<p><strong>道瓊斯工業平均指數</strong>(^DJI 0.59%) 在 2024 年迎來了第二次重大變動。今年早些時候，<strong>亞馬遜</strong>(AMZN -0.89%) 替代了 <strong>沃爾格林聯合</strong>。現在，<strong>英偉達</strong>(NVDA -0.84%) 將與 <strong>英特爾</strong> 進行更換，而 <strong>舍温 - 威廉姆斯</strong> 則替代了化工巨頭 <strong>陶氏</strong>。</p>
<p>以下是為什麼這個已有 128 年曆史的指數的變動反映了更廣泛的市場領導力，以及為什麼藍籌股的定義可能需要更新。</p>
<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://g.foolcdn.com/image//query-b3A9cmVzaXplJnVybD1odHRwczovL2cuZm9vbGNkbi5jb20vZWRpdG9yaWFsL2ltYWdlcy83OTY4NTYvZ2V0dHktc2FmZS1zZWN1cmUtdW1icmVsbGEtcmV0aXJlbWVudC0xMjAweDgwMC01YjJkZjc5LmpwZyZ3PTcwMA?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://g.foolcdn.com/image//query-b3A9cmVzaXplJnVybD1odHRwczovL2cuZm9vbGNkbi5jb20vZWRpdG9yaWFsL2ltYWdlcy83OTY4NTYvZ2V0dHktc2FmZS1zZWN1cmUtdW1icmVsbGEtcmV0aXJlbWVudC0xMjAweDgwMC01YjJkZjc5LmpwZyZ3PTcwMA"/></p>
<p>圖片來源：Getty Images。</p>
<h2>以增長為主，告別高收益</h2>
<p>“藍籌股” 一詞源於撲克，指的是最高面值的籌碼。藍籌股並沒有官方定義，但傳統上道瓊斯的 30 個成分股都符合標準，以及那些在較長時間內增加股息的公司，如股息之王。股息之王是指那些連續增長股息至少 50 年的公司。</p>
<p>大多數道瓊斯股票支付股息，但並非全部。2020 年 8 月，<strong>Salesforce</strong> 替代了 <strong>埃克森美孚</strong> 進入道瓊斯，成為第三個不支付股息的成分股，此前 <strong>波音</strong> 和 <strong>華特迪士尼</strong> 在年初暫停了季度分紅。然而，Salesforce 在今年早些時候開始支付適度的股息，而迪士尼也恢復了股息，但金額低於削減前的水平。</p>
<p>亞馬遜目前不支付股息。英偉達支付股息，但僅僅是技術性支付，每季度每股僅為 0.01 美元。舍温 - 威廉姆斯的股息收益率僅為 0.8%，而它所替代的陶氏則是該指數中收益率最高的公司之一，週五的收益率為 5.7%。</p>
<p>調整後，只有 16 個道瓊斯成分股的收益率在 2% 或以上，8 個成分股的收益率在 1% 或以下。</p>
<p>過去，道瓊斯充滿了優先考慮股息的公司。如今，關注點已從股息轉向行業領導力。</p>
<h2>理解股息和資本配置</h2>
<p>要理解股息為何對我們對藍籌股的形象如此重要，我們首先需要理解公司為何支付股息。</p>
<p>股息是公司將收益直接分配給股東的一種方式。如果公司能夠長期穩定地支付股息，那麼它的業務可能是穩健的。如果一家公司能夠每年提高股息，這意味着其收益在增長，因此它能夠將更多的利潤分配給股東。</p>
<p>然而，股息只是公司配置資本的一種方式。公司可以償還債務，或將多餘的收益保留為現金及現金等價物或可交易證券。它還可以回購股票，從而減少流通股數量並人為提高每股收益。公司可以進行併購（M&amp;A），並可以將資金重新投入到業務中以推動有機增長。</p>
<p>許多傳統的藍籌道瓊斯股票的增長前景有限，或其商業模式實際上並不需要不斷增加的再投資水平。例如，<strong>可口可樂</strong> 的股東不希望看到公司將所有的超額利潤用於冒險的研發項目，以期開發出下一個偉大的飲料。<strong>寶潔</strong> 也不應盲目投入資金，希望開發出顛覆性的紙巾。即使是像 <strong>摩根大通</strong> 這樣的公司，也更願意穩步擴大其網絡和客户基礎，而不是過度槓桿化以危及其穩定性。因此，這些公司自然會利用股息作為獎勵股東的主要方式，以獲得被動收入，無論股市表現如何。</p>
<p>相比之下，今天最有價值的公司大多被視為成長股。股息可能是其中的一部分，但並不是重點。<strong>蘋果</strong> 和 <strong>微軟</strong> 支付股息，但兩者的收益率都低於 1%。<strong>字母表</strong> 和 <strong>Meta Platforms</strong> 在今年早些時候開始支付股息，但兩者的收益率都低於 0.5%。然而，這些公司的一個共同主題是它們回購了大量自己的股票。</p>
<p>使用資本回購股票而不是支付股息顯示出管理層相信該股票的價值良好，並且在長期內將產生比股息更好的回報。到目前為止，這一策略對於像蘋果、微軟、字母表和 Meta 這樣的巨型科技公司來説，確實證明了其有效性，它們在長期內的表現遠超大盤。</p>
<p>沃倫·巴菲特領導的 <strong>伯克希爾哈撒韋</strong> 以不支付股息而聞名，因為巴菲特認為伯克希爾能夠通過資本增值為投資者提供比股息更高的回報（而且他是對的）。儘管沒有股息，許多人可能仍會將伯克希爾哈撒韋視為藍籌股。<strong>Meta</strong> 和 <strong>字母表</strong> 也是如此，儘管它們的收益率如此之低，並且支付股息的時間僅為幾個月而非幾十年。但對於那些沒有可觀股息或回購計劃的公司呢？</p>
<p>最近加入道瓊斯的亞馬遜和英偉達通過股票激勵稀釋了其股東。尤其是亞馬遜，以其將資金重新投入到多個行業而聞名。在過去十年中，亞馬遜的流通股數量增加了 13.1%，但股價卻增長了超過 13 倍。因此，很難反對亞馬遜超激進的資本配置策略。</p>
<h2>對藍籌股的新看法</h2>
<p>道瓊斯工業平均指數已經演變，因此 “藍籌股” 的定義也應該隨之更新。</p>
