Lengthy bu_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

2021-12-22

Lengthy but well argued. But I wonder what Warren Buffet would actually do.

Why Buffett Should Sell Berkshire's Apple Stake<blockquote>为什么巴菲特应该出售苹果股份</blockquote>

免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。

精彩评论

我们需要你的真知灼见来填补这片空白

发表看法

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"detailType":1,"isChannel":false,"data":{"magic":2,"id":691833665,"tweetId":"691833665","gmtCreate":1640161849613,"gmtModify":1640161850623,"author":{"id":3573703375513385,"idStr":"3573703375513385","authorId":3573703375513385,"authorIdStr":"3573703375513385","name":"JonLucky","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/15afb66e92e4e4d6d1a8e9b7854e9d5e","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":105,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body>Lengthy but well argued. But I wonder what Warren Buffet would actually do.</body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body>Lengthy but well argued. But I wonder what Warren Buffet would actually do.</body></html>","text":"Lengthy but well argued. But I wonder what Warren Buffet would actually do.","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/691833665","repostId":1101145405,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101145405","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1640152602,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1101145405?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-22 13:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Buffett Should Sell Berkshire's Apple Stake<blockquote>为什么巴菲特应该出售苹果股份</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101145405","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"Summary\n\nApple has been a strong buy when Berkshire made its first investment. Today, things are ver","content":"Summary<blockquote>总结</blockquote> <ul> <li>Apple has been a strong buy when Berkshire made its first investment. Today, things are very different - instead of cheap and out of favor, AAPL is very expensive.</li> <li>Berkshire has shown that they are willing to capitalize on low BRK valuations by buying back shares when they are undervalued.</li> <li>Selling overvalued AAPL and using the proceeds to buy undervalued BRK could generate significant shareholder value for Berkshire's investors, I believe.</li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c50b6ba612256ee64eedf00f7b274a61\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Paul Morigi/Getty Images Entertainment<blockquote><ul><li>当Berkshire进行第一笔投资时，苹果一直是一个强有力的买入对象。如今，情况大不相同——AAPL非但不便宜、失宠，反而非常昂贵。</li><li>伯克希尔已经表明，他们愿意通过在股票被低估时回购股票来利用低BRK估值。</li><li>我相信，出售被高估的AAPL并用所得收益购买被低估的BRK可以为伯克希尔的投资者创造巨大的股东价值。</li></ul>保罗·莫里吉/盖蒂图片社娱乐公司</blockquote> Article Thesis<blockquote>文章论文</blockquote> Apple's (AAPL) shares are pretty expensive, and the company is entering a period of lower growth if analysts are correct. This means that it could be an opportune time for investors to sell shares to lock in gain - this also holds true for Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) (BRK.B), which is a major shareholder. Berkshire could use the proceeds to ramp up its already healthy buybacks further, which would be immensely accretive at current valuations.<blockquote>苹果（AAPL）的股价相当昂贵，如果分析师是正确的，该公司正在进入增长放缓的时期。这意味着现在可能是投资者出售股票以锁定收益的好时机——对于大股东伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（BRK.A）（BRK.B）来说也是如此。伯克希尔可以利用这些收益进一步加大其本已健康的回购力度，以目前的估值来看，这将极大地增值。</blockquote> Why It Could Be Opportune To Lock In Gains In Apple<blockquote>为什么现在是锁定苹果收益的好时机</blockquote> Last week, I wrote a longer&nbsp;article on Apple&nbsp;and why I believe that shares are currently trading above fair value. The quick recap is that Apple is trading at the highest valuation in a long period of time, no matter whether we look at its earnings multiple, its EV to EBITDA ratio, or its cash flow yield. The EV/EBITDA multiple is most telling, I believe, as it accounts for changes in debt usage and in Apple's cash position over the years:<blockquote>上周，我写了一篇关于苹果的更长文章，以及为什么我认为股票目前的交易价格高于公允价值。快速回顾一下，无论我们看其市盈率、EV与EBITDA比率还是现金流收益率，苹果的估值都处于很长一段时间以来的最高水平。我认为，EV/EBITDA倍数最能说明问题，因为它说明了多年来债务使用和苹果现金状况的变化：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e6b5d51759ba11c78d02d04731e19a2\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Data by YCharts<blockquote>数据来自YCharts</blockquote> At easily more than twice the historical valuation, AAPL is pretty expensive. At the same time, Apple is entering a period of&nbsp;slower growth, according to the analyst community, since the iPhone and iPad lines are not generating significant business growth any longer, while the Apple Car is likely still years away. The combination of an above-average valuation and a below-average growth rate, combined with weaker tailwinds from buybacks (which are less effective at the current high valuation), means that Apple could be poised for underperformance going forward, which is why I believe that locking in gains could make a lot of sense.<blockquote>苹果公司的估值很容易是历史估值的两倍多，相当昂贵。与此同时，据分析师界称，苹果正在进入增长放缓时期，因为iPhone和iPad系列不再产生显着的业务增长，而苹果汽车可能还需要数年时间。高于平均水平的估值和低于平均水平的增长率，再加上回购带来的较弱的推动力（在当前的高估值下，回购的效果较差），意味着苹果未来可能会表现不佳，这就是为什么我相信锁定收益可能很有意义。</blockquote> Berkshire's Apple Investment<blockquote>Berkshire的苹果投资</blockquote> Berkshire Hathaway first started to buy into Apple in 2016. At that time, Apple was trading at a completely different valuation compared to today:<blockquote>Berkshire Hathaway于2016年首次开始收购苹果。当时，苹果的估值与今天完全不同：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14b39fa01fe2ec9423cdac40d8fb1684\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Data by YCharts<blockquote>数据来自YCharts</blockquote> Shares traded for 10-14x net profits, and at 7-9x EBITDA - not at all comparable to the 30x net earnings multiple and 24x EBITDA multiple AAPL trades at today. In other words, Buffett has, as could be expected, identified Apple as a strong investment when it was very inexpensive - following his \"Value\" approach. Right now, however, Apple is far from a value pick and instead seems pretty pricey, especially when we account for its not very convincing near-term growth outlook - forecasted EPS growth over the next couple of years ranges from just 2%-8% (linked above).