现金过剩的困境：返还还是再投资？

Ashley Kindergan    2015 年11月10日

                   
随着美国企业盈利能力的逐渐增强，企业持有大量现金，这是史无前例的，因此，如何处理这些现金成了高管们的一大难题。2015年第二季度，标普500公司的现金总额已达1.43万亿美元，追平了2014年第四季度创下的记录。

那么公司该怎样处理这些现金呢？在最近发布的一份白皮书《瑞士信贷公司见解》中，HOLT 企业咨询总监 Rick Faery 提出了两种方案。其一，通过分红或股票回购的方式将现金返还给股东。其二，通过有机增长（资本支出、产品研发），兼并与收购等方式将资金重新投入到产业中。

在过去的20年中，公司将现金流量的60%用来进行资本投资（28%用于资本投资与研发，32%用于企业并购）。Faery 说：“但在近几年中，激进投资者发起的维权运动，使得资本分配的优先级发生了变化，公司更倾向于回购、分红及研发。”在2014年，资本投资下降到53%（27%有机增长，26%研发），而返还给股东的资金增加到36%（21%回购，15%分红）。

那么这两种方法的成效如何呢？不出意料，直接返还资金的收益整体低于再投资的收益，收益率分别为9%和11%。但再投资的成功表明了长期投资的运营状况已有明显改善，在过去的五年中，再投资的收益增长到180个基本点，而直接返还资金的收益仅为150个基本点。
与此同时，在过去的五年中，再投资公司的销量增长率要远高于直接返还的公司，两者的数据分别为19%和5%。再投资的公司即使表现不好，也能达到16%的增长率，直接返还者的销量增长率则可低至4%。但市场还要向前看的，不是吗？再投资公司的未来市场预期也要好于直接返还资金给股东的公司。

最后，还有一个需要考虑的问题是企业生命周期。在公司发展早期，增加盈利的机会很多，因此要乘胜追击。然而，随着业务逐渐成熟，现金增长和投资的机会逐渐减少，此时则应该将过剩的资金分配给股东。

The Excess Cash Dilemma: To Return or Reinvest?

With profitability at U.S. corporations touching historic highs, and corporate cash piles as large as they’ve ever been, one of the top tasks of executives these days is simply deciding how best to spend the money. Companies in the S&P 500 had an aggregate cash balance of $1.43 trillion in the second quarter of 2015, which tied a record set in the fourth quarter of 2014.
 
So what should companies be doing with all that money? In a recent white paper, Credit Suisse Corporate Insights, the Head of HOLT Corporate Advisory, Rick Faery outlined the two broad alternatives. “Returners” share the wealth right away with shareholders through dividends and stock buybacks, while “reinvestors” pump money back into the business, through a combination of organic growth efforts (capital expenditures, research and development), and mergers and acquisitions.
 
For the last 20 years, companies deployed an average of 60 percent of cash flows to capital investment (28 percent to capex/R&D, 32 percent to M&A), and 26 percent to shareholders (12 percent dividends, 14 percent buybacks). “[But] in recent years,” says Faery, “due in part to the pressures of noisy campaigns by activist investors, there has been a shift in capital allocation priorities, favoring share buybacks and dividends over capital investments and M&A.” In 2014, capital investment dropped to 53 percent (27 percent organic growth, 26 percent M&A) and money returned to shareholders rose to 36 percent (21 percent buybacks, 15 percent dividends).

So how have the differing approaches panned out? Not surprisingly, the initial returns on capital are generally lower for reinvestors than returners, averaging 9 percent and 11 percent, respectively. But those who reinvest successfully show greater operating improvement over the long-term, with cash flow return on investment up 180 basis points over five years, versus just 150 basis points for cash returners.
 
Meanwhile, companies that reinvest show dramatically stronger sales growth over a five-year period than returners, 19 percent versus just 5 percent. Even reinvestors that underperformed their peers saw sales grow 16 percent a year, compared to just 4 percent for underperforming returners. But the market looks to the future, right? Well, companies that reinvest also tend to be much more effective in increasing market expectations about their future growth than those that returned cash to shareholders. And the market has persistently paid a premium for companies that offer compelling growth stories over those that don’t.
 
Finally, there’s the question of the corporate life cycle. For early-stage companies, profitable growth opportunities are abundant and should therefore be aggressively pursued. As businesses mature, however, and cash flows expand and investment opportunities diminish, the balance should shift toward returning excess cash to shareholders.

文章翻译由兄弟财经提供
文章来源：
https://www.thefinancialist.com/the-excess-cash-dilemma-to-return-or-reinvest/#sthash.LFhkszDW.dpuf