡裝的都是這些東西。是的，我是說所有股票基本上都有這種特質，當你深入研究一支股票時，你就是在尋找那些市場上其他人可能不太理解的獨特機會。但我們必須結合外部環境來判斷——這是一支周期性股票嗎？我們處於周期的哪個階段？還是這只是一支穩定增長型的股票，只是目前價格被低估了？所以我們必須將兩者結合起來理解。因此，很多工作是針對個別公司的，但同時也要試圖結合並理解外部市場如何影響這家公司，以及這家公司如何融入整體投資組合。所以這又是一種來回反覆的過程。我們真的不認為你可以只做其中一部分而忽略另一部分。我們發現能夠同時做到這兩點很有價值。 我們普遍取得了成功，並且在某種程度上更廣泛地思考，無論是從上而下還是從下而上，以及在投資組合中更好地定位。作為一名資產配置者，過去幾十年我觀察到一件有趣的事情：有些投資經理只專注於自下而上的方法，他們可能在一段時間內表現良好，但當環境競爭格局發生變化，進入新的市場體制時，他們就很難理解為什麼自己的表現不如過去十年或更長時間那樣出色。因此，你可以看到這種完全不考慮宏觀因素的盲點，尤其是在經歷那些重大轉折點時。確實如此。所以我認為你必須同時意識到這兩方面，並且通過妥善應對這些轉變，才能真正為客戶帶來回報。如果嚴格只關注其中一個方面，你可以選擇自上而下的視角，但必須找到那些未被正確定價或低估的優質標的；或者僅關注自下而上的方法，但這些轉變往往相當巨大。因此，正如我們所討論的，這些轉折點可能具有非常重要的意義。 而如果你沒有意識到自己可能正朝那個方向前進，你可能會錯過很多。所以我們完全同意這一點。這兩者的結合確實對長期投資有所幫助，特別是在投資組合的建構上。有沒有什麼具體的東西是你在尋找的，我想你稱之為低預期、過度折價的股票，可能是其他人容易忽略的？是的，我的意思是，簡單來說，我們還是會尋找那些可能好轉的機會。所以我們會關注那些不受青睞、甚至可能被忽視的股票。我本身是會計師出身，會建立龐大且深入的模型，包括詳細的部門分析。我不認為我或我們在預測上比其他人更厲害，但這個過程幫助我們更深入理解公司成長與盈利的驅動因素。

We also get a view into intrinsic value, usually a range where we kind of think this is what the stock has worked. We get a view into discounted expectations and where we're different. And what we're trying to do is identify stocks where the market is under-preciating long-term growth, profitability risk reduction or maybe some combination of the three. And example, so 18T back in 2023, mid-2023, the stock had a big pullback. The market was concerned about industry competition, their ability to generate free cash flow and and lead sheet cable liabilities. Well, we viewed all those concerns were fully priced into the stock. And we also believed that the industry was fundamentally better and stronger than what was estimated and that the company's strategic vision or execution, I should say, would be better than the market expected. Well, we ended up being correct. The company continued to surprise the market with better fundamentals and increased cash flows, which led to better margins and better growth. And that excess free cash flow was also used to pay down debt, which we sort of view as reducing risk. So that example's just sort of hit everything. But that's kind of what we're looking for. We're looking for something that will go right. That's sort of better than expected.
我們也會對內在價值有一個看法，通常是一個範圍，我們大致認為這就是這支股票的價值所在。我們會觀察市場的折價預期以及我們與市場觀點的差異所在。而我們試圖做的，就是找出那些市場低估了長期成長性、盈利能力提升或風險降低，或是這三者某種組合的股票。舉個例子，像是 18T 這家公司，回溯到 2023 年中，當時股價出現大幅回調。市場擔憂產業競爭加劇、公司產生自由現金流的能力，以及鉛護套電纜的潛在負債問題。但我們認為這些擔憂已完全反映在股價上。同時我們相信，這個產業的基本面實際上比市場預估的更穩健，而公司的戰略視野——或者更準確地說，執行力——將會超越市場預期。事實證明我們的判斷正確。該公司持續以優於預期的基本面與現金流增長讓市場驚艷，進而帶動利潤率提升與成長加速。那些超額的自由現金流也被用來償還債務，這在我們看來正是風險降低的體現。可以說這個例子完美涵蓋了所有關鍵要素。 但這正是我們在尋找的。我們在尋找那些會順利發展的事物，也就是比預期更好的情況。