<blockquote>股价的净利润为10-14倍，EBITDA为7-9倍，与AAPL目前的30倍净利润倍数和24倍EBITDA倍数根本无法相比。换句话说，不出所料，巴菲特遵循他的“价值”方法，在苹果非常便宜的时候就将其视为一项强有力的投资。然而，目前苹果远非一个价值选择，相反似乎相当昂贵，特别是当我们考虑到其不太令人信服的近期增长前景时——未来几年的预测每股收益增长率仅为2%-8%（上面链接）。</blockquote> Per Berkshire's most recent 10-Q filing, the company held $128 billion worth of Apple stock on September 30:<blockquote>根据伯克希尔最新的10季度报告，截至9月30日，伯克希尔持有价值1280亿美元的苹果股票：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/09f96108345a43e1eda784e61ff7ee2e\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"211\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Source: BRK 10-Q<blockquote>资料来源：BRK 10-Q</blockquote> Apple's share price on that date was $142, from which we can infer that Berkshire held around 900 million shares of Apple at the end of the third quarter. Assuming that there were no sales and no buys since then, those same 900 million shares are worth around $154 billion at a current share price of $171 - at the recent peak of $182, the position had a value of $164 billion.<blockquote>苹果当天的股价为142美元，由此我们可以推断，伯克希尔在第三季度末持有约9亿股苹果股票。假设此后没有出售或购买，那么按照目前171美元的股价计算，这9亿股股票的价值约为1540亿美元——在最近182美元的峰值时，该头寸的价值为1640亿美元。</blockquote> What does Berkshire get out of that $154 billion investment right now? Based on Apple's dividend of $0.22 per share per quarter, Berkshire receives about $790 million a year in dividends - this sounds like quite a lot, but relative to the massive size of the investment, it's just a yield of ~0.5% - the same yield all other Apple shareholders get. On top of that, Berkshire also gets a portion of Apple's other profits, of course. Some of those are paid out via buybacks, which make for a theoretical pro-forma return of around $4.5 billion to Berkshire every year, based on Apple's trailing twelve-month buyback yield of 2.9% (per YCharts). Shareholder returns thus total a little more than $5 billion a year (Berkshire's portion), for a yield of slightly above 3% - still not too great, I believe. Of course, Apple can also generate profits that are not paid out to shareholders, but that are, instead, reinvested to grow the business, e.g. via R&amp;D spending or capital expenditures. In recent years, however, that was not an especially large portion - with an earnings yield of just above 3%, based on estimates for the current fiscal year, and with buybacks and dividends totaling 3.4%, Apple isn't actually retaining any earnings right now.<blockquote>伯克希尔目前从1540亿美元的投资中得到了什么？根据苹果每季度每股0.22美元的股息计算，伯克希尔每年获得约7.9亿美元的股息——这听起来相当多，但相对于庞大的投资规模，收益率仅为0.5%左右——与所有其他苹果股东获得的收益相同。当然，除此之外，Berkshire还获得了苹果其他利润的一部分。其中一些是通过回购支付的，根据苹果过去12个月2.9%的回购收益率（根据YCharts），理论上每年为伯克希尔哈撒韦带来约45亿美元的预计回报。因此，股东每年的回报总额略高于50亿美元（伯克希尔的部分），收益率略高于3%——我相信仍然不算太高。当然，苹果也可以产生不支付给股东的利润，而是用于再投资以发展业务，例如通过研发支出或资本支出。然而，近年来，这并不是一个特别大的部分——根据本财年的估计，收益率略高于3%，回购和股息总计3.4%，苹果实际上并没有保留任何收益现在。</blockquote> Looking at the shareholder return picture, or alternatively using the concept of \"look-through earnings\" - Berkshire's portion of Apple's profits - gets us to a relatively similar picture: Apple's earnings per share are forecasted at $5.70 during the current year - a 900 million share position thus generates theoretical profits of $5.1 billion for Apple. In both cases, whether we focus on actual shareholder returns or on the look-through profit concept, the return picture is comparable - Berkshire gets about $5 billion a year for a $150+ billion investment.<blockquote>看看股东回报情况，或者使用“透视收益”的概念——伯克希尔哈撒韦在苹果利润中的份额——我们会得到一个相对相似的情况：苹果今年的每股收益预计为5.70美元——9亿股因此，苹果的理论利润为51亿美元。在这两种情况下，无论我们关注的是实际股东回报还是透视利润概念，回报情况都是可比的——伯克希尔每年从1500多亿美元的投资中获得约50亿美元。</blockquote> This does, I believe, not generate an adequate return on investment, especially when we consider that the value of Berkshire's Apple investment could easily drop by tens of billions of dollars if Apple's valuation ever reverted back towards historical norms. A 20x earnings multiple for Apple, which would still be above the 10-year median earnings multiple (16, per YCharts), would see shares drop to ~$115, which would result in $52 billion in equity losses for Berkshire's AAPL position relative to how the position is valued today.<blockquote>我认为，这并不能产生足够的投资回报，尤其是当我们考虑到如果苹果的估值恢复到历史正常水平，伯克希尔在苹果的投资价值很容易下降数百亿美元时。苹果的市盈率为20倍，仍高于10年市盈率中位数（根据YCharts为16倍），股价将跌至115美元左右，这将导致伯克希尔哈撒韦公司的AAPL头寸相对于伯克希尔哈撒韦公司的股权损失520亿美元。该职位今天的估值如何。</blockquote> Creating More Value For Shareholders<blockquote>为股东创造更多价值</blockquote> If Apple is trading at a price that could justify locking in gains, this brings up an important question: What would Berkshire do with the proceeds if it were to sell its stake? I believe that there is a pretty good answer to that - they could use it to buy an excellent company trading at an inexpensive valuation. The company in question is one that management knows extremely well - it's Berkshire Hathaway.<blockquote>如果苹果的交易价格可以证明锁定收益是合理的，这就带来了一个重要的问题：如果伯克希尔出售其股份，伯克希尔会如何处理收益？我相信对此有一个很好的答案——他们可以用它来购买一家以低廉估值交易的优秀公司。这家公司是管理层非常了解的公司——伯克希尔哈撒韦公司。</blockquote> Berkshire Hathaway has been buying back its own shares at a considerable pace in recent quarters, which shows that management clearly likes the idea of buybacks, and that they deem BRK a good value at current prices - otherwise a great capital allocator, such as Warren Buffett, wouldn't spend billions on buybacks today:<blockquote>伯克希尔哈撒韦公司最近几个季度一直在以相当快的速度回购自己的股票，这表明管理层显然喜欢回购的想法，并且他们认为BRK在当前价格下具有良好的价值——否则它是一个伟大的资本配置者，例如沃伦·巴菲特，今天不会花费数十亿美元进行回购：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/698ffef8c32981fa0d60f5e7a29f6726\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Data by YCharts<blockquote>数据来自YCharts</blockquote> Berkshire has traded in the $280 to $300 range for more than half a year, and Berkshire has continued to spend billions of dollars on buybacks in that time frame, so it seems pretty obvious that Buffett sees Berkshire as an attractive value in that range. When we consider that Berkshire's book value has most likely risen in recent months, due to equity markets climbing and due to operating profits, BRK could be an even better deal today.