To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:
致伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司的全体股东：
Berkshire earned $42.5 billion in 2020 according to generally accepted accounting principles (commonly called “GAAP”). The four components of that figure are $21.9 billion of operating earnings, $4.9 billion of realized capital gains, a $26.7 billion gain from an increase in the amount of net unrealized capital gains that exist in the stocks we hold and, finally, an $11 billion loss from a write-down in the value of a few subsidiary and affiliate businesses that we own. All items are stated on an after-tax basis.
根据美国公认会计准则（GAAP），伯克希尔2020年的盈利为425亿美元。这一数字的四个组成部分是219亿美元的营业利润，49亿美元的实现资本利得，我们持有的股票中存在的净未实现资本利得增加所带来的267亿美元收益，最后，我们拥有的一些子公司和附属公司的价值减记导致的110亿美元损失。所有项目均在税后基础上列示。
Operating earnings are what count most, even during periods when they are not the largest item in our GAAP total. Our focus at Berkshire is both to increase this segment of our income and to acquire large and favorably-situated businesses. Last year, however, we met neither goal: Berkshire made no sizable acquisitions and operating earnings fell 9%. We did, though, increase Berkshire’s per-share intrinsic value by both retaining earnings and repurchasing about 5% of our shares.
营业利润是最重要的，即使它们不是我们公认会计准则总额中最大的项目。我们在伯克希尔的重点是增加我们的这部分收入和收购大的处于有利位置的企业。但去年，我们两个目标都没有实现：伯克希尔没有进行大规模收购，营业利润下降了9%。不过，通过保留收益和回购约5%的股票，我们确实提高了伯克希尔的每股内在价值。
The two GAAP components pertaining to capital gains or losses (whether realized or unrealized) fluctuate capriciously from year to year, reflecting swings in the stock market. Whatever today’s figures, Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I firmly believe that, over time, Berkshire’s capital gains from its investment holdings will be substantial.
与资本利得或损失（无论是已实现或未实现）相关的两个公认会计准则组成部分每年都在反复波动，这反映了股票市场的波动。无论今天的数据如何，我和我的长期合作伙伴查理·芒格都坚信，随着时间的推移，伯克希尔的投资收益将是可观的。
As I’ve emphasized many times, Charlie and I view Berkshire’s holdings of marketable stocks – at yearend worth $281 billion – as a collection of businesses. We don’t control the operations of those companies, but we do share proportionately in their long-term prosperity. From an accounting standpoint, however, our portion of their earnings is not included in Berkshire’s income. Instead, only what these investees pay us in dividends is recorded on our books. Under GAAP, the huge sums that investees retain on our behalf become invisible.
正如我多次强调的那样，查理和我将伯克希尔持有的上市股票（截至去年年底价值2810亿美元）视为一个企业集合。我们并不控制这些公司的运营，但我们确实按比例分享了它们的长期繁荣。然而，从会计角度来看，我们的那部分利润并没有包括在伯克希尔的收益中。相反，只有这些被投资方支付给我们的股息才会被记录在我们的账簿上。根据公认会计准则，被投资方代表我们保留的巨额资金也变成无形资产。
What’s out of sight, however, should not be out of mind: Those unrecorded retained earnings are usually building value – lots of value – for Berkshire. Investees use the withheld funds to expand their business, make acquisitions, pay off debt and, often, to repurchase their stock (an act that increases our share of their future earnings). As we pointed out in these pages last year, retained earnings have propelled American business throughout our country’s history. What worked for Carnegie and Rockefeller has, over the years, worked its magic for millions of shareholders as well.
