一个传奇! 安息！<ZZ>

一个传奇! 安息！

http://www.fortunechina.com/investing/c/2012-…

明星基金的神秘掌舵人

 作者: Mina Kimes    时间: 2012年05月12日    位置： 投资理财

全美业绩最好的共同基金经理人是一位隐居的前生物化学家。他的秘诀何在？
（插图：MARK ALLEN MILLER）

    詹姆斯·J·王（音译，James J. Wang）到底是何方神圣？这是当前共同基金业内最感兴趣的话题之一。过去五年间，王管理的一只规模很小的基金——海石基金（Oceanstone Fund）业绩胜过各类共同基金中的任何一只，而且还不仅仅是略胜一筹。2007年以来，该基金年回报率达40.5%，约为紧随其后者的3倍，标准普尔500指数（S&P）同期内1%的年度平均回报率更是相形见绌。然而，管理这家资产规模1,700万美元基金的投资人隐居在圣迭戈，从不接受采访。

    如此璀璨的业绩单和无比坚定的沉默，使得一些人心生疑问：这一切是否好得不大可能？“不断有人打电话过来询问，‘这是怎么回事？这些数据准确吗？’”基金信息提供商理柏公司（Lipper）的一名研究经理杰夫·托内霍伊（Jeff Tjornehoj）说。海石基金连续27个月获得理柏稳定回报评比最高分，仅有1.7%的基金同等时长内获得过这一战果。

    2006年海石基金成立以来，家住加利福尼亚州长滩市的拉金德拉·普拉萨德（Rajendra Prasad）医生一直担任其受托人。他称詹姆斯·王——王没有回复《财富》的采访电话——指示他不要向媒体透露任何信息。“我跟他很熟，他非常注重保密。”普拉萨德说。“我不会透露任何信息，因为这会让他对我很失望。” 2009年，海石基金首次引起关注，它的回报率令人震惊地高达264%。当年王因大笔投资汽车租赁公司达乐·苏立夫（Dollar Thrifty）和艾维士·巴吉（Avis Budget）获得丰厚的回报，两家公司的股价在他买入后涨幅都超过10倍。

    诚然，小型基金比大型基金更容易获得高额回报率。但是，细看海石基金过去五年间递交美国证券交易委员会（SEC）的申报文件可以发现，王并非一战成名。他对不同行业各种规模公司的投资都持续获得成功。无论牛市熊市，他都能跑赢大市。2008年标准普尔500指数暴跌37%，而得益于投资宠物药品速递公司（PetMed Express）这类小盘股，海石基金仅下滑10%。他还赶在市场崩盘前将现金仓位提高一倍至40%，并在第二年春天股市触底的节点将其缩减到3%。在2009年取得傲人成绩后，海石基金于2010年再度以31%的回报率跑赢大市，而同期标准普尔500指数回报率为15%。

    2011年，海石基金上涨1%——并不出彩，但仍好于92%的同行表现。王的基金蒸蒸日上，不仅因为它善于挑选优胜股，还在于它能避开地雷。2011年初，他买入美国银行（Bank of America）股票，但赶在夏季股价跳水前卖出。

    海石基金的申报文件披露了很少的有关王本人或其投资方法的信息。但通过研究他的简历以及采访前同事，我们揭示出他不同寻常的职业路径。王现年48岁，科学家出身。他从中国移民美国后，20世纪90年代初曾在约翰·霍普金斯大学（Johns Hopkins）学习生物化学。[圣地亚哥县的记录显示王原名王金廷（音译，Jinting Wang），2005年更名为詹姆士·王。]劳伦斯·伯克利国家实验室（Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory）的科学家弗兰克·陈（Frank Chen）说，20世纪90年末他曾与王在位于新墨西哥州的洛斯阿拉莫斯国家实验室（Los Alamos National Laboratory）共事，研究DNA修复。但陈说，王真正热爱的一直是投资。“他用自己的钱投资，回报相当不错。”陈说。“他阅读了巴菲特（Buffett）所有的著述，他还读本杰明·格雷厄姆（Ben Graham）和菲利普·费雪(Philip Fisher)的书。他是一位半路出家的投资者。”

    据陈介绍，后来王辞去洛斯阿拉莫斯的工作，全身心进行投资。随后，王搬到圣迭戈。陈说，在那里，王可以享受他喜欢的生活方式：大清早起来工作，午后慢跑和放松。2003年，王成为一名注册投资顾问。他在一所社区大学修读税务课程，并请他的老师——托马斯·塞弗伦斯（Thomas Severance）律师——担任其共同基金的受托人。“他花大量时间进行投资分析，有自己的一套方法。”塞弗伦斯回忆说，他为王的基金担任了一年的受托人。

    基金经理通常会在致股东信中详细阐述投资战略。王的信则简短、谦逊、深奥难懂。（2009年取得令人难以置信的业绩后，他写信称，“管理一个小型投资组合，相对要容易得多。”）王写道，他运用一个特殊等式来计算他所谓的股票“内在价值”：IV = IV/E × E。但是，这条等式——其中IV代表股票内在价值，E代表盈利——看起来似乎毫无意义，因为IV/E × E和IV原本就是一回事，其结果当然等于IV。

    王在洛斯阿拉莫斯的同事陈向我们提供了有关王投资方法的更多信息。“他有一套非常简单的筛选方法。”陈回忆称，王倾向搜寻市盈率低于12倍但预期年盈利增幅超过20%的公司。根据陈的叙述，筛选出股票后，王会仔细研究这些公司的年报。“他不碰他弄不懂的公司。”陈说。

http://fortune.com/2012/03/12/a-star-funds-my…

A star fund's mystery man

by  Mina Kimes @FortuneMagazine MARCH 12, 2012, 9:00 AM EDT

The manager of the country’s top-performing mutual fund is a reclusive former biochemist. What’s his secret?
Who is James J. Wang? It’s one of the most intriguing questions in the mutual fund world today. Over the past five years, Wang’s tiny Oceanstone Fund  OSFDX  has outperformed every single mutual fund in every category — and it’s not even close. His 40.5% annualized return since 2007 is almost triple that of his nearest competition and dwarfs the 1% average return of the S&P 500 (SPX) over that span. But the reclusive investor, who runs the $17 million fund out of San Diego, has repeatedly declined interviews.