It's not priced in and there's the opportunity. One concept that you've described a few times is being a long-term holder of equities. But how do you navigate the challenges of maintaining a long-term investment perspective in a world, as you mentioned earlier, is increasingly focused on short-term results, especially when dealing with investors. But what's that? As a firm, maybe we may give you a long-lash, but many investors may have less patience or operate under shorter time horizon. So how do you deal with that disparity? The first about the long-term oriented, again, that's kind of where edge lies. We have that long-term mindset and it's even though I think a lot of people talk about it, I do believe it's increasingly rare and gives us a bit of a competitive advantage. We are comfortable and only businesses that appear unattractive in the short-term do this usually matters that don't, things that don't matter long-term. So the emotion kind of gives us shot at some stocks that we would normally be able to get a look at. So in some ways we're sort of attracted by, as I like to sort of say, the ugly or the uncool at times. The second part of that, though, ties into the first, is what we do is we spend time communicating to our clients exactly who we are.
這尚未反映在價格中，因此存在機會。你多次提到的一個概念是長期持有股票。但在這個如你所言越來越注重短期成果的世界裡，你如何應對維持長期投資觀點的挑戰，尤其是在面對投資者時？這是什麼意思？作為一家公司，或許我們能給你較長的時間，但許多投資者可能缺乏耐心或操作時間框架較短。那麼你如何處理這種差異？首先關於長期導向，這正是我們的優勢所在。我們擁有這種長期思維，儘管我認為很多人都在談論這一點，但我確實相信這越來越罕見，並給了我們一些競爭優勢。我們感到自在，只有那些在短期內看起來不吸引人的企業才會這樣做，通常這些是無關緊要的事情，對長期無關緊要的事情。因此，這種情緒在某種程度上讓我們有機會接觸一些我們通常無法看到的股票。所以在某些方面，我們可以說是被那些我喜歡稱之為「醜陋」或「不酷」的東西所吸引。 不過，第二點與第一點相呼應的是，我們會花時間向客戶清楚傳達我們是誰。

Our philosophy, our process, our hope that we are aligned with that mandate. So that we're all coming together and on the same thing what we do, what we think we do well. And then we do it and then we don't drift. So I think part of that is, is applying your process and philosophy can communicate into clients. This is what we do and how we do it. And then hope that you're on the same page and that there's an understanding with that and that we attempt to earn that and we never styled for it. We stay with it.
我們的理念、流程，以及我們希望能與客戶的目標保持一致。這樣我們就能齊心協力，專注於我們所擅長的事。然後我們付諸實踐，絕不偏離。因此我認為其中一部分在於，將你的流程和理念應用並傳達給客戶：這就是我們的做法。接著希望你們能達成共識，對此有所理解。我們努力贏得這種理解，從不為此改變風格，始終堅持如一。

This is what we tell clients. This is what we do. So when you meet with company management, are there any types of questions that you ask to uncover what the market misunderstands about their business? Because you're trying to find things that are not properly discounted? Yes. So I consistently try to focus on capital allocation, particularly where is management investing? What are the expectations for that investment? Is it you expect an improvement in growth returns, well, this investment increased stability, or is it just maintenance? Are the questions, what's the priority of excess cash? Are you going to give it back in dividend? Are you going to share by-back? Is it really going to be invested in growth? Will it be used to, I would say, reduce risk, pay down debt? That's always important to ask. I also like to ask about which elements of their strategy are misunderstood by investors. What positives aren't being discounted by investors or in the stock place? That's a little bit to try to find out where there's something that's different from what the market expects.
這就是我們告訴客戶的內容，也是我們實際執行的方式。那麼，當你與公司管理層會面時，是否會提出某些類型的問題，以揭露市場對其業務的誤解？因為你試圖找出那些未被適當反映在股價中的因素？沒錯。因此，我始終專注於資本配置的問題，特別是管理層將資金投入何處？對這些投資的預期是什麼？是期望能提升成長回報、增強穩定性，還是僅僅維持現狀？這些問題包括：超額現金的優先用途是什麼？會以股息形式回饋股東嗎？會進行股票回購嗎？還是真的會投入成長計畫？或者，我會說，是否會用來降低風險、償還債務？這些都是必須詢問的重要問題。我也喜歡詢問投資者對他們策略中的哪些部分存在誤解。哪些正面因素未被投資者或股價所反映？這有點像是在試圖找出與市場預期不同的地方。

And then I think the last thing that I kind of consistently like to ask is what about potential risks? What risks do you see? What are you doing to prevent them? So it's a lot of capital allocation. It's a lot of trying to understand where they think expectations aren't aligned with what they're doing and their strategy and then sort of like, "Riss, tell me about what kind of risks do you see and what are you trying to do to prevent them?" So that's generally, every company is a different set of questions to ask, but those are consistently kind of the way we orient our questioning of management teams. So we live in very interesting times today.
然後我想最後一個我經常喜歡問的問題是關於潛在風險？你看到了哪些風險？你正在採取什麼措施來預防它們？所以這很大程度上是資本配置的問題。這很大程度上是試圖理解他們認為期望與他們正在做的事情和策略不一致的地方，然後就像是，「Riss，告訴我你看到了哪些風險，以及你正在採取什麼措施來預防它們？」所以一般來說，每個公司都有一組不同的問題要問，但這些問題通常是我們對管理團隊提問的方式。所以我們今天生活在非常有趣的時代。