然而，这些看不见的东西不应该被忽视：这些未记录的留存收益通常为伯克希尔创造价值 —— 大量价值。被投资方利用这些留存资金来扩大业务、进行收购、偿还债务，通常还会回购股票（这种行为增加了我们在他们未来收益中所占的份额）。正如我们在去年的股东信中指出的那样，留存收益在整个美国历史上推动了美国企业的发展。对卡内基和洛克菲勒行之有效的方法多年来对数百万股东也行之有效。
Of course, some of our investees will disappoint, adding little, if anything, to the value of their company by retaining earnings. But others will over-deliver, a few spectacularly. In aggregate, we expect our share of the huge pile of earnings retained by Berkshire’s non-controlled businesses (what others would label our equity portfolio) to eventually deliver us an equal or greater amount of capital gains. Over our 56-year tenure, that expectation has been met.
当然，我们的一些投资人会令人失望，他们留存的收益几乎没有增加他们公司的价值。但其他公司会超额完成任务，其中少数公司表现出色。总而言之，我们预计自己在伯克希尔非控股业务（别人会认为是我们的股票投资组合）留存的巨额收益中所占的份额，最终会给我们带来等量或更多的资本利得。在我们56年的任期中，这一期望一直得到满足。
The final component in our GAAP figure – that ugly $11 billion write-down – is almost entirely the quantification of a mistake I made in 2016. That year, Berkshire purchased Precision Castparts (“PCC”), and I paid too much for the company.
我们GAAP数据的最后一个组成部分——丑陋的110亿美元减记——几乎是全部量化我在2016年犯的一个错误。那一年，伯克希尔收购了精密铸件公司（Precision Castparts，“PCC”），我付了太多的钱。
No one misled me in any way – I was simply too optimistic about PCC’s normalized profit potential. Last year, my miscalculation was laid bare by adverse developments throughout the aerospace industry, PCC’s most important source of customers.
没有人以任何方式误导我——我只是对PCC的正常盈利潜力过于乐观。去年，作为PCC最重要的客户来源，整个航空航天业的不利发展，暴露了我的误判。
In purchasing PCC, Berkshire bought a fine company – the best in its business. Mark Donegan, PCC’s CEO, is a passionate manager who consistently pours the same energy into the business that he did before we purchased it. We are lucky to have him running things.
在收购PCC的过程中，伯克希尔收购了一家很好的公司，同行业中最好的一家。PCC的首席执行官马克-多尼根是一位充满激情的经理，他一如既往地将同样的精力投入到我们收购的业务中。我们很幸运有他来管理。
I believe I was right in concluding that PCC would, over time, earn good returns on the net tangible assets deployed in its operations. I was wrong, however, in judging the average amount of future earnings and, consequently, wrong in my calculation of the proper price to pay for the business.
我认为我的结论是正确的，PCC将随着时间的推移，在其运营中部署的净有形资产上获得良好的回报。然而，我对未来收益的判断是错误的，因此，我也就错误地计算出了为收购该企业支付的合理价格。
PCC is far from my first error of that sort. But it’s a big one.
PCC远非我犯下的第一个错误。但这是一个大错误。
Berkshire is often labeled a conglomerate, a negative term applied to holding companies that own a hodge-podge of unrelated businesses. And, yes, that describes Berkshire – but only in part. To understand how and why we differ from the prototype conglomerate, let’s review a little history.
伯克希尔哈撒韦经常被贴上“综合企业集团”的标签，这是一个贬义词，指的是拥有大量不相关业务的控股公司。是的，这是对伯克希尔正确的描述——但只是部分描画。为了更好理解我们如何以及为什么不同于其他综合性企业集团，让我们回顾一下历史。
Over time, conglomerates have generally limited themselves to buying businesses in their entirety. That strategy, however, came with two major problems. One was unsolvable: Most of the truly great businesses had no interest in having anyone take them over. Consequently, deal-hungry conglomerateurs had to focus on so-so companies that lacked important and durable competitive strengths. That was not a great pond in which to fish.