<p>藍籌股的地位應該更多地關注行業領導力和資本配置的有效性，而不是基於資本是分配給股息、回購、併購還是有機增長來進行區分。也就是説，如果一家公司決定走像亞馬遜或英偉達這樣的高風險路線，它需要證明資本支出的價值。</p>
<p>“藍籌股” 這一術語應保留給那些在行業中領先、產生大量超額資本並以最大化股東價值的方式使用這些資本的公司。</p>

英特爾

<p>道瓊斯工業平均指數在 2024 年正經歷重大變化，英特爾被英偉達取代，陶氏化學則被舍温 - 威廉姆斯取代。這一變化突顯了從高收益分紅股票向以增長為導向的公司的轉變，挑戰了傳統的藍籌股定義。雖然分紅歷來是藍籌股的標誌，但許多當前的領軍企業更重視資本配置策略，如股票回購，而非分紅。這一演變反映了更廣泛的市場趨勢，表明在當今經濟中需要重新定義什麼構成藍籌股</p>

<p>The <strong>Dow Jones Industrial Average</strong>(^DJI 0.59%) is making its second major change in 2024. Earlier this year, <strong>Amazon</strong>(AMZN -0.89%) replaced <strong>Walgreens Boots Alliance</strong>. Now, <strong>Nvidia</strong>(NVDA -0.84%) is swapping with <strong>Intel</strong>, and <strong>Sherwin-Williams</strong> is replacing chemical giant <strong>Dow</strong>.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>道瓊斯工業平均指數</strong>(^DJI 0.59%) 在 2024 年迎來了第二次重大變動。今年早些時候，<strong>亞馬遜</strong>(AMZN -0.89%) 替代了 <strong>沃爾格林聯合</strong>。現在，<strong>英偉達</strong>(NVDA -0.84%) 將與 <strong>英特爾</strong> 進行更換，而 <strong>舍温 - 威廉姆斯</strong> 則替代了化工巨頭 <strong>陶氏</strong>。</p>
</div><p>Here's why the shakeups in the 128-year-old index reflect broader market leadership, and why the very definition of what it means to be a blue chip stock could need an update.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>以下是為什麼這個已有 128 年曆史的指數的變動反映了更廣泛的市場領導力，以及為什麼藍籌股的定義可能需要更新。</p>
</div><p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://g.foolcdn.com/image//query-b3A9cmVzaXplJnVybD1odHRwczovL2cuZm9vbGNkbi5jb20vZWRpdG9yaWFsL2ltYWdlcy83OTY4NTYvZ2V0dHktc2FmZS1zZWN1cmUtdW1icmVsbGEtcmV0aXJlbWVudC0xMjAweDgwMC01YjJkZjc5LmpwZyZ3PTcwMA" alt="" original-src="https://g.foolcdn.com/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fg.foolcdn.com%2Feditorial%2Fimages%2F796856%2Fgetty-safe-secure-umbrella-retirement-1200x800-5b2df79.jpg&amp;op=resize&amp;w=700"/></p>
<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>圖片來源：Getty Images。</p>
</div><h2>In with growth, out with high yield</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>以增長為主，告別高收益</h2>
</div><p>The term &#34;blue chip&#34; comes from poker, where it refers to the highest chip denomination. There is no official definition of a blue chip stock, but traditionally all 30 components of the Dow would make the cut, as well as companies that have increased their dividends for an extended period of time, such as Dividend Kings. Dividend Kings are companies that have grown their dividends for at least 50 consecutive years.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>“藍籌股” 一詞源於撲克，指的是最高面值的籌碼。藍籌股並沒有官方定義，但傳統上道瓊斯的 30 個成分股都符合標準，以及那些在較長時間內增加股息的公司，如股息之王。股息之王是指那些連續增長股息至少 50 年的公司。</p>