<blockquote>半年多来，伯克希尔哈撒韦的交易价格一直在280美元至300美元的范围内，伯克希尔哈撒韦在这段时间内继续花费数十亿美元进行回购，因此巴菲特显然认为伯克希尔哈撒韦在这一范围内具有吸引力的价值。当我们考虑到伯克希尔哈撒韦公司的账面价值近几个月来由于股市攀升和营业利润而很可能上涨时，BRK今天可能是一笔更好的交易。</blockquote> Let's look at what selling the Apple stake and using the proceeds for buybacks could do for Berkshire and its shareholders. The Apple stake is worth $154 billion, and as established earlier, Berkshire generates about $5 billion a year from that. Berkshire's operating businesses generated about&nbsp;$6.5 billion&nbsp;during the most recent quarter, or $26 billion a year (assuming no future growth). Berkshire's equity portfolio, excluding Apple, was worth $183 billion at the end of the third quarter. The S&amp;P 500(NYSEARCA:SPY)&nbsp;has risen by 6% since then, so let's assume that the equity portfolio, without the Apple stake, is worth around $190 billion today (4% growth to be conservative). Let's now look at two scenarios.<blockquote>让我们看看出售苹果股份并将所得用于回购会给伯克希尔及其股东带来什么。Berkshire持有的苹果股份价值1540亿美元，正如之前所确定的，Berkshire每年从中赚取约50亿美元。伯克希尔的运营业务在最近一个季度创造了约65亿美元的收入，即每年260亿美元（假设未来没有增长）。截至第三季度末，Berkshire的股票投资组合（不包括苹果）价值1830亿美元。自那以来，标普500(NYSEARCA：SPDR标普500指数ETF)上涨了6%，因此让我们假设股票投资组合（不包括苹果股份）今天的价值约为1900亿美元（保守地增长4%）。现在让我们看两个场景。</blockquote> In the first scenario, the Apple investment is held and we also assume that other equity investments, as well as the cash position, are held. When we further assume that other equities are fairly valued, we can subtract those from Berkshire's current market capitalization to \"net them out\".<blockquote>在第一种情况下，持有苹果投资，我们还假设持有其他股权投资以及现金头寸。当我们进一步假设其他股票的估值合理时，我们可以从伯克希尔当前的市值中减去这些股票来“净额”。</blockquote> In that case, Berkshire, including its Apple stake, is valued at $311 billion today, once we adjust the $650 billion market capitalization for the $190 billion in non-Apple equities, and for the $149 billion in cash held at the end of the third quarter. Investors get $26 billion in operating earnings, and $5 billion in Apple earnings for that investment, which makes for a $31 billion total - Apple is thus, once we net out cash and non-Apple equities, trading at 10x current profits. In other words, investors get $13.70 in earnings per share from Apple in the form of operating profits and Apple earnings, and they get $150 per share in the form of cash and non-Apple equities held at Berkshire on top of that. Paying $288 for that seems like a pretty good deal, I believe.<blockquote>在这种情况下，如果我们将1900亿美元的非苹果股票和1490亿美元的现金调整为6500亿美元的市值，包括其在苹果的股份，伯克希尔今天的估值为3110亿美元。第三季度。投资者从该投资中获得260亿美元的营业收益和50亿美元的苹果收益，总计310亿美元——因此，一旦我们扣除现金和非苹果股票，苹果的交易价格是当前利润的10倍。换句话说，投资者以营业利润和苹果收益的形式从苹果获得每股13.70美元的收益，在此基础上，他们以现金和持有的非苹果股票的形式获得每股150美元。我相信，支付288美元似乎是一笔不错的交易。</blockquote> Things get way better in scenario 2, however, where Berkshire sells all of its 900 million shares in Apple and uses the proceeds to buy back $154 billion worth of BRK. This would reduce the share count by 535 million, from 2.26 billion to 1.73 billion. At $288 per share, Berkshire would then be valued at $497 billion. The company would still own $190 billion in non-Apple equities, and $149 billion in cash, but those would be distributed over a significantly lower share count of just 1.73 billion, which would lift the per-share value to $196. Berkshire would also still generate $26 billion in operating profits, but the $5 billion in Apple profits would have vanished. The $26 billion in operating profits, distributed over 1.73 billion shares, would total $15.03, however. We see that, if Berkshire were to sell all its Apple shares and use all of the proceeds to reduce its share count by 24%, its per-share value should rise dramatically. Not only would the value of its cash and non-Apple investments rise from $150 per share to $196 per share, but its operating earnings (including the look-through Apple earnings in scenario 1) would also rise from $13.70 to $15.03. If Apple were to trade at a similar operating earnings multiple of around 10 in scenario 2, its per share value would climb from $288 in scenario 1 to $346 in scenario 2 ($196 of non-Apple equities and cash, and $150 for its operating businesses), all else equal. If we assume that a 10x earnings multiple for Berkshire's operating businesses is too low, and that they should be valued at a higher multiple, the impact is even larger.<blockquote>然而，在第二种情况下，情况会好得多，伯克希尔出售其在苹果的所有9亿股股票，并用所得收益回购价值1540亿美元的BRK。这将使股票数量减少5.35亿股，从22.6亿股减少到17.3亿股。按照每股288美元，伯克希尔的估值将达到4970亿美元。该公司仍将拥有1900亿美元的非苹果股票和1490亿美元现金，但这些股票将分配给低得多的股票数量，仅为17.3亿股，这将使每股价值升至196美元。伯克希尔仍将创造260亿美元的营业利润，但苹果50亿美元的利润将化为乌有。然而，260亿美元的营业利润分配给17.3亿股，总计15.03美元。我们看到，如果伯克希尔出售所有苹果股票，并用所有收益将其股票数量减少24%，其每股价值应该会大幅上升。不仅其现金和非苹果投资的价值将从每股150美元上升到每股196美元，而且其营业收益（包括情景1中的透视苹果收益）也将从13.70美元上升到15.03美元。如果苹果在情景2中以10左右的类似营业收益倍数进行交易，其每股价值将从情景1中的288美元攀升至情景2中的346美元（非苹果股票和现金为196美元，其运营业务为150美元），其他条件相同。如果我们假设伯克希尔运营业务10倍的市盈率太低，而它们的估值应该更高，那么影响就会更大。</blockquote> Takeaway<blockquote>外卖</blockquote> Apple has been a great investment for Berkshire, but that does not mean that holding shares is the best idea. When Berkshire bought into AAPL, Apple was very inexpensive and out of favor. Today, Apple is pretty expensive, which makes it a way worse investment. At the same time, Berkshire itself is pretty inexpensive today, once we account for the Apple stake, other equity positions, and the large cash pile.<blockquote>苹果对Berkshire来说是一项伟大的投资，但这并不意味着持有股票是最好的主意。当Berkshire收购AAPL时，苹果非常便宜，也不受欢迎。如今，苹果相当昂贵，这使得它成为一项更糟糕的投资。与此同时，如果我们考虑到苹果的股份、其他股票头寸和大量现金储备，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司今天的股价也相当便宜。</blockquote> Berkshire has shown that they are willing to take advantage of the low valuation BRK trades at by buying back shares at a rapid pace. Monetizing the overvalued Apple stake in order to ramp up buybacks further could create significant value for Berkshire's shareholders, and it would, at the same time, reduce risks from both a valuation perspective and since management would use the money to invest into the company it knows best - Berkshire.