You talked about part of your process being top down macro analysis and you've been investing in equities for nearly 30 years and we've experienced several major cycles over that span. Are there any specific insights you can share about market cycles and your views of them? Yeah, I just want to a lot of time think about this in attempting to get better. I think you have to sort of break it down into two different cycles. The first is economic cycles. They're inevitable. They're not always easy to time and then investment cycles and investment cycles actually what I've seen tend to act somewhat rationally consistently, but the characteristics of those cycles can be awfully different. So they're never the same, but the important thing with the investment cycle is always ahead of the economic cycle. The difficulty in all that is to know where you are in a different phases that are part of the cycle. In that context, we have sort of thought about this enough about the investment cycle that we've sort of put it into five different phases and they kind of blur a bit. So they're just the way to sort of start to think about it, but sort of the capitulation stage, the end of the cycle stocks are coming down. Again, this is sort of seeing the economy slow and then there's the recovery cycle. We can see that the economic cycle is bottoming and then sort of the bull market, a late bull market stage and then a peak sell-off stage. We sort of use those as benchmarks of how to think about the cycle itself and then kind of where we are. Because within an investment cycle, different sectors and industries perform well at different stages. And that's really why we spend a time thinking about this. And so we try to figure out where we are today and then anticipate where we're going, maybe several months from now. And we slowly move money into those industries that tend to perform best in those next phase of that investment cycle. So I guess I would say essentially what we're trying to do is anticipate where the puck is going and if we can get a right sector rotation adds to our stock picking returns. So if we can get a right, it's it turbo charges hopefully good stock picking. So we think about the investment cycles quite a bit. We don't always get them right, but we certainly, it's a big part of how we think about it and how we think about the portfolio as a whole. And what do you think we are today in that cycle and also do you feel like we're nearer or had a major inflection point? Perfect question. For the economic cycle, I think we're in the later stages. The economy is slowing, but we're not in recession. Earlier this year, I did expect we'd have a pick up maybe late in the year, but I think that's kind of reversed a bit. Policy uncertainty is adding confusion and recession calls have picked up and have increased. I think the feds in a tough position, there's a real risk of a globe growth slow down and potentially increased inflation, tight labor market and tariffs, etc. As for the investment cycle, I also believe we're late stages. Maybe late, bull market, possibly nearing the peak will see what happens. Probably close to the peak if we sort of get towards an economic recession or a real slow down. And early in the year, I would have expected that we would see a pick up in anticipation of the economy starting to pick up due to interest rate declines or interest rate cuts from the Fed last year.
你談到你的投資流程中有一部分是自上而下的宏觀分析，而且你投資股票市場已近 30 年，期間我們經歷了幾個主要週期。關於市場週期及其觀點，你有什麼具體見解可以分享嗎？是的，我花了很多時間思考這個問題，試圖做得更好。我認為你必須將其分解為兩種不同的週期。第一種是經濟週期，它們是不可避免的，而且時機並不總是容易掌握；然後是投資週期，根據我的觀察，投資週期的行為往往相對理性且一致，但這些週期的特徵可能大不相同。所以它們從不相同，但投資週期總是領先於經濟週期，這一點很重要。這其中的困難在於了解你處於週期的哪個階段。基於此，我們對投資週期思考得足夠多，以至於我們將其分為五個不同的階段，這些階段之間有些模糊。 所以這只是開始思考這個問題的一種方式，但可以說是市場投降階段，週期性股票的尾聲正在到來。再次強調，這有點像是看到經濟放緩，然後進入復甦週期。我們可以看到經濟週期正在觸底，然後進入牛市階段，一個晚期的牛市階段，接著是高峰拋售階段。我們將這些視為思考週期本身以及我們目前所處位置的基準。因為在一個投資週期中，不同的行業和產業在不同的階段表現良好。這正是我們花時間思考這個問題的真正原因。因此，我們試圖弄清楚我們現在的位置，然後預測幾個月後可能會走向何方。我們慢慢將資金轉移到那些在投資週期的下一階段往往表現最好的行業。所以我想說，我們本質上試圖做的是預測冰球將往哪裡去，如果我們能正確進行行業輪動，就能為我們的選股回報加分。如果我們能做到這一點，它就能為原本良好的選股表現錦上添花。因此，我們對投資週期思考得相當多。 我們並不總是能準確判斷，但這無疑是我們思考方式及整體投資組合配置的重要部分。你認為目前我們處於週期的哪個階段？是否接近或已達重大轉折點？這問題問得好。就經濟週期而言，我認為我們正處於後期階段。經濟正在放緩，但尚未陷入衰退。今年稍早，我確實預期年底可能出現回升，但現在看來情況有些逆轉。政策不確定性加劇了混亂，對衰退的預測也隨之增加。聯準會處境艱難，全球經濟增長確實面臨放緩風險，通膨可能升溫，勞動市場緊縮及關稅等因素都在作用。至於投資週期，我也認為處於晚期。可能是牛市尾聲，或許正接近高峰，還需觀察後續發展。若經濟步入衰退或實質放緩，我們可能已接近頂點。年初時，我原本預期隨著去年聯準會降息帶動經濟復甦，市場會提前反映這波回升。