</div><p>Most, but not all, Dow stocks pay dividends. In August 2020, <strong>Salesforce</strong> replaced <strong>ExxonMobil</strong> in the Dow. It became the third component not to pay a dividend, after Boeing and Walt Disney suspended their quarterly payouts earlier in the year. However, Salesforce began paying a modest dividend earlier this year, and Disney has since brought back its dividend, at a smaller amount than before the cut.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>大多數道瓊斯股票支付股息，但並非全部。2020 年 8 月，<strong>Salesforce</strong> 替代了 <strong>埃克森美孚</strong> 進入道瓊斯，成為第三個不支付股息的成分股，此前 <strong>波音</strong> 和 <strong>華特迪士尼</strong> 在年初暫停了季度分紅。然而，Salesforce 在今年早些時候開始支付適度的股息，而迪士尼也恢復了股息，但金額低於削減前的水平。</p>
</div><p>Amazon doesn't currently pay a dividend. Nvidia does, but only on a technicality, as it is just $0.01 per share per quarter. Sherwin-Williams yields just 0.8%, whereas the company it's replacing, Dow, was one of the highest-yielding companies in the index, with a yield of 5.7% at Friday's prices.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>亞馬遜目前不支付股息。英偉達支付股息，但僅僅是技術性支付，每季度每股僅為 0.01 美元。舍温 - 威廉姆斯的股息收益率僅為 0.8%，而它所替代的陶氏則是該指數中收益率最高的公司之一，週五的收益率為 5.7%。</p>
</div><p>Post-adjustment, there will be just 16 Dow components that yield 2% or more, and eight components that yield 1% or less.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>調整後，只有 16 個道瓊斯成分股的收益率在 2% 或以上，8 個成分股的收益率在 1% 或以下。</p>
</div><p>In the past, the Dow was chock-full of companies that prioritized dividends. Today, the focus has shifted away from dividends toward industry leadership.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>過去，道瓊斯充滿了優先考慮股息的公司。如今，關注點已從股息轉向行業領導力。</p>
</div><h2>Understanding dividends and capital allocation</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>理解股息和資本配置</h2>
</div><p>To understand why dividends are so fundamental to our image of a blue chip stock, we have to first understand why companies pay them in the first place.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>要理解股息為何對我們對藍籌股的形象如此重要，我們首先需要理解公司為何支付股息。</p>
</div><p>A dividend is a way for a company to pass along earnings directly to its shareholders. If it can pay a dividend consistently over the long term, its business is probably solid. If a company can raise its dividend every year, that implies earnings are growing, so it can afford to pass even more profits to shareholders.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>股息是公司將收益直接分配給股東的一種方式。如果公司能夠長期穩定地支付股息，那麼它的業務可能是穩健的。如果一家公司能夠每年提高股息，這意味着其收益在增長，因此它能夠將更多的利潤分配給股東。</p>
</div><p>However, dividends are just one way a company can allocate capital. A company can pay down debt or keep excess earnings in cash and cash equivalents or marketable securities. It can also repurchase stock, which reduces the share count and artificially increases earnings per share. It can engage in mergers and acquisitions (M&amp;A), and companies can pour money back into the business to drive organic growth.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>然而，股息只是公司配置資本的一種方式。公司可以償還債務，或將多餘的收益保留為現金及現金等價物或可交易證券。它還可以回購股票，從而減少流通股數量並人為提高每股收益。公司可以進行併購（M&amp;A），並可以將資金重新投入到業務中以推動有機增長。</p>