长期以来，综合企业集团通常会局限于收购整个企业。然而，这一战略带来了两个大问题。有一个问题是无解的：大多数真正伟大的企业都无意让别人接管。因此，渴望收购的企业集团不得不专注于那些缺乏重要和持久竞争优势的一般公司。那不是一个钓鱼的好池塘。
Beyond that, as conglomerateurs dipped into this universe of mediocre businesses, they often found themselves required to pay staggering “control” premiums to snare their quarry. Aspiring conglomerateurs knew the answer to this “overpayment” problem: They simply needed to manufacture a vastly overvalued stock of their own that could be used as a “currency” for pricey acquisitions. (“I’ll pay you $10,000 for your dog by giving you two of my $5,000 cats.”)
除此之外，当综合企业集团不得不收购平庸的公司时，他们常常发现自己需要支付惊人的“控制权”溢价，以诱捕他们的猎物。一些精明的企业集团知道如何解决这个“超额支付”的问题：他们只需让自己公司估值变得高得离谱，来作为昂贵收购的“货币”。（“我愿意花1万美元买你的狗，做法是把我单价5000美元的两只猫给你。”）
Often, the tools for fostering the overvaluation of a conglomerate’s stock involved promotional techniques and “imaginative” accounting maneuvers that were, at best, deceptive and that sometimes crossed the line into fraud. When these tricks were “successful,” the conglomerate pushed its own stock to, say, 3x its business value in order to offer the target 2x its value.
通常，推高股票估值的方法包括营销手段和“富有想象力”的财务报表操纵技巧，程度轻的时候这些只是骗人的把戏，程度重的时候则会演绎成成为欺诈。当这些伎俩成功后，企业集团将自己的股价推到了3倍于其商业价值，用来收购股价2倍于其价值的公司。
Investing illusions can continue for a surprisingly long time. Wall Street loves the fees that deal-making generates, and the press loves the stories that colorful promoters provide. At a point, also, the soaring price of a promoted stock can itself become the “proof” that an illusion is reality.
这种盛世幻象可以持续很长时间。华尔街要从交易中抽佣，新闻界也喜欢公司提供的五彩缤纷的故事。甚至可以说，一只股票被推高的价格可以让幻象变成现实。
Eventually, of course, the party ends, and many business “emperors” are found to have no clothes. Financial history is replete with the names of famous conglomerateurs who were initially lionized as business geniuses by journalists, analysts and investment bankers, but whose creations ended up as business junkyards.
当然，潮水最终褪去的时候，我们会发现许多商业“皇帝”在裸泳。回顾金融史，许多著名的企业集团在最初被记者、分析师和投资银行家奉为商业天才，但他们最终却成了商业垃圾。
Conglomerates earned their terrible reputation.
企业集团的声誉因此变得很糟糕。
************
Charlie and I want our conglomerate to own all or part of a diverse group of businesses with good economic characteristics and good managers. Whether Berkshire controls these businesses, however, is unimportant to us.
查理和我希望伯克希尔是一个多元化集团，各个业务（或者部分业务）良好运转、拥有优秀的管理者。（只要能做到这一点），伯克希尔是否控制了这些业务，对我们来说并不重要。
It took me a while to wise up. But Charlie – and also my 20-year struggle with the textile operation I inherited at Berkshire – finally convinced me that owning a non-controlling portion of a wonderful business is more profitable, more enjoyable and far less work than struggling with 100% of a marginal enterprise.
我花了好一会儿才明白过来。但是芒格，还有我在伯克希尔继承的纺织业务中苦苦挣扎的20年经验，最终说服了我，拥有一个很棒的企业的不控股股权，要比拥有控股100%的挣扎在边缘企业更有利可图，更愉快，更少工作量。
For those reasons, our conglomerate will remain a collection of controlled and non-controlled businesses. Charlie and I will simply deploy your capital into whatever we believe makes the most sense, based on a company’s durable competitive strengths, the capabilities and character of its management, and price.