So I sort of expected we probably have a bit of a boost. Even though valuations came into the year quite elevated, I thought they might be reasonably well supported after the Fed cuts at the end of last year. Now I'm not so sure we're going to grow. So I think we're kind of stuck in both the economic cycle possibly and the investment cycle sort of in the late innings of that investment cycle. And you have indicators that can kind of help you tell a little bit about where you are, particularly in the investment cycle. Large cap stocks are still up or forming small cap stocks. And there's a reminder small cap stocks generally need an economic recovery to sort of really start to pick up and bounce. So that's not happening yet, which is sort of an indicator that we're still late in the cycle. Large cap growth is holding on and have actually picked up a little bit though, I don't know the last 10 days or so. And they've held in pretty well because there's uncertainty about growth. And so safety and growth tends to be paid for and uncertain times. And even though growth stocks tend to be susceptible to higher inflation higher interest rates, the willingness to pay up for growth and good companies is sort of taking the day and that kind of tells us we're late in the cycle. And again, as we look out, what the turn will be is the market will have that inflection, which it isn't seen yet, will have that inflection and flexion, particularly in recovery mode when the market feels like it can see the bottom of the economic cycle. And it'll start to price an anticipation for that. And again, historically coming out of that end, value does well because it tends to have beaten up stocks out of favor stocks and in small caps, which often do the same way. So you need to sort of see that recovery. That's in the US and internationally in Europe, and several of the emerging markets. We've seen central bank cuts that have started well before hours. And a lot of those cuts should start to sort of have an effect throughout the year.
所以我原本預期我們可能會有一些提振。儘管年初時的估值已經相當高，我認為在聯準會去年底降息後，這些估值可能會得到合理的支撐。但現在我不太確定我們是否會成長。因此，我認為我們在某種程度上可能卡在經濟週期和投資週期的後期階段。有一些指標可以幫助你稍微判斷目前所處的位置，特別是在投資週期中。大型股仍然上漲或正在形成小型股。提醒一下，小型股通常需要經濟復甦才能真正開始回升和反彈。但目前這還沒有發生，這在某種程度上表明我們仍處於週期的後期。大型成長股表現堅挺，甚至最近十天左右還略有回升。它們表現相當不錯，因為市場對成長存在不確定性。在不確定的時期，安全性和成長性往往會受到青睞。 儘管成長型股票往往容易受到高通膨和高利率的影響，但市場願意為優質成長型企業支付溢價的現象正逐漸成為主流，這在某種程度上告訴我們，當前已處於週期的後段。再次展望未來，市場轉折點將出現在經濟週期觸底可期的復甦階段——屆時市場會出現明顯的拐點與彈升（雖然目前尚未顯現），並開始提前反映這種預期。歷史經驗顯示，在這種週期末端，價值型股票通常表現出色，因為這類標的多屬遭低估或失寵的個股，小型股也往往如此。關鍵在於觀察到實質復甦跡象——無論是美國本土、歐洲國際市場或部分新興經濟體皆然。事實上，許多央行早已啟動降息循環，這些寬鬆政策的效果應會在今年逐步發酵。

And so you could see a better economic recovery in places outside the US if it's just left up to central bank cuts and where we are in the US. The political part of this and the uncertainty over the US economy will affect anybody, but in theory, you know, you start to see more of an inflection internationally as those central bank cuts work the way through system a bit faster than the US or least that's our view. And you also have a relatively new major input into all of this, which is policy uncertainty. And if you're in business planning for the next multiple years of the direction you want to take, it's very reasonable to pause right now until there's some clarity in where policies had it because you don't want to make the wrong decision to be stuck with that. Yes, I think I think we're seeing that. So investment has slowed supply chains are getting kind of out of whack.
因此，如果僅依賴央行降息以及美國當前的經濟狀況，你會發現美國以外地區的經濟復甦可能更為強勁。政治因素和美國經濟的不確定性將影響每個人，但理論上，隨著這些央行降息措施比美國更快地在系統中發揮作用，國際間可能會出現更多轉折點，至少這是我們的觀點。此外，你還有一個相對較新的重大變數，那就是政策不確定性。如果你正在為未來幾年的業務方向制定計劃，現在暫停決策直到政策方向明朗化是非常合理的，因為你不希望做出錯誤的決定而被困住。是的，我認為我們正在看到這種情況。投資已經放緩，供應鏈也開始出現混亂。