<blockquote>伯克希尔哈撒韦公司已经表明，他们愿意利用BRK交易的低估值，快速回购股票。将被高估的苹果股份货币化以进一步加大回购力度，可能会为伯克希尔的股东创造巨大价值，同时从估值角度以及管理层将用这笔钱投资于其最了解的公司来降低风险——伯克希尔。</blockquote> Selling/monetizing the currently overvalued Apple stake and using the proceeds to buy up undervalued Berkshire shares would thus be a good idea that should generate considerable shareholder value, I believe.<blockquote>因此，我相信，出售/货币化目前被高估的苹果股份，并用所得收益购买被低估的伯克希尔股票将是一个好主意，应该会产生可观的股东价值。</blockquote> This article was written by&nbsp;Jonathan Weber.<blockquote>这篇文章是乔纳森·韦伯写的。</blockquote>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why Buffett Should Sell Berkshire's Apple Stake<blockquote>为什么巴菲特应该出售苹果股份</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy Buffett Should Sell Berkshire's Apple Stake<blockquote>为什么巴菲特应该出售苹果股份</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nSeeking Alpha2021-12-22 13:56\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nSummary<blockquote>总结</blockquote> <ul> <li>Apple has been a strong buy when Berkshire made its first investment. Today, things are very different - instead of cheap and out of favor, AAPL is very expensive.</li> <li>Berkshire has shown that they are willing to capitalize on low BRK valuations by buying back shares when they are undervalued.</li> <li>Selling overvalued AAPL and using the proceeds to buy undervalued BRK could generate significant shareholder value for Berkshire's investors, I believe.</li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c50b6ba612256ee64eedf00f7b274a61\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Paul Morigi/Getty Images Entertainment<blockquote><ul><li>当Berkshire进行第一笔投资时，苹果一直是一个强有力的买入对象。如今，情况大不相同——AAPL非但不便宜、失宠，反而非常昂贵。</li><li>伯克希尔已经表明，他们愿意通过在股票被低估时回购股票来利用低BRK估值。</li><li>我相信，出售被高估的AAPL并用所得收益购买被低估的BRK可以为伯克希尔的投资者创造巨大的股东价值。</li></ul>保罗·莫里吉/盖蒂图片社娱乐公司</blockquote> Article Thesis<blockquote>文章论文</blockquote> Apple's (AAPL) shares are pretty expensive, and the company is entering a period of lower growth if analysts are correct. This means that it could be an opportune time for investors to sell shares to lock in gain - this also holds true for Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) (BRK.B), which is a major shareholder. Berkshire could use the proceeds to ramp up its already healthy buybacks further, which would be immensely accretive at current valuations.<blockquote>苹果（AAPL）的股价相当昂贵，如果分析师是正确的，该公司正在进入增长放缓的时期。这意味着现在可能是投资者出售股票以锁定收益的好时机——对于大股东伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（BRK.A）（BRK.B）来说也是如此。伯克希尔可以利用这些收益进一步加大其本已健康的回购力度，以目前的估值来看，这将极大地增值。</blockquote> Why It Could Be Opportune To Lock In Gains In Apple<blockquote>为什么现在是锁定苹果收益的好时机</blockquote> Last week, I wrote a longer&nbsp;article on Apple&nbsp;and why I believe that shares are currently trading above fair value. The quick recap is that Apple is trading at the highest valuation in a long period of time, no matter whether we look at its earnings multiple, its EV to EBITDA ratio, or its cash flow yield. The EV/EBITDA multiple is most telling, I believe, as it accounts for changes in debt usage and in Apple's cash position over the years:<blockquote>上周，我写了一篇关于苹果的更长文章，以及为什么我认为股票目前的交易价格高于公允价值。快速回顾一下，无论我们看其市盈率、EV与EBITDA比率还是现金流收益率，苹果的估值都处于很长一段时间以来的最高水平。我认为，EV/EBITDA倍数最能说明问题，因为它说明了多年来债务使用和苹果现金状况的变化：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8e6b5d51759ba11c78d02d04731e19a2\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Data by YCharts<blockquote>数据来自YCharts</blockquote> At easily more than twice the historical valuation, AAPL is pretty expensive. At the same time, Apple is entering a period of&nbsp;slower growth, according to the analyst community, since the iPhone and iPad lines are not generating significant business growth any longer, while the Apple Car is likely still years away. The combination of an above-average valuation and a below-average growth rate, combined with weaker tailwinds from buybacks (which are less effective at the current high valuation), means that Apple could be poised for underperformance going forward, which is why I believe that locking in gains could make a lot of sense.<blockquote>苹果公司的估值很容易是历史估值的两倍多，相当昂贵。与此同时，据分析师界称，苹果正在进入增长放缓时期，因为iPhone和iPad系列不再产生显着的业务增长，而苹果汽车可能还需要数年时间。高于平均水平的估值和低于平均水平的增长率，再加上回购带来的较弱的推动力（在当前的高估值下，回购的效果较差），意味着苹果未来可能会表现不佳，这就是为什么我相信锁定收益可能很有意义。</blockquote> Berkshire's Apple Investment<blockquote>Berkshire的苹果投资</blockquote> Berkshire Hathaway first started to buy into Apple in 2016. At that time, Apple was trading at a completely different valuation compared to today:<blockquote>Berkshire Hathaway于2016年首次开始收购苹果。当时，苹果的估值与今天完全不同：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14b39fa01fe2ec9423cdac40d8fb1684\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Data by YCharts<blockquote>数据来自YCharts</blockquote> Shares traded for 10-14x net profits, and at 7-9x EBITDA - not at all comparable to the 30x net earnings multiple and 24x EBITDA multiple AAPL trades at today. In other words, Buffett has, as could be expected, identified Apple as a strong investment when it was very inexpensive - following his \"Value\" approach. Right now, however, Apple is far from a value pick and instead seems pretty pricey, especially when we account for its not very convincing near-term growth outlook - forecasted EPS growth over the next couple of years ranges from just 2%-8% (linked above).<blockquote>股价的净利润为10-14倍，EBITDA为7-9倍，与AAPL目前的30倍净利润倍数和24倍EBITDA倍数根本无法相比。换句话说，不出所料，巴菲特遵循他的“价值”方法，在苹果非常便宜的时候就将其视为一项强有力的投资。然而，目前苹果远非一个价值选择，相反似乎相当昂贵，特别是当我们考虑到其不太令人信服的近期增长前景时——未来几年的预测每股收益增长率仅为2%-8%（上面链接）。