本文原载于1977年5月的《财富》杂志，发表文章时，巴菲特46岁。在文中，巴菲特阐述了通货膨胀对股票投资的影响。这篇文章对我们今天的投资仍然有借鉴意义。本文是我自己翻译的。

通货膨胀如何欺诈股票投资者

核心问题在于：股票市场的资本回报率没有随着通货膨胀而上升，而似乎是停滞在了12%

作者：沃伦•巴菲特，《财富》杂志1977年5月号

股票在通货膨胀环境下像债券一样表现不佳，这已经不是个秘密。在过去10年里，我们一直处于这种通胀环境里。确实，这是一个股票遇到麻烦的时期。但是，在这段时间里造成股票市场难题的原因仍然没有被人们完全理解。

在通胀时期债券持有者所遇到的问题一点也不神秘。当美元月复一月地贬值，一种本金和收入都用美元支付的证券不会是个大赢家。你根本不需要一个博士学位就能搞懂这个问题。

一直以来，人们认为股票是不同的。多年来，传统智慧坚持认为股票是对通货膨胀的对冲。这个说法来源于一个事实，那就是股票不像债券一样是对美元的所有权，而是对有着生产设施的公司的所有权。因此，股票投资者们相信，无论政客们如何印钞票，股票投资者仍然能保持他们投资的实际价值。

但是为什么实际上不是这么回事？主要原因在于：我认为股票在经济实质上非常类似于债券。

我知道我的主张对很多投资者来说显得古怪。他们马上就观察到债券的回报（利息）是固定的，而股票投资的回报（盈利）会每年变化极大。这确实是事实。但是，任何研究战后公司总体回报的人都会发现一个现象：资本回报率实际上并没有变化那么多。

巴菲特：《通货膨胀如何欺诈股票投资者》（二）

How Inflation Swindles the Equity Investor

The central problem in the stock market is that the return on capital hasn’t risen with inflation. It seems to be stuck at 12 percent.

by Warren E. Buffett, FORTUNE May 1977

It is no longer a secret that stocks, like bonds, do poorly in an inflationary environment. We have been in such an environment for most of the past decade, and it has indeed been a time of troubles for stocks. But the reasons for the stock market's problems in this period are still imperfectly understood.

There is no mystery at all about the problems of bondholders in an era of inflation. When the value of the dollar deteriorates month after month, a security with income and principal payments denominated in those dollars isn't going to be a big winner. You hardly need a Ph.D. in economics to figure that one out.

It was long assumed that stocks were something else. For many years, the conventional wisdom insisted that stocks were a hedge against inflation. The proposition was rooted in the fact that stocks are not claims against dollars, as bonds are, but represent ownership of companies with productive facilities. These, investors believed, would retain their Value in real terms, let the politicians print money as they might.

And why didn't it turn but that way? The main reason, I believe, is that stocks, in economic substance, are really very similar to bonds.

I know that this belief will seem eccentric to many investors. They will immediately observe that the return on a bond (the coupon) is fixed, while the return on an equity investment (the company's earnings) can vary substantially from one year to another. True enough. But anyone who examines the aggregate returns that have been earned by companies during the postwar years will discover something extraordinary: the returns on equity have in fact not varied much at all.