And what it is is just uncertainty about where we're going. So as particularly US oriented companies and probably Chinese, etc, etc, in particular, you're sort of waiting to see what happens and you're trying to not sort of go one way or the other too far quite yet. Because you're just not sure where we're going. And so there's a bit of a pause here and that can create a slow down by itself. And so we're looking for clarity and maybe we get more of that going forward and the market is certainly looking for that. But right now, you're probably smart or to be conservative is probably a better way of putting it up just pulling tight, sticking pat and just waiting until you get a little bit more clarity particularly if you're a company or even as an investor.
而這一切只是因為我們對未來方向的不確定性。特別是對於以美國為主的公司，可能還有中國等地的企業來說，大家都在觀望局勢發展，試著不要過度偏向某一方。因為你根本無法確定未來會如何。因此，這裡出現了一種暫停的狀態，這種狀態本身就可能導致經濟放緩。所以我們正在尋求更明確的方向，或許未來會有更多線索，市場當然也在等待這一點。但現在，保持謹慎或許是更明智的做法，或者說得更貼切一點，就是緊縮開支、按兵不動，直到獲得更多明確資訊——無論你是企業還是投資者都該如此。

The other major input today that we haven't had for decades until very recently is where inflation is headed for for a long time since probably the 80s to recent time inflation has been relatively low and stable. And now it's higher than it's been for a while and uncertain where the path goes. And that, as you mentioned earlier, the Fed is on pause and that's part of the reason. I do think about the volatility of inflation as you're analyzing the economic cycle. I think the Fed is on pause your copper between dual mandate and slow down and growth and inflation. Pricing power becomes a bigger piece of how you sort of think about it. It's not always easy to identify what companies that can pass through. prices is very important in your analysis and always is it's probably even more so now. In theory, if inflation is sort of out pacing and growth is still okay, then you like to be and maybe high fixed costs, businesses and value companies that can sort of pass that long. So it's not easy to tell exactly where you are at the moment because you do sort of have this constraint of sort of saying, okay, how do I think about inflation? Where is that coming from? We have tight labor markets, we have potential effects from the tariff, but also what does that mean to growth and how do I want the position in the companies and a lot of companies these days in their earnings calls are very understandably saying we don't know where things are going. So it's making it a big cloudy everywhere. But it's sort of focusing a little bit heavier on is pricing going to help you versus your input costs versus your ability to price your products. So I just inflation creates a bigger focus in those areas than it has for a lot of years.
另一個我們幾十年來直到最近才重新面對的重大變數，就是通膨的長期走向。自 1980 年代以來，通膨率一直處於相對低且穩定的狀態。但現在通膨已攀升至多年高點，且未來走勢充滿不確定性。正如您稍早提到的，聯準會目前暫停升息，這正是部分原因所在。當您在分析經濟週期時，我確實會考量通膨的波動性。我認為聯準會正處於兩難局面——既要平衡雙重使命（就業與通膨），又要兼顧經濟放緩與成長。此時定價能力在投資決策中的重要性更為凸顯。要辨別哪些企業能成功轉嫁成本並不容易，但這項分析要素始終至關重要，在當前環境下尤其如此。理論上，若通膨持續超標而經濟成長尚可，您可能會傾向布局高固定成本產業，或是能長期轉嫁成本的那些價值型企業。但由於我們正面臨「該如何解讀通膨？通膨根源何在？」這類思考框架的限制，要精準判斷當下所處位置其實並不容易。 我們面臨緊縮的勞動力市場，關稅可能帶來的影響，但這對成長意味著什麼？我該如何調整在企業中的布局？如今許多公司在財報電話會議上很合理地表示，他們不知道未來會如何發展。這讓整體情勢變得相當不明朗。但重點稍微更偏向於：定價能否幫助你應對投入成本，以及你為產品定價的能力。因此，通膨讓這些領域的關注度比過去許多年都來得更高。

It sounds like an environment where having a well informed top-down perspective is very valuable because so much of it can influence the individual companies looking at it from a bottom-up perspective. I would agree. And so you don't get a perfect, but when you're not getting information from companies because they don't really know, then sort of finding a way to step back and maybe some clarity. As you think about portfolio construction, the macro awareness top-down, I think, does help. It adds maybe a bit more context than it normally would when you are getting more company-specific information. One of the regimes, if you want to call it that, that is coming to focus recently, is US exceptionalism.
聽起來在這樣的環境中，擁有充分了解宏觀視角（自上而下）的觀點非常有價值，因為許多因素都會影響從微觀視角（自下而上）審視的個別公司。我同意這一點。雖然無法做到完美，但當你無法從公司獲得資訊（因為它們其實也不清楚）時，某種程度上後退一步或許能帶來一些清晰度。在思考投資組合建構時，我認為宏觀意識（自上而下）確實有所幫助。相較於通常獲得更具體的公司資訊時，它能提供更多背景脈絡。最近受到關注的其中一個「體制」（如果你想這麼稱呼的話），就是美國例外主義。

