Edge
Chrome
Firefox
黄金的年化回报率，如果从1971年黄金美元（当时是35美元一盎司)开始算，到今天1957美元一盎司，这50年的年化回报率= (1957/35)^(1/50)-1= 8.38% !
可见，这50年来黄金，如果只是长持不炒的话，黄金是跑赢S&P 500和Dow 的！至于HSI，我也很诧异,毕竟从近年看，这个指数是比S&P 500和Dow逊色不少 的。
跑输Nasdaq可以看作风险补偿，毕竟Nasdaq类似创投基金的风格，波动巨大，举个例子，AMZN在99年可以跌9成几，之后在03-05腰斩，在金融海啸期间又跌6成几，这么巨大的波动有几个人能守到最后？！年化2%的风险补偿颇为合理。
而黄金从79年的850高位跌到99年的252，被各国央行打压了20年（而这段时间Nasdaq可是大放异彩，从151点涨到4696点！）跌幅70%，但也比Nasdaq科网泡沫时的78%跌幅要小。而金融海啸时Nasdaq跌幅56%, 和黄金在11-15年间的56%跌幅一模一样！但黄金在金融海啸时跌幅很小。
结论就是，黄金应该成为资产组合里必不可少的长持部分，而从上面数字看，黄金+Nasdaq可以说是非常不错的对冲组合。不过，现在这个位置我不敢说是否合适的重仓时机。
- S&P 500 在1971年底102点，2021年底最高峰4818点，这50年间的年化回报率= 8.02%
- Dow 在1971年底831点，2021年底最高峰36952点，这50年间的年化回报率= 7.88%
- Nasdaq 在1971年底114点，2021年底最高峰16212点，这50年间的年化回报率= 10.42%
- HSI在1971年底约400点，2021年底最高峰31183，这50年间的年化回报率= 9.10%
可见，这50年来黄金，如果只是长持不炒的话，黄金是跑赢S&P 500和Dow 的！至于HSI，我也很诧异,毕竟从近年看，这个指数是比S&P 500和Dow逊色不少 的。
跑输Nasdaq可以看作风险补偿，毕竟Nasdaq类似创投基金的风格，波动巨大，举个例子，AMZN在99年可以跌9成几，之后在03-05腰斩，在金融海啸期间又跌6成几，这么巨大的波动有几个人能守到最后？！年化2%的风险补偿颇为合理。
而黄金从79年的850高位跌到99年的252，被各国央行打压了20年（而这段时间Nasdaq可是大放异彩，从151点涨到4696点！）跌幅70%，但也比Nasdaq科网泡沫时的78%跌幅要小。而金融海啸时Nasdaq跌幅56%, 和黄金在11-15年间的56%跌幅一模一样！但黄金在金融海啸时跌幅很小。
结论就是，黄金应该成为资产组合里必不可少的长持部分，而从上面数字看，黄金+Nasdaq可以说是非常不错的对冲组合。不过，现在这个位置我不敢说是否合适的重仓时机。
1
In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation
through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would
have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for
example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and
thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is
simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious
process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty
in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.
-- by 1967年的耿直小伙绿斯潘
through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would
have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for
example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and
thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is
simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious
process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty
in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.
-- by 1967年的耿直小伙绿斯潘
京公网安备 11010802031449号