</div><p>Many of the traditional blue chip Dow stocks have limited growth prospects or business models that actually don't need ever-higher levels of reinvestment. For example, <strong>Coca-Cola</strong> shareholders wouldn't want to see the company use all its excess profits in risky research and development endeavors in the hopes of making the next great soda. It would be unwise for <strong>Procter &amp; Gamble</strong> to throw money at the wall in the hopes of developing a game-changing paper towel. Even a company like <strong>JPMorgan Chase</strong> would prefer steadily growing its network and client base rather than overleveraging and jeopardizing its stability. So naturally, these companies use dividends as a key way to reward shareholders with passive income, no matter what the stock market is doing.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>許多傳統的藍籌道瓊斯股票的增長前景有限，或其商業模式實際上並不需要不斷增加的再投資水平。例如，<strong>可口可樂</strong> 的股東不希望看到公司將所有的超額利潤用於冒險的研發項目，以期開發出下一個偉大的飲料。<strong>寶潔</strong> 也不應盲目投入資金，希望開發出顛覆性的紙巾。即使是像 <strong>摩根大通</strong> 這樣的公司，也更願意穩步擴大其網絡和客户基礎，而不是過度槓桿化以危及其穩定性。因此，這些公司自然會利用股息作為獎勵股東的主要方式，以獲得被動收入，無論股市表現如何。</p>
</div><p>In comparison, today's most valuable companies are mostly considered growth stocks. Dividends may be part of the equation, but they aren't the focus. <strong>Apple</strong> and <strong>Microsoft</strong> pay dividends, but both yield less than 1%. <strong>Alphabet</strong> and <strong>Meta Platforms</strong> began paying dividends earlier this year, but both yield less than 0.5%. However, a common theme among all these companies is that they buy back a considerable amount of their own stock.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>相比之下，今天最有價值的公司大多被視為成長股。股息可能是其中的一部分，但並不是重點。<strong>蘋果</strong> 和 <strong>微軟</strong> 支付股息，但兩者的收益率都低於 1%。<strong>字母表</strong> 和 <strong>Meta Platforms</strong> 在今年早些時候開始支付股息，但兩者的收益率都低於 0.5%。然而，這些公司的一個共同主題是它們回購了大量自己的股票。</p>
</div><p>Using capital to buy back stock instead of paying a dividend shows confidence that management believes the stock is a good value and will produce a better return than dividends over time. So far, that strategy has certainly proven true for mega-cap tech giants like Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Meta, which have crushed the performance of the broader market over the long term.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>使用資本回購股票而不是支付股息顯示出管理層相信該股票的價值良好，並且在長期內將產生比股息更好的回報。到目前為止，這一策略對於像蘋果、微軟、字母表和 Meta 這樣的巨型科技公司來説，確實證明了其有效性，它們在長期內的表現遠超大盤。</p>