How do you view the risk of continued US exceptionalism and you think we're in the late inings of that cycle? I do think we're in the late inings of that cycle. In some ways, it's sort of like how did we get here and why would the exceptionalism change? And I think when I sort of think about that, the US earned that exceptionalism, the past 10 15 years, just some context. The US right now is approximately 67,68 percent of the global market cap. That has increased from the low 40s, maybe mid 40 percentage in 2008, 2009, or the global financial crisis.
你如何看待美國持續卓越的風險，以及你認為我們是否已處於這個週期的後期階段？我確實認為我們正處於這個週期的後期。從某些方面來看，這有點像是我們是如何走到這一步的，以及為什麼這種卓越性會改變？當我思考這個問題時，我認為美國在過去 10 到 15 年間贏得了這種卓越地位，這裡提供一些背景資料。目前美國約佔全球市值的 67%至 68%，這一比例從 2008、2009 年全球金融危機時的低 40%或中 40%有所上升。

And the further context, the US is about 28,29 percent of GDP. So why the improvement? How did we get there and how did it get earned? It's really the question. And so globalization, you had improved margins. The US also over the period of time experienced declines in interest rates and tax rates. You had high fixed costs absorption, which is really revenues outpacing wages. And then you had the fourth, which is a big driver, as you had a lot, the emergence of, I would say, probably of capital light businesses.
進一步的背景是，美國約佔全球 GDP 的 28%至 29%。那麼，這種提升是如何發生的？我們是如何達到這一地步的，又是如何贏得這一切的？這確實是個問題。全球化帶來了利潤率的提升。美國在這段時間內還經歷了利率和稅率的下降。高固定成本吸收率，即收入增長超過工資增長，也是一個因素。然後是第四個重要驅動因素，那就是資本輕型企業的大量湧現。

So the high returns from those big tech firms, which could argue some of them may be pseudo and monopoly. So you really benefit from that. So the concerns that we have high federal deficits in the slowing federal stimulus, at least it won't be as powerful of a driver. And you got some pretty tough decisions with tax and social reforms. I mean, all of this should be a drag on growth. So we get too negative. I think the US still has a deepest markets by a lot around the world and access to capital and rule of law. And I would say somewhat less orderous regulations are still under vantage.
因此，那些大型科技公司帶來的高回報，可以說其中一些可能具有偽壟斷性質。你確實從中受益。所以我們擔憂的是，在聯邦刺激措施減緩的情況下，高額的聯邦赤字至少不會成為那麼強勁的驅動力。而且，在稅收和社會改革方面，你還面臨一些相當艱難的決定。我的意思是，所有這些都應該會拖累增長。如果我們過於悲觀，我認為美國仍然擁有世界上最深厚的市場、資本准入和法治環境。而且我會說，相對較少的繁瑣法規仍然是其優勢。

When I put all that together, though, I still expect that capital will slowly exit the US as investors see maybe better returns in other places. And there are many opportunities for that outside the US. And part of that is that the valuation disparity is still quite wide. For example, particularly after let's say the last 10 days here, it's March, I mean, sorry, it's make fit. We see a big sort of move back up. And in the US, S&P 500 large caps are back to being priced at about 20 times forward earnings. And compared to Europe is 13 or 14 times.
不過，當我把所有這些因素綜合起來考慮時，我仍然預期資本會慢慢撤出美國，因為投資者可能會在其他地方看到更好的回報。美國之外有許多這樣的機會。部分原因是估值差距仍然相當大。例如，特別是在過去 10 天（現在是三月，抱歉，應該是五月）之後，我們看到市場大幅回升。在美國，標普 500 大型股的預期市盈率又回到了約 20 倍，而歐洲則是 13 或 14 倍。

Japan is 13 or 14 times. And that's generally wider than it used to be. Not that it students, there will be a difference. But it's the gap is big. As I've mentioned before, there's also a lot of central banks are further along in cutting. Or stimulating their economies than the US, which could create better, cyclical growth outside of the US. And then, of course, I think the last kind of part of that, which is the hardest part of the moment, is increased political uncertainty, which I think is encouraging and reminding is probably better word of it for diversification. So I expect that flows are going to be volatile and back and forth between US and international, but I suspect international opportunities will be good enough to reduce US exceptionalism at least for now. At quick way to summarize what you just said is, and it goes back to your point earlier about what is the market discounting? 15 years ago, the market wasn't discounting US exceptionalism. And you had a distale wind of factors that help get us to this point today. And you look forward from this point 10, 15 years from now is certainly discounting US exceptionalism.
日本是 13 或 14 倍。這通常比過去更廣泛。並不是說學生會有差異，而是差距很大。正如我之前提到的，還有許多央行在降息方面比美國走得更遠。或者說在刺激經濟方面比美國更積極，這可能在美國以外創造更好的周期性增長。當然，我認為最後一部分，也是當下最困難的部分，就是政治不確定性增加，我認為這是在鼓勵——或者用「提醒」可能更貼切——分散投資的重要性。因此，我預期資金流動將在美國與國際市場之間波動不定，來回擺動，但我懷疑國際市場的機會將足夠好，至少目前能削弱美國的例外主義。快速總結你剛才所說的話，這又回到你早先提到的觀點：市場在折價什麼？15 年前，市場並沒有折價美國的例外主義。當時有一系列遠端因素幫助我們走到今天這一步。而從現在展望未來 10 到 15 年，市場肯定正在折價美國的例外主義。