基于这些原因，我们的企业集团将继续由可控的和非可控的业务组成。芒格和我会根据一家公司持久的竞争优势，管理能力和特点，以及价格，将资金配置到我们认为最合理的地方。
If that strategy requires little or no effort on our part, so much the better. In contrast to the scoring system utilized in diving competitions, you are awarded no points in business endeavors for “degree of difficulty.” Furthermore, as Ronald Reagan cautioned: “It’s said that hard work never killed anyone, but I say why take the chance?”
如果这一战略不需要我们付出多少努力，那就更好了。与跳水比赛使用的计分系统不同，你在商业活动中不会因为有“难度”而得分。此外，正如罗纳德·里根(Ronald Reagan)告诫的那样：“据说努力工作不会导致死亡，但我要说为什么要冒这个险？”
On page A-1 we list Berkshire’s subsidiaries, a smorgasbord of businesses employing 360,000 at yearend. You can read much more about these controlled operations in the 10-K that fills the back part of this report. Our major positions in companies that we partly own and don’t control are listed on page 7 of this letter. That portfolio of businesses, too, is large and diverse.
在A-1页，我们列出了伯克希尔的子公司，这是一系列企业构成的组合，年底共有36万名员工。您可以在本报告后面的10-K页中阅读更多具体信息。本报告第7页列出了我们拥有少量股权，但不控股的公司，我们的业务组合是非常庞大且多样化的。
Most of Berkshire’s value, however, resides in four businesses, three controlled and one in which we have only a 5.4% interest. All four are jewels.
然而，伯克希尔的大部分价值都在四家公司中，三家是控股公司，一家只有5.4％的股权。这四家我们都视作珍宝。
The largest in value is our property/casualty insurance operation, which for 53 years has been the core of Berkshire. Our family of insurers is unique in the insurance field. So, too, is its manager, Ajit Jain, who joined Berkshire in 1986.
价值最大的是我们的财产/意外险业务，53年来一直是伯克希尔的核心业务。我们的保险家族在保险领域是独一无二的。它的负责人阿吉特·贾恩（Ajit Jain）在1986年加入了伯克希尔哈撒韦公司，他也是独一无二的。
Overall, the insurance fleet operates with far more capital than is deployed by any of its competitors worldwide. That financial strength, coupled with the huge flow of cash Berkshire annually receives from its non-insurance businesses, allows our insurance companies to safely follow an equity-heavy investment strategy not feasible for the overwhelming majority of insurers. Those competitors, for both regulatory and credit-rating reasons, must focus on bonds.
总的来说，我们保险业务的运营资金远远超过其全球竞争对手。这种财务实力，再加上伯克希尔每年从非保险业务获得的巨额现金流，使我们的保险公司能够安全地遵循一种对绝大多数保险公司来说不可行的密集型股权投资战略。出于监管和信用评级的原因，这些竞争者必须把重点放在债券投资上。
And bonds are not the place to be these days. Can you believe that the income recently available from a 10-year U.S. Treasury bond – the yield was 0.93% at yearend – had fallen 94% from the 15.8% yield available in September 1981? In certain large and important countries, such as Germany and Japan, investors earn a negative return on trillions of dollars of sovereign debt. Fixed-income investors worldwide – whether pension funds, insurance companies or retirees – face a bleak future.
现在债券并不是好的投资标的。你能相信最近10年期美国国债的收益率是0.93%——比1981年9月的15.8%的收益率下降了94%吗？在某些重要的大国，如德国和日本，投资者从数万亿美元的主权债务中获得负回报。全球范围内的固定收益投资者——无论是养老基金、保险公司还是退休人员——都面临着暗淡的未来。
Some insurers, as well as other bond investors, may try to juice the pathetic returns now available by shifting their purchases to obligations backed by shaky borrowers. Risky loans, however, are not the answer to inadequate interest rates. Three decades ago, the once-mighty savings and loan industry destroyed itself, partly by ignoring that maxim.