</blockquote> Per Berkshire's most recent 10-Q filing, the company held $128 billion worth of Apple stock on September 30:<blockquote>根据伯克希尔最新的10季度报告，截至9月30日，伯克希尔持有价值1280亿美元的苹果股票：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/09f96108345a43e1eda784e61ff7ee2e\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"211\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Source: BRK 10-Q<blockquote>资料来源：BRK 10-Q</blockquote> Apple's share price on that date was $142, from which we can infer that Berkshire held around 900 million shares of Apple at the end of the third quarter. Assuming that there were no sales and no buys since then, those same 900 million shares are worth around $154 billion at a current share price of $171 - at the recent peak of $182, the position had a value of $164 billion.<blockquote>苹果当天的股价为142美元，由此我们可以推断，伯克希尔在第三季度末持有约9亿股苹果股票。假设此后没有出售或购买，那么按照目前171美元的股价计算，这9亿股股票的价值约为1540亿美元——在最近182美元的峰值时，该头寸的价值为1640亿美元。</blockquote> What does Berkshire get out of that $154 billion investment right now? Based on Apple's dividend of $0.22 per share per quarter, Berkshire receives about $790 million a year in dividends - this sounds like quite a lot, but relative to the massive size of the investment, it's just a yield of ~0.5% - the same yield all other Apple shareholders get. On top of that, Berkshire also gets a portion of Apple's other profits, of course. Some of those are paid out via buybacks, which make for a theoretical pro-forma return of around $4.5 billion to Berkshire every year, based on Apple's trailing twelve-month buyback yield of 2.9% (per YCharts). Shareholder returns thus total a little more than $5 billion a year (Berkshire's portion), for a yield of slightly above 3% - still not too great, I believe. Of course, Apple can also generate profits that are not paid out to shareholders, but that are, instead, reinvested to grow the business, e.g. via R&amp;D spending or capital expenditures. In recent years, however, that was not an especially large portion - with an earnings yield of just above 3%, based on estimates for the current fiscal year, and with buybacks and dividends totaling 3.4%, Apple isn't actually retaining any earnings right now.<blockquote>伯克希尔目前从1540亿美元的投资中得到了什么？根据苹果每季度每股0.22美元的股息计算，伯克希尔每年获得约7.9亿美元的股息——这听起来相当多，但相对于庞大的投资规模，收益率仅为0.5%左右——与所有其他苹果股东获得的收益相同。当然，除此之外，Berkshire还获得了苹果其他利润的一部分。其中一些是通过回购支付的，根据苹果过去12个月2.9%的回购收益率（根据YCharts），理论上每年为伯克希尔哈撒韦带来约45亿美元的预计回报。因此，股东每年的回报总额略高于50亿美元（伯克希尔的部分），收益率略高于3%——我相信仍然不算太高。当然，苹果也可以产生不支付给股东的利润，而是用于再投资以发展业务，例如通过研发支出或资本支出。然而，近年来，这并不是一个特别大的部分——根据本财年的估计，收益率略高于3%，回购和股息总计3.4%，苹果实际上并没有保留任何收益现在。</blockquote> Looking at the shareholder return picture, or alternatively using the concept of \"look-through earnings\" - Berkshire's portion of Apple's profits - gets us to a relatively similar picture: Apple's earnings per share are forecasted at $5.70 during the current year - a 900 million share position thus generates theoretical profits of $5.1 billion for Apple. In both cases, whether we focus on actual shareholder returns or on the look-through profit concept, the return picture is comparable - Berkshire gets about $5 billion a year for a $150+ billion investment.<blockquote>看看股东回报情况，或者使用“透视收益”的概念——伯克希尔哈撒韦在苹果利润中的份额——我们会得到一个相对相似的情况：苹果今年的每股收益预计为5.70美元——9亿股因此，苹果的理论利润为51亿美元。在这两种情况下，无论我们关注的是实际股东回报还是透视利润概念，回报情况都是可比的——伯克希尔每年从1500多亿美元的投资中获得约50亿美元。</blockquote> This does, I believe, not generate an adequate return on investment, especially when we consider that the value of Berkshire's Apple investment could easily drop by tens of billions of dollars if Apple's valuation ever reverted back towards historical norms. A 20x earnings multiple for Apple, which would still be above the 10-year median earnings multiple (16, per YCharts), would see shares drop to ~$115, which would result in $52 billion in equity losses for Berkshire's AAPL position relative to how the position is valued today.<blockquote>我认为，这并不能产生足够的投资回报，尤其是当我们考虑到如果苹果的估值恢复到历史正常水平，伯克希尔在苹果的投资价值很容易下降数百亿美元时。苹果的市盈率为20倍，仍高于10年市盈率中位数（根据YCharts为16倍），股价将跌至115美元左右，这将导致伯克希尔哈撒韦公司的AAPL头寸相对于伯克希尔哈撒韦公司的股权损失520亿美元。该职位今天的估值如何。</blockquote> Creating More Value For Shareholders<blockquote>为股东创造更多价值</blockquote> If Apple is trading at a price that could justify locking in gains, this brings up an important question: What would Berkshire do with the proceeds if it were to sell its stake? I believe that there is a pretty good answer to that - they could use it to buy an excellent company trading at an inexpensive valuation. The company in question is one that management knows extremely well - it's Berkshire Hathaway.<blockquote>如果苹果的交易价格可以证明锁定收益是合理的，这就带来了一个重要的问题：如果伯克希尔出售其股份，伯克希尔会如何处理收益？我相信对此有一个很好的答案——他们可以用它来购买一家以低廉估值交易的优秀公司。这家公司是管理层非常了解的公司——伯克希尔哈撒韦公司。</blockquote> Berkshire Hathaway has been buying back its own shares at a considerable pace in recent quarters, which shows that management clearly likes the idea of buybacks, and that they deem BRK a good value at current prices - otherwise a great capital allocator, such as Warren Buffett, wouldn't spend billions on buybacks today:<blockquote>伯克希尔哈撒韦公司最近几个季度一直在以相当快的速度回购自己的股票，这表明管理层显然喜欢回购的想法，并且他们认为BRK在当前价格下具有良好的价值——否则它是一个伟大的资本配置者，例如沃伦·巴菲特，今天不会花费数十亿美元进行回购：</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/698ffef8c32981fa0d60f5e7a29f6726\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\">Data by YCharts<blockquote>数据来自YCharts</blockquote> Berkshire has traded in the $280 to $300 range for more than half a year, and Berkshire has continued to spend billions of dollars on buybacks in that time frame, so it seems pretty obvious that Buffett sees Berkshire as an attractive value in that range. When we consider that Berkshire's book value has most likely risen in recent months, due to equity markets climbing and due to operating profits, BRK could be an even better deal today.<blockquote>半年多来，伯克希尔哈撒韦的交易价格一直在280美元至300美元的范围内，伯克希尔哈撒韦在这段时间内继续花费数十亿美元进行回购，因此巴菲特显然认为伯克希尔哈撒韦在这一范围内具有吸引力的价值。当我们考虑到伯克希尔哈撒韦公司的账面价值近几个月来由于股市攀升和营业利润而很可能上涨时，BRK今天可能是一笔更好的交易。</blockquote> Let's look at what selling the Apple stake and using the proceeds for buybacks could do for Berkshire and its shareholders. The Apple stake is worth $154 billion, and as established earlier, Berkshire generates about $5 billion a year from that. Berkshire's operating businesses generated about&nbsp;$6.5 billion&nbsp;during the most recent quarter, or $26 billion a year (assuming no future growth). Berkshire's equity portfolio, excluding Apple, was worth $183 billion at the end of the third quarter. The S&amp;P 500(NYSEARCA:SPY)&nbsp;has risen by 6% since then, so let's assume that the equity portfolio, without the Apple stake, is worth around $190 billion today (4% growth to be conservative). Let's now look at two scenarios.