The combination of such a spectacular record with such resolute silence has prompted some to wonder if it’s all too good to be true. “We have people calling us and asking, ‘What’s going on with this? Are those numbers right?'” says Jeff Tjornehoj, a research manager at fund tracker Lipper. Oceanstone has received a top score for consistent returns from Lipper for 27 consecutive months, a feat achieved by just 1.7% of funds over that span.

Rajendra Prasad, a doctor in Long Beach, Calif., who has served as a trustee for Oceanstone since its 2006 launch, says Wang — who did not reply to Fortune’s phone calls — instructed him not to talk to the press. “I know him well; he is very private,” Prasad says. “I don’t want to give out anything because he will be upset with me.”

Oceanstone first attracted attention in 2009 when the fund returned an astonishing 264%. Wang benefited especially that year from big investments in rental-car operators Dollar Thrifty  DTG  and Avis Budget  CAR , both of which rose more than 1,000% after he bought them.

True, it’s much easier to produce such a huge percentage gain while managing a pee-wee fund than it is if you’re running big money. But a close look at Oceanstone’s SEC filings during the past five years reveals that Wang is no one-hit wonder. He’s had consistent success investing in companies of various sizes and in different sectors. And he has outperformed in both up and down markets. In 2008, a year in which the S&P 500 plummeted 37%, Oceanstone fell just 10%, thanks to his bets on small-caps like pet pharmacy PetMed Express  PETS . He also doubled his cash position to 40% right before the market collapsed, then reduced it to 3% just as stocks bottomed the following spring. After scorching the market in 2009, Oceanstone outperformed again in 2010, returning 31% while the S&P returned 15%.

In 2011, Oceanstone rose 1% — nothing spectacular, but still better than 92% of its peers. Wang has thrived not only by picking winners, but also by avoiding land mines. He bought Bank of America  BAC  at the beginning of 2011 but sold before the stock nose-dived over the summer.

3 small but mighty funds

Oceanstone’s filings reveal little about Wang or his methods. But a study of his paper trail and interviews with former colleagues reveal an unusual career arc. It turns out that Wang, 48, started out as a scientist. He studied biochemistry at Johns Hopkins in the early 1990s, after emigrating from China. (In 2005 he changed his name from Jinting Wang to James Wang, according to San Diego County records.) Frank Chen, a scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, says he worked with Wang at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in the late 1990s. The two scientists studied DNA repair. But Wang’s real passion, says Chen, was always investing. “He played with his own money and got pretty good returns,” says Chen. “He reads all of the books of Buffett, and also Ben Graham, Philip Fisher. He’s a bottom-up investor.”

According to Chen, Wang quit his job at Los Alamos to focus fully on finance. Later, Wang moved to San Diego, where, Chen says, he could enjoy his preferred lifestyle: working early in the morning and then jogging and relaxing in the afternoons. In 2003, Wang became a registered investment adviser. He took a tax course at a community college and asked his teacher, a lawyer named Thomas Severance, to be a trustee for his mutual fund. “He spent hours and hours analyzing these things, and he had his own way of doing it,” recalls Severance, who served as a trustee for a year.

Fund managers typically expound on their strategy in shareholder letters. Wang’s notes are short, esoteric, and humble. (After his incredible results in 2009, he noted, “It is much easier to manage a very small portfolio.”) Wang writes that he uses a specific equation to calculate what he calls the “intrinsic value” of stocks: IV = IV/E x E. But the equation — in which IV stands for intrinsic value and E represents earnings — appears to make no sense. IV/E x E is the same thing as IV, which of course equals IV.

Chen, Wang’s co-worker at Los Alamos, offers insight into Wang’s approach. “He had a very simple screening method,” says Chen, who recalls that Wang used to look for companies with price/earnings ratios of less than 12 and projected annual earnings growth of more than 20%. After screening stocks, Wang would scour the companies’ annual reports, according to Chen. “He avoids companies he doesn’t understand,” Chen says.

His latest bet is on the financial services sector. In the third quarter of 2011, Wang bought shares of Janus Capital Group  JNS , J.P. Morgan Chase  Jpm 1.49% , and Goldman Sachs  GS 0.64% , all of which had meager price/earnings ratios at the time. The move paid off: So far this year, Oceanstone is up 14%, nearly doubling the S&P 500’s return.

Wang’s secrecy has no doubt deterred potential investors. Despite its amazing performance, Oceanstone hasn’t grown much. One of Wang’s biggest shareholders, a Michigan doctor named Raymond McDonald, says the manager won’t reply to his queries. “I’ve actually asked to talk to him, and he won’t talk to me,” says McDonald, who owns 5.99% of the fund. McDonald — a self-described “mutual fund junkie” — says he took a large stake partly because “the whole thing is curious.” He wasn’t put off by the fund’s size. Says McDonald: “Warren Buffett didn’t get big for a long time.” If Wang keeps posting outsize returns, he may find it hard to avoid the spotlight forever.