一些保险公司，以及其他债券投资者，转向购买由高风险借款人的债务来获取回报。然而，风险贷款并不是解决利率不足问题的办法。30年前，一度强大的储蓄和贷款行业摧毁了自己，部分原因是无视这一准则。
Berkshire now enjoys $138 billion of insurance “float” – funds that do not belong to us, but are nevertheless ours to deploy, whether in bonds, stocks or cash equivalents such as U.S. Treasury bills. Float has some similarities to bank deposits: cash flows in and out daily to insurers, with the total they hold changing very little. The massive sum held by Berkshire is likely to remain near its present level for many years and, on a cumulative basis, has been costless to us. That happy result, of course, could change – but, over time, I like our odds.
伯克希尔现在拥有1380亿美元的保险“浮动”资金 —— 这些资金不属于我们，但我们可以配置，无论是配置债券、股票还是美国国库券等现金等价物。浮动资金与银行存款有一些相似之处：保险公司每天都有现金进进出出，但保险公司持有的现金总额变化很小。伯克希尔持有的巨额资产很可能会在未来许多年保持在目前的水平，而且从会计角度看对我们来说是没有成本的。当然，这个令人高兴的结果可能会改变 —— 但是，随着时间的推移，我会喜欢我们的胜算。
I have repetitiously – some might say endlessly – explained our insurance operation in my annual letters to you. Therefore, I will this year ask new shareholders who wish to learn more about our insurance business and “float” to read the pertinent section of the 2019 report, reprinted on page A-2. It’s important that you understand the risks, as well as the opportunities, existing in our insurance activities.
在我每年给你们的信中，我已经重复地 —— 有些人可能会说没完没了地 —— 解释了我们的保险业务。因此，今年我会请希望更多了解我们保险业务和“浮动资金”的新股东阅读2019年报告的相关部分，今年再次刊发在A-2页。重要的是您要了解我们从事保险业务所存在的风险和机会。
Our second and third most valuable assets – it’s pretty much a toss-up at this point – are Berkshire’s 100% ownership of BNSF, America’s largest railroad measured by freight volume, and our 5.4% ownership of Apple. And in the fourth spot is our 91% ownership of Berkshire Hathaway Energy (“BHE”). What we have here is a very unusual utility business, whose annual earnings have grown from $122 million to $3.4 billion during our 21 years of ownership.
我们第二和第三大最有价值的资产是伯克希尔对以货运量计美国最大铁路公司BNSF的100%持股，以及我们对苹果公司5.4%的持股。排名第四的是我们持有91%的伯克希尔哈撒韦能源公司（BHE）。这是一个非常不同寻常的公用事业公司，在我们拥有它的21年里，它的年收入从1.22亿美元增长到了34亿美元。
I’ll have more to say about BNSF and BHE later in this letter. For now, however, I would like to focus on a practice Berkshire will periodically use to enhance your interest in both its “Big Four” as well as the many other assets Berkshire owns.
关于BNSF和BHE在这封信后面我将做更多说明。然而，现在，我想把重点放在伯克希尔会定期使用的一种做法上，以提高你对它的“四大资产”以及伯克希尔拥有的许多其他资产的兴趣。
************
Last year we demonstrated our enthusiasm for Berkshire’s spread of properties by repurchasing the equivalent of 80,998 “A” shares, spending $24.7 billion in the process. That action increased your ownership in all of Berkshire’s businesses by 5.2% without requiring you to so much as touch your wallet.
去年，我们回购了相当于80998股的A类股票，在回购过程中花费了247亿美元，这表明了我们对伯克希尔的热情。这一行动使你们在伯克希尔所有业务中的所有权增加了5.2%，而你甚至不必动自己的账户。
Following criteria Charlie and I have long recommended, we made those purchases because we believed they would both enhance the intrinsic value per share for continuing shareholders and would leave Berkshire with more than ample funds for any opportunities or problems it might encounter.