<blockquote>让我们看看出售苹果股份并将所得用于回购会给伯克希尔及其股东带来什么。Berkshire持有的苹果股份价值1540亿美元，正如之前所确定的，Berkshire每年从中赚取约50亿美元。伯克希尔的运营业务在最近一个季度创造了约65亿美元的收入，即每年260亿美元（假设未来没有增长）。截至第三季度末，Berkshire的股票投资组合（不包括苹果）价值1830亿美元。自那以来，标普500(NYSEARCA：SPDR标普500指数ETF)上涨了6%，因此让我们假设股票投资组合（不包括苹果股份）今天的价值约为1900亿美元（保守地增长4%）。现在让我们看两个场景。</blockquote> In the first scenario, the Apple investment is held and we also assume that other equity investments, as well as the cash position, are held. When we further assume that other equities are fairly valued, we can subtract those from Berkshire's current market capitalization to \"net them out\".<blockquote>在第一种情况下，持有苹果投资，我们还假设持有其他股权投资以及现金头寸。当我们进一步假设其他股票的估值合理时，我们可以从伯克希尔当前的市值中减去这些股票来“净额”。</blockquote> In that case, Berkshire, including its Apple stake, is valued at $311 billion today, once we adjust the $650 billion market capitalization for the $190 billion in non-Apple equities, and for the $149 billion in cash held at the end of the third quarter. Investors get $26 billion in operating earnings, and $5 billion in Apple earnings for that investment, which makes for a $31 billion total - Apple is thus, once we net out cash and non-Apple equities, trading at 10x current profits. In other words, investors get $13.70 in earnings per share from Apple in the form of operating profits and Apple earnings, and they get $150 per share in the form of cash and non-Apple equities held at Berkshire on top of that. Paying $288 for that seems like a pretty good deal, I believe.<blockquote>在这种情况下，如果我们将1900亿美元的非苹果股票和1490亿美元的现金调整为6500亿美元的市值，包括其在苹果的股份，伯克希尔今天的估值为3110亿美元。第三季度。投资者从该投资中获得260亿美元的营业收益和50亿美元的苹果收益，总计310亿美元——因此，一旦我们扣除现金和非苹果股票，苹果的交易价格是当前利润的10倍。换句话说，投资者以营业利润和苹果收益的形式从苹果获得每股13.70美元的收益，在此基础上，他们以现金和持有的非苹果股票的形式获得每股150美元。我相信，支付288美元似乎是一笔不错的交易。</blockquote> Things get way better in scenario 2, however, where Berkshire sells all of its 900 million shares in Apple and uses the proceeds to buy back $154 billion worth of BRK. This would reduce the share count by 535 million, from 2.26 billion to 1.73 billion. At $288 per share, Berkshire would then be valued at $497 billion. The company would still own $190 billion in non-Apple equities, and $149 billion in cash, but those would be distributed over a significantly lower share count of just 1.73 billion, which would lift the per-share value to $196. Berkshire would also still generate $26 billion in operating profits, but the $5 billion in Apple profits would have vanished. The $26 billion in operating profits, distributed over 1.73 billion shares, would total $15.03, however. We see that, if Berkshire were to sell all its Apple shares and use all of the proceeds to reduce its share count by 24%, its per-share value should rise dramatically. Not only would the value of its cash and non-Apple investments rise from $150 per share to $196 per share, but its operating earnings (including the look-through Apple earnings in scenario 1) would also rise from $13.70 to $15.03. If Apple were to trade at a similar operating earnings multiple of around 10 in scenario 2, its per share value would climb from $288 in scenario 1 to $346 in scenario 2 ($196 of non-Apple equities and cash, and $150 for its operating businesses), all else equal. If we assume that a 10x earnings multiple for Berkshire's operating businesses is too low, and that they should be valued at a higher multiple, the impact is even larger.<blockquote>然而，在第二种情况下，情况会好得多，伯克希尔出售其在苹果的所有9亿股股票，并用所得收益回购价值1540亿美元的BRK。这将使股票数量减少5.35亿股，从22.6亿股减少到17.3亿股。按照每股288美元，伯克希尔的估值将达到4970亿美元。该公司仍将拥有1900亿美元的非苹果股票和1490亿美元现金，但这些股票将分配给低得多的股票数量，仅为17.3亿股，这将使每股价值升至196美元。伯克希尔仍将创造260亿美元的营业利润，但苹果50亿美元的利润将化为乌有。然而，260亿美元的营业利润分配给17.3亿股，总计15.03美元。我们看到，如果伯克希尔出售所有苹果股票，并用所有收益将其股票数量减少24%，其每股价值应该会大幅上升。不仅其现金和非苹果投资的价值将从每股150美元上升到每股196美元，而且其营业收益（包括情景1中的透视苹果收益）也将从13.70美元上升到15.03美元。如果苹果在情景2中以10左右的类似营业收益倍数进行交易，其每股价值将从情景1中的288美元攀升至情景2中的346美元（非苹果股票和现金为196美元，其运营业务为150美元），其他条件相同。如果我们假设伯克希尔运营业务10倍的市盈率太低，而它们的估值应该更高，那么影响就会更大。</blockquote> Takeaway<blockquote>外卖</blockquote> Apple has been a great investment for Berkshire, but that does not mean that holding shares is the best idea. When Berkshire bought into AAPL, Apple was very inexpensive and out of favor. Today, Apple is pretty expensive, which makes it a way worse investment. At the same time, Berkshire itself is pretty inexpensive today, once we account for the Apple stake, other equity positions, and the large cash pile.<blockquote>苹果对Berkshire来说是一项伟大的投资，但这并不意味着持有股票是最好的主意。当Berkshire收购AAPL时，苹果非常便宜，也不受欢迎。如今，苹果相当昂贵，这使得它成为一项更糟糕的投资。与此同时，如果我们考虑到苹果的股份、其他股票头寸和大量现金储备，伯克希尔哈撒韦公司今天的股价也相当便宜。</blockquote> Berkshire has shown that they are willing to take advantage of the low valuation BRK trades at by buying back shares at a rapid pace. Monetizing the overvalued Apple stake in order to ramp up buybacks further could create significant value for Berkshire's shareholders, and it would, at the same time, reduce risks from both a valuation perspective and since management would use the money to invest into the company it knows best - Berkshire.<blockquote>伯克希尔哈撒韦公司已经表明，他们愿意利用BRK交易的低估值，快速回购股票。将被高估的苹果股份货币化以进一步加大回购力度，可能会为伯克希尔的股东创造巨大价值，同时从估值角度以及管理层将用这笔钱投资于其最了解的公司来降低风险——伯克希尔。</blockquote> Selling/monetizing the currently overvalued Apple stake and using the proceeds to buy up undervalued Berkshire shares would thus be a good idea that should generate considerable shareholder value, I believe.<blockquote>因此，我相信，出售/货币化目前被高估的苹果股份，并用所得收益购买被低估的伯克希尔股票将是一个好主意，应该会产生可观的股东价值。</blockquote> This article was written by&nbsp;Jonathan Weber.<blockquote>这篇文章是乔纳森·韦伯写的。