And so the upside is probably more limited than the opportunity on the downside. Well said, I think another way of putting that is, is that the way the US is priced, that expectations kind of have to be delivered, where if you are looking at, particularly, let's say Europe, Japan, a lot of the emerging market indexes, that all you need is expectations are so low. All you need is them to sort of hit that or even be slightly better, where your returns could be much better than here in the US. So as far as what's being priced, the US is priced really well.
因此，上漲空間可能比下跌機會更有限。說得好，我想另一種表達方式是，美國的定價方式意味著預期必須被實現，而如果你看的是歐洲、日本或許多新興市場指數，預期已經低到只要它們能達到甚至略超預期，回報就可能遠比美國好得多。就定價而言，美國確實被定價得很充分。

It has to happen everywhere else anything good can happen and you should get better relative returns. And at the same time, if you ignore the pricing, you just look at the fundamentals and the trends, those seem to be reversing as we speak. I agree. We're seeing that, particularly in Europe and certainly Japan, the last several years been going through that too. Are there any particular risks that are most concerning to you right now? I'm probably going to sound an awful lot like others. The administrative administration's economic plan is often unclear and quickly changing.
在其他任何地方只要有一點好事發生，你就應該能獲得更好的相對回報。同時，如果你忽略定價，只看基本面和趨勢，這些似乎正在我們眼前逆轉。我同意。我們尤其看到歐洲，當然日本過去幾年也經歷了這種情況。目前有什麼特別讓你擔憂的風險嗎？我可能會聽起來和很多人很像。現任政府的經濟計畫常常不明確且快速變動。

And as we talked about this, is led to the uncertainty is led to stagnation and of investment. And that investment seems to be in the later cancelled and supply chains are being put under severe pressure. So I am concerned that we're going to see a slow down and global growth certainly could be here but could spread internationally. And then I'm also concerned about higher inflation. We're still positioned defensively. We're holding positions in defensive sectors and in large companies. And we're well diversified. We sort of stayed with all that. So we're well diversified among regions and countries.
而正如我們所討論的，這種不確定性導致了投資的停滯。這些投資似乎在後期被取消，供應鏈也正承受著巨大壓力。因此，我擔心我們將看到全球增長放緩，這情況雖然可能僅限於此地，但也有可能擴散至國際範圍。此外，我也對高通膨感到憂慮。我們目前仍採取防禦性布局，持有防禦性產業及大型企業的倉位，並且保持高度分散投資。我們大致上維持這樣的策略，因此在區域與國家間的配置相當分散。

I think we're coming from, as I think, President Trump's plan may work, but it might most likely it'll take longer than most expect. And then the tough part is at the same time. I think the market is hoping for a quicker resolution than I think will occur. And all of this sort of creates risk. And we like our portfolio at this point. But you know, what I can tell you is doing, we will remain sort of patient and looking for the opportunities that may or may not happen if if and when prices fall. So I'm worried about the slow down. I'm worried about inflation and then we're trying to, we're not really paid to go in one direction or another. So we're quite patient in staying in defensive stocks and then just seeing what opportunities fall out. And oftentimes the best opportunities fall out when you get these downturns that's maybe unexpected to many. Yes, broadly, I think. Before the last 10 day bounce in the US stocks. Some of the stock action was so severe. We were starting to see potential opportunities and some of those very overly concentrated areas of the market. Specifically on dustrails and technology. Now, view is as we were still quite early there, but after the large drops, we did notice it and structurally some of those stocks hold a peel. But kind of only at the right prices. There's other places that are sort of interesting. Not too far along in some of this were sort of noticing those areas too, but internationally Japanese stocks. Some of those particularly those affected by the tariff concerns. You know, have gotten beaten up and they could be interesting and looked to be overly discounted. I've mentioned before that emerging market stocks. They're inexpensive.
我認為，我們正處於一個階段，川普總統的計畫或許會奏效，但很可能需要比多數人預期更長的時間。而與此同時，棘手之處在於市場似乎期待著比我預期中更快的解決方案。這一切都在某種程度上增加了風險。目前我們對自己的投資組合感到滿意。不過，我可以告訴你的是，我們將保持耐心，等待那些可能在價格下跌時出現的機會——無論這些機會是否真的會來臨。因此，我對經濟放緩感到憂慮，也擔心通膨問題。但我們的工作並非押注單一方向，所以我們相當有耐心地持有防禦性股票，靜觀其變。往往在許多人始料未及的市場低迷時期，最佳的投資機會才會浮現。是的，總體來說，我認為在美國股市過去十天的反彈之前，某些股票的走勢已經相當劇烈。我們開始在市場中一些過度集中的領域看到潛在機會，特別是工業股和科技股。 現在看來，我們當時還處於相當早期的階段，但在大幅下跌之後，我們確實注意到了這一點，而且從結構上看，其中一些股票確實具有吸引力。不過，只有在價格合適的情況下才會考慮。還有其他一些領域也頗具吸引力。在某些方面進展還不太深入時，我們也開始注意到這些區域，特別是國際上的日本股票。尤其是那些受到關稅問題影響的股票。你知道的，它們已經遭受重創，可能變得有趣，而且看起來被過度低估了。我之前提到過新興市場股票。它們的價格相當低廉。