根据芒格和我长期以来的标准，我们进行这些收购是因为我们相信，它们将提高股东的每股内在价值，并使伯克希尔有足够的资金来应对它可能遇到的任何机会或问题。
In no way do we think that Berkshire shares should be repurchased at simply any price. I emphasize that point because American CEOs have an embarrassing record of devoting more company funds to repurchases when prices have risen than when they have tanked. Our approach is exactly the reverse.
我们绝不认为伯克希尔的股票应该以任何价格回购。我之所以强调这一点，是因为美国的CEO们有过这样一个尴尬的记录：在股价上涨时，他们投入更多公司资金用于回购，而不是股价下跌时。我们的做法恰恰相反。
Berkshire’s investment in Apple vividly illustrates the power of repurchases. We began buying Apple stock late in 2016 and by early July 2018, owned slightly more than one billion Apple shares (split-adjusted). Saying that, I’m referencing the investment held in Berkshire’s general account and am excluding a very small and separately-managed holding of Apple shares that was subsequently sold. When we finished our purchases in mid-2018, Berkshire’s general account owned 5.2% of Apple.
伯克希尔对苹果的投资生动地说明了回购的力量。我们从2016年末开始购买苹果股票，到2018年7月初，我们持有的苹果股票（经拆股调整后）略多于10亿股。说到这里，我指的是伯克希尔总账户中持有的投资，而不包括随后被出售的非常少的、单独管理的苹果股票。当我们在2018年年中完成购买时，伯克希尔的一般账户持有苹果5.2%的股份。
Our cost for that stake was $36 billion. Since then, we have both enjoyed regular dividends, averaging about $775 million annually, and have also – in 2020 – pocketed an additional $11 billion by selling a small portion of our position.
我们为此付出的成本是360亿美元。自那时以来，我们都享受了定期股息，平均每年约7.75亿美元，并且在2020年通过出售一小部分我们的头寸，又赚了110亿美元。
Despite that sale – voila! – Berkshire now owns 5.4% of Apple. That increase was costless to us, coming about because Apple has continuously repurchased its shares, thereby substantially shrinking the number it now has outstanding.
尽管有出售 —— 你们瞧！—— 伯克希尔目前仍持有苹果5.4%的股份。这一增长对我们来说是没有成本的，因为苹果一直在回购其股票，从而大幅减少了目前的流通股票数量。
But that’s far from all of the good news. Because we also repurchased Berkshire shares during the 21⁄2 years, you now indirectly own a full 10% more of Apple’s assets and future earnings than you did in July 2018.
但这远不是所有的好消息。因为我们还在两年半内回购了伯克希尔的股票，你现在间接拥有的苹果资产和未来收益比2018年7月整整多10%。
This agreeable dynamic continues. Berkshire has repurchased more shares since yearend and is likely to further reduce its share count in the future. Apple has publicly stated an intention to repurchase its shares as well. As these reductions occur, Berkshire shareholders will not only own a greater interest in our insurance group and in BNSF and BHE, but will also find their indirect ownership of Apple increasing as well.
这一动态收益仍在继续。自年底以来，伯克希尔已经回购了更多股份，未来可能会进一步减少其股份数量。苹果也已公开表示打算回购其股份。随着流通股的减少，伯克希尔的股东不仅将在我们的保险集团、BNSF（北伯林顿铁路公司）和BHE（伯克希尔·哈撒韦能源公司）中拥有更大的利益，而且还会发现他们对苹果的间接所有权也在增加。
The math of repurchases grinds away slowly, but can be powerful over time. The process offers a simple way for investors to own an ever-expanding portion of exceptional businesses.
回购的数学看似缓慢，但随着时间的推移会产生强大的力量。该过程为投资者提供了一种简单的方式，让他们拥有不断扩大的企业份额。
And as a sultry Mae West assured us: “Too much of a good thing can be . . . wonderful.”
正如性感女星梅·韦斯特（Mae West）向我们保证的那样：“太多的好东西都可以是美好的”。
（文章内容未完，但限于单篇文章字数限制，剩余内容将以新的文章推送。）