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476181-why-buffett-should-sell-berkshires-apple-stake\">Seeking Alpha</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4476181-why-buffett-should-sell-berkshires-apple-stake","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101145405","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple has been a strong buy when Berkshire made its first investment. Today, things are very different - instead of cheap and out of favor, AAPL is very expensive.\nBerkshire has shown that they are willing to capitalize on low BRK valuations by buying back shares when they are undervalued.\nSelling overvalued AAPL and using the proceeds to buy undervalued BRK could generate significant shareholder value for Berkshire's investors, I believe.\n\nPaul Morigi/Getty Images Entertainment\nArticle Thesis\nApple's (AAPL) shares are pretty expensive, and the company is entering a period of lower growth if analysts are correct. This means that it could be an opportune time for investors to sell shares to lock in gain - this also holds true for Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) (BRK.B), which is a major shareholder. Berkshire could use the proceeds to ramp up its already healthy buybacks further, which would be immensely accretive at current valuations.\nWhy It Could Be Opportune To Lock In Gains In Apple\nLast week, I wrote a longer article on Apple and why I believe that shares are currently trading above fair value. The quick recap is that Apple is trading at the highest valuation in a long period of time, no matter whether we look at its earnings multiple, its EV to EBITDA ratio, or its cash flow yield. The EV/EBITDA multiple is most telling, I believe, as it accounts for changes in debt usage and in Apple's cash position over the years:\nData by YCharts\nAt easily more than twice the historical valuation, AAPL is pretty expensive. At the same time, Apple is entering a period of slower growth, according to the analyst community, since the iPhone and iPad lines are not generating significant business growth any longer, while the Apple Car is likely still years away. The combination of an above-average valuation and a below-average growth rate, combined with weaker tailwinds from buybacks (which are less effective at the current high valuation), means that Apple could be poised for underperformance going forward, which is why I believe that locking in gains could make a lot of sense.\nBerkshire's Apple Investment\nBerkshire Hathaway first started to buy into Apple in 2016. At that time, Apple was trading at a completely different valuation compared to today:\nData by YCharts\nShares traded for 10-14x net profits, and at 7-9x EBITDA - not at all comparable to the 30x net earnings multiple and 24x EBITDA multiple AAPL trades at today. In other words, Buffett has, as could be expected, identified Apple as a strong investment when it was very inexpensive - following his \"Value\" approach. Right now, however, Apple is far from a value pick and instead seems pretty pricey, especially when we account for its not very convincing near-term growth outlook - forecasted EPS growth over the next couple of years ranges from just 2%-8% (linked above).\nPer Berkshire's most recent 10-Q filing, the company held $128 billion worth of Apple stock on September 30:\nSource: BRK 10-Q\nApple's share price on that date was $142, from which we can infer that Berkshire held around 900 million shares of Apple at the end of the third quarter. Assuming that there were no sales and no buys since then, those same 900 million shares are worth around $154 billion at a current share price of $171 - at the recent peak of $182, the position had a value of $164 billion.\nWhat does Berkshire get out of that $154 billion investment right now? Based on Apple's dividend of $0.22 per share per quarter, Berkshire receives about $790 million a year in dividends - this sounds like quite a lot, but relative to the massive size of the investment, it's just a yield of ~0.5% - the same yield all other Apple shareholders get. On top of that, Berkshire also gets a portion of Apple's other profits, of course. Some of those are paid out via buybacks, which make for a theoretical pro-forma return of around $4.5 billion to Berkshire every year, based on Apple's trailing twelve-month buyback yield of 2.9% (per YCharts). Shareholder returns thus total a little more than $5 billion a year (Berkshire's portion), for a yield of slightly above 3% - still not too great, I believe. Of course, Apple can also generate profits that are not paid out to shareholders, but that are, instead, reinvested to grow the business, e.g. via R&D spending or capital expenditures. In recent years, however, that was not an especially large portion - with an earnings yield of just above 3%, based on estimates for the current fiscal year, and with buybacks and dividends totaling 3.4%, Apple isn't actually retaining any earnings right now.\nLooking at the shareholder return picture, or alternatively using the concept of \"look-through earnings\" - Berkshire's portion of Apple's profits - gets us to a relatively similar picture: Apple's earnings per share are forecasted at $5.70 during the current year - a 900 million share position thus generates theoretical profits of $5.1 billion for Apple. In both cases, whether we focus on actual shareholder returns or on the look-through profit concept, the return picture is comparable - Berkshire gets about $5 billion a year for a $150+ billion investment.\nThis does, I believe, not generate an adequate return on investment, especially when we consider that the value of Berkshire's Apple investment could easily drop by tens of billions of dollars if Apple's valuation ever reverted back towards historical norms. A 20x earnings multiple for Apple, which would still be above the 10-year median earnings multiple (16, per YCharts), would see shares drop to ~$115, which would result in $52 billion in equity losses for Berkshire's AAPL position relative to how the position is valued today.