They're beaten up. They should benefit from a weaker dollar and some several of those countries have gone through central banks stimulus, you know, for quite some time. And so they could look interesting. But you do need to feel like you're going to turn. And then sort of like what we've talked about before is the Europe still looks attractive and. And growth there might be better than expected and actually better than the US, particularly maybe next year. And some of that surrounds, you know, the German fiscal spending that probably takes time and picks up load later in the year, but there's a bit of a stimulus to the continent itself. And so we could still find pretty good ideas there too. This has been great day. I appreciate you taking the time to share your insights with our audience. Thanks. Thanks for joining me. Have some pleasure. Thank you very much. This is me great. Thanks for listening.
它們受到重創。它們應該會從美元走弱中受益，而且其中幾個國家已經實施了央行刺激措施，你知道的，已經持續好一段時間了。所以它們看起來可能頗具吸引力。但你確實需要感覺到市場即將轉向。然後就像我們之前談到的，歐洲仍然看起來很有吸引力，而且那裡的增長可能會比預期的更好，實際上甚至可能比美國更好，特別是明年。其中一部分原因與德國財政支出有關，這可能需要時間並在今年晚些時候才開始發揮作用，但這對整個歐洲大陸來說是一種刺激。因此，我們在那裡仍然可以找到相當不錯的投資機會。今天真是很棒的一天。感謝你抽空與我們的觀眾分享你的見解。謝謝。謝謝你來參加。很愉快。非常感謝。這對我來說很棒。謝謝收聽。

We hope you enjoyed this episode. Please visit our website at insightfulinvestor.org to access past shows and learn more about our podcast. If you have questions, feel free to email us at info@insightfullinvestor.org. And if you enjoyed the discussion, please subscribe to this podcast to ensure you don't miss future episodes. And don't forget to forward today's conversation to others you think would enjoy listening. This podcast is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as legal, business, investment or tax advice. All opinions expressed by podcast participants are solely their own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of evoke advisors, their affiliates or companies feature. Due to industry regulations, participants on this podcast are instructed not to make specific trade recommendations. No reference past or potential profits. And listeners are reminded that security is trading, commodity trading, and alternative investments are complex and carry risk of substantial losses. As such, they are not suitable for all investors. Listeners should be aware that guests featured on the insightful investor may have current or past associations with evoke advisors or the host, including as an investment manager of a private fund opportunity by evoke. Or access through an affiliated evoke fund or as a client.
希望您喜歡這一集的內容。歡迎造訪我們的網站 insightfulinvestor.org，收聽過往節目並了解更多關於本播客的資訊。若有任何疑問，請隨時寄信至 info@insightfullinvestor.org 與我們聯繫。若您喜歡這次的討論，請訂閱本播客以確保不錯過未來的集數。別忘了將今天的對話分享給您認為會有興趣收聽的朋友。本播客僅供資訊參考，不應被視為法律、商業、投資或稅務建議。播客參與者所表達的所有觀點僅代表其個人意見，未必反映 evoke advisors、其附屬機構或提及企業的觀點。根據行業規範，播客參與者被要求不得提供具體交易建議。不提及過往或潛在收益。提醒聽眾，證券交易、商品交易及另類投資具有複雜性且可能造成重大損失風險，因此並不適合所有投資者。 聽眾應注意，出現在《洞察投資者》節目中的嘉賓可能目前或過去與 Evoke 顧問公司或主持人有關聯，包括作為 Evoke 私募基金機會的投資經理，或透過附屬的 Evoke 基金參與，或是其客戶。

Participation as a guest on the podcast should not be perceived as an endorsement or testimonial with respect to evoke advisors, the podcast host or their services. Similarly, the inclusion of a guest on the podcast does not imply that evoke advisors or the host endorses the guests or any company with which they may be affiliated or employed. Evoke has neither paid nor received compensation from guests for their participation. participation.
嘉賓參與播客節目不應被視為對 Evoke 顧問公司、節目主持人或其服務的背書或推薦。同樣地，嘉賓出現在節目中並不意味著 Evoke 顧問公司或主持人認可該嘉賓或其可能隸屬或受僱的任何公司。Evoke 並未支付亦未從嘉賓的參與中獲得任何報酬。