</div><p>Warren Buffett-led <strong>Berkshire Hathaway</strong> famously doesn't pay a dividend, because Buffett believes Berkshire can provide a higher return to investors with capital gains than dividends (and he's been right). Despite its lack of dividends, many folks would probably consider Berkshire Hathaway a blue chip stock. The same goes for Meta and Alphabet, even though they sport such low yields and have been paying dividends for a matter of months rather than decades. But what about companies that don't sport sizable dividends or buyback programs?</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>沃倫·巴菲特領導的 <strong>伯克希爾哈撒韋</strong> 以不支付股息而聞名，因為巴菲特認為伯克希爾能夠通過資本增值為投資者提供比股息更高的回報（而且他是對的）。儘管沒有股息，許多人可能仍會將伯克希爾哈撒韋視為藍籌股。<strong>Meta</strong> 和 <strong>字母表</strong> 也是如此，儘管它們的收益率如此之低，並且支付股息的時間僅為幾個月而非幾十年。但對於那些沒有可觀股息或回購計劃的公司呢？</p>
</div><p>Recent Dow additions Amazon and Nvidia dilute their shareholders with stock-based compensation. Amazon, in particular, is famous for pouring money back into the business to invest in a variety of industries. Over the last decade, Amazon's share count has increased by 13.1%, but the stock price has increased by over 13-fold. So it's hard to argue against Amazon's ultra-aggressive capital allocation strategy.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>最近加入道瓊斯的亞馬遜和英偉達通過股票激勵稀釋了其股東。尤其是亞馬遜，以其將資金重新投入到多個行業而聞名。在過去十年中，亞馬遜的流通股數量增加了 13.1%，但股價卻增長了超過 13 倍。因此，很難反對亞馬遜超激進的資本配置策略。</p>
</div><h2>A new take on blue chip stocks</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>對藍籌股的新看法</h2>
</div><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average has evolved, and so should the definition of &#34;blue chip stock.&#34;</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>道瓊斯工業平均指數已經演變，因此 “藍籌股” 的定義也應該隨之更新。</p>
</div><p>Blue chip status should be more about industry leadership and the effectiveness of capital allocation, rather than discriminating based on whether capital is allocated toward dividends, buybacks, M&amp;A, or organic growth. That being said, if a company decides to go the riskier route of companies like Amazon or Nvidia, it needs to prove that the capital spending is worth it.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>藍籌股的地位應該更多地關注行業領導力和資本配置的有效性，而不是基於資本是分配給股息、回購、併購還是有機增長來進行區分。也就是説，如果一家公司決定走像亞馬遜或英偉達這樣的高風險路線，它需要證明資本支出的價值。</p>
</div><p>The term &#34;blue chip&#34; should be reserved for industry-leading companies that generate plenty of excess capital <em>and</em> use it in a way that maximizes shareholder value.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>“藍籌股” 這一術語應保留給那些在行業中領先、產生大量超額資本並以最大化股東價值的方式使用這些資本的公司。</p>
</div>

With Nvidia Replacing Intel in the Dow Jones, Is It Time to Redefine What It Means to Be a Blue Chip Stock?

- 道瓊斯工業平均指數在 2024 年進行第二次重大調整。  
- 英偉達替換英特爾，舍温威廉姆斯取代道化學。  
- 藍籌股的定義應更新，更注重行業領導力和資本配置效率。

隨着英偉達取代英特爾進入道瓊斯指數，現在是否是重新定義藍籌股含義的時機？