\nCreating More Value For Shareholders\nIf Apple is trading at a price that could justify locking in gains, this brings up an important question: What would Berkshire do with the proceeds if it were to sell its stake? I believe that there is a pretty good answer to that - they could use it to buy an excellent company trading at an inexpensive valuation. The company in question is one that management knows extremely well - it's Berkshire Hathaway.\nBerkshire Hathaway has been buying back its own shares at a considerable pace in recent quarters, which shows that management clearly likes the idea of buybacks, and that they deem BRK a good value at current prices - otherwise a great capital allocator, such as Warren Buffett, wouldn't spend billions on buybacks today:\nData by YCharts\nBerkshire has traded in the $280 to $300 range for more than half a year, and Berkshire has continued to spend billions of dollars on buybacks in that time frame, so it seems pretty obvious that Buffett sees Berkshire as an attractive value in that range. When we consider that Berkshire's book value has most likely risen in recent months, due to equity markets climbing and due to operating profits, BRK could be an even better deal today.\nLet's look at what selling the Apple stake and using the proceeds for buybacks could do for Berkshire and its shareholders. The Apple stake is worth $154 billion, and as established earlier, Berkshire generates about $5 billion a year from that. Berkshire's operating businesses generated about $6.5 billion during the most recent quarter, or $26 billion a year (assuming no future growth). Berkshire's equity portfolio, excluding Apple, was worth $183 billion at the end of the third quarter. The S&P 500(NYSEARCA:SPY) has risen by 6% since then, so let's assume that the equity portfolio, without the Apple stake, is worth around $190 billion today (4% growth to be conservative). Let's now look at two scenarios.\nIn the first scenario, the Apple investment is held and we also assume that other equity investments, as well as the cash position, are held. When we further assume that other equities are fairly valued, we can subtract those from Berkshire's current market capitalization to \"net them out\".\nIn that case, Berkshire, including its Apple stake, is valued at $311 billion today, once we adjust the $650 billion market capitalization for the $190 billion in non-Apple equities, and for the $149 billion in cash held at the end of the third quarter. Investors get $26 billion in operating earnings, and $5 billion in Apple earnings for that investment, which makes for a $31 billion total - Apple is thus, once we net out cash and non-Apple equities, trading at 10x current profits. In other words, investors get $13.70 in earnings per share from Apple in the form of operating profits and Apple earnings, and they get $150 per share in the form of cash and non-Apple equities held at Berkshire on top of that. Paying $288 for that seems like a pretty good deal, I believe.\nThings get way better in scenario 2, however, where Berkshire sells all of its 900 million shares in Apple and uses the proceeds to buy back $154 billion worth of BRK. This would reduce the share count by 535 million, from 2.26 billion to 1.73 billion. At $288 per share, Berkshire would then be valued at $497 billion. The company would still own $190 billion in non-Apple equities, and $149 billion in cash, but those would be distributed over a significantly lower share count of just 1.73 billion, which would lift the per-share value to $196. Berkshire would also still generate $26 billion in operating profits, but the $5 billion in Apple profits would have vanished. The $26 billion in operating profits, distributed over 1.73 billion shares, would total $15.03, however. We see that, if Berkshire were to sell all its Apple shares and use all of the proceeds to reduce its share count by 24%, its per-share value should rise dramatically. Not only would the value of its cash and non-Apple investments rise from $150 per share to $196 per share, but its operating earnings (including the look-through Apple earnings in scenario 1) would also rise from $13.70 to $15.03. If Apple were to trade at a similar operating earnings multiple of around 10 in scenario 2, its per share value would climb from $288 in scenario 1 to $346 in scenario 2 ($196 of non-Apple equities and cash, and $150 for its operating businesses), all else equal. If we assume that a 10x earnings multiple for Berkshire's operating businesses is too low, and that they should be valued at a higher multiple, the impact is even larger.\nTakeaway\nApple has been a great investment for Berkshire, but that does not mean that holding shares is the best idea. When Berkshire bought into AAPL, Apple was very inexpensive and out of favor. Today, Apple is pretty expensive, which makes it a way worse investment. At the same time, Berkshire itself is pretty inexpensive today, once we account for the Apple stake, other equity positions, and the large cash pile.\nBerkshire has shown that they are willing to take advantage of the low valuation BRK trades at by buying back shares at a rapid pace. Monetizing the overvalued Apple stake in order to ramp up buybacks further could create significant value for Berkshire's shareholders, and it would, at the same time, reduce risks from both a valuation perspective and since management would use the money to invest into the company it knows best - Berkshire.\nSelling/monetizing the currently overvalued Apple stake and using the proceeds to buy up undervalued Berkshire shares would thus be a good idea that should generate considerable shareholder value, I believe.\nThis article was written by Jonathan Weber.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BRK.A":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9,"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1007,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"CN","currentLanguage":"CN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":63,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ZH_CN"},"commentList":[],"isCommentEnd":true,"isTiger":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"url":"/m/post/691833665"}