2025lovepeace

Current Ratio = Current Assets / Current Liabilities
Debt Ratio = Total Liabilities / Total Assets
In simple terms, a company operates with debt, which includes long-term loans borrowed from banks, temporary revolving funds, accounts payable formed by purchasing goods before payment, and so on. Among these, those that need to be paid within a short period, or within one year, are called current liabilities. Current assets are those assets that can be converted into cash within a relatively short period, such as cash and cash equivalents, trading financial assets, accounts receivable, inventories, etc. Therefore, the current ratio measures the company's ability to repay its current liabilities.
My understanding is that if the current ratio is below 1, it means the company's cash plus liquid assets are insufficient to cover its current liabilities. In other words, if short-term creditors come knocking, the company cannot raise enough money to pay them. In such situations, there are three ways to respond:
1. Increase profitability: If there is a steady cash flow from operations, it can help with turnover. However, when we consider this issue, it often means that the operating net cash flow is too small or even negative, insufficient to handle cash turnover. What should we do then?
2. Introduce new shareholders: For listed companies, this usually involves a private placement, bringing in new shareholders. The new capital can help alleviate cash flow pressure. However, the process of private placement is often complicated and time-consuming, and it may not solve the problem immediately. More importantly, private placement is not always successful, sometimes leading to false hopes.
3. If the above measures are insufficient, the company may need to consider other options.

10 Years of Classic Cryptocurrency Whale Quotes - Compliance and Security, No Needles in Crypto Exchange Platforms. Don't Fear Sharp Drops, Only Fears of Gradual Decline—refers to the rapid fall in coin prices (significant short-term decline) which often quickly stabilizes or even rebounds; whereas daily slight declines, known as gradual decline, may last a long time and accumulate substantial drops. Additionally, a short-term sharp drop after a long-term decline is often a bear trap, with prices often rising immediately after falling for several days; a common phenomenon is that after a large surge, prices first plunge sharply, then decline gradually, and then plunge again, finally reaching the bottom zone.
If it rises but doesn't, a big drop is inevitable; if it falls but doesn't, a big rise is imminent—refers to the coin price being in the mid-to-high range, with positive news or a general rise in the crypto market or industry, but the coin itself doesn't rise, possibly because the main force is selling on good news. Once the selling is done, the price will plummet; if the price is in the mid-to-low range, with negative news or a general decline in the market or industry, but the coin doesn't fall, it may be because the main force has completed accumulation and shaping the price trend, deliberately supporting the price to prevent the pattern from breaking, aiming for a significant rally later.
Intraday chart flattens, suddenly hits the limit-up—refers to small and mid-cap coins that have undergone long consolidation; if the intraday chart is very flat on a certain day, it is very likely to suddenly hit the limit-up afterward.
Normal volume contraction, no volume, weak market—an adage created by grassroots trader Chen Jinsong. It indicates that during an uptrend, in the mid to late stages of the rally, the market recognizes it as a bull market, so holders are reluctant to sell, but buyers are very strong, leading to volume contraction during upward movement. Conversely, during a downtrend, in the mid to late stages, the market recognizes it as a bear market, so holders are reluctant to buy, but sellers are very strong, leading to...

The two most fundamental principles in life are: uphold righteousness and fear no death. Due to the nature of China: power determines everything, money measures everything, having money means having everything, everything is for money, which leads to the fact that China never advocates professional integrity; morality and even law are often trampled upon by power, money, and influence. Therefore, in China, it is very difficult to stick to the right path, not follow the crowd, not succumb to power, money, and influence, and not do bad things—just as difficult as not fearing death. For example, it is hard for managers in unregulated companies to refuse participating in illegal deductions from employees, and well-regulated companies are as rare as giant pandas. Thus, those who stick to the right path find it hard to get promotions, etc., and will pay a price. Those who maintain integrity over the long term will pay various prices, and the accumulation of these costs can, over time, indirectly affect their lives. Unless one’s professional skills or interpersonal abilities are top-notch, and only a very few can reach that level. It is evident that the entire social environment in China hinders people from adhering to righteousness; therefore, the vast majority find it very difficult to uphold integrity for a long time. But isn’t being a person about maintaining righteousness? If you don’t uphold righteousness, what kind of person are you? Is being forced to be an accomplice or a lackey of power, money, and influence considered a person of integrity? Is being forced to be a slave to power, money, and influence considered a person of integrity? Upholding righteousness means you cannot revere power, money, and influence; you cannot fear paying the price; you cannot fear death. Otherwise, how can you uphold righteousness? Therefore, in current China, on an individual level, if you want to uphold righteousness and be a person of integrity, you must not fear paying the price and be willing to uphold it for a lifetime.

Many fellow enthusiasts have noticed that I often say that the core idea of value investing is to buy good companies at reasonable prices and hold them for the long term. There is a very interesting story behind this statement. In January 1972, Buffett was preparing to acquire 100% of the shares of See's Candies. At that time, See's Candies had a book net asset value of about $7 million, with an annual net profit of around $2 million. The initial offer was $40 million, and since there was $10 million on the books, the seller's actual asking price was $30 million, corresponding to a PE ratio of about 14.5 times and a PB ratio of about 4 times. For Buffett, who still adhered to Graham's traditional value investing concepts at the time, this was unacceptable. He was only thinking of investing at 50 cents on the dollar, and even at a 1x PB ratio, he found it hard to accept. It was Munger who took Buffett to visit the See's Candies store in California and conducted an on-site inspection, discovering that there were many customers and that brand loyalty was very high. Munger said: "Instead of paying a small price for a lousy company, it's better to buy a good company at a fair and reasonable price." Ultimately, both parties agreed on $25 million, with a PE of 12.5 times, and Buffett made the deal at a "price worse than death." In the days that followed, the investment in See's Candies brought Buffett over $8.3 billion in returns. This classic deal also marked Buffett's shift from the "Graham-style low-price penny stocks" philosophy to the growth stock investment philosophy of "buying good companies at reasonable prices and holding them long-term." Buying good companies at reasonable prices and holding them long-term, this phrase is very

On March 29, 2013, Dadao shared on his blog why he bought GE, which is very worth learning from. I personally was greatly inspired by his sharing. First, Dadao had been paying attention to Panasonic and GE since his early days of running a business. Later, he gave up on Panasonic after finding issues, but he was deeply impressed by GE's famous CEO Jack Welch, and then began to delve into why GE is a conglomerate (founded in 1892, with a 133-year history until 2025). This stems from business management issues. How can my enterprise be as enduring as GE? So he further studied the company's culture. At the same time, he also started paying attention to GE's stock but felt it was not cheap, so he never bought it. This reveals a person's curiosity—without curiosity, one wouldn't delve deeply. Curiosity is probably the most enduring productivity in this world. Second, after more than ten years, he experienced the 2008 financial crisis. In September 2008, Lehman Brothers collapsed, and the entire market was in turmoil. Dadao felt that it was his turn to be "greedy." In the same year, on October 16, Warren Buffett published an article titled "Buy American, Now Is the Time." However, he didn't immediately buy GE; instead, in February 2009, when GE's stock fell below $10, he started buying, from $9 down to $6, then back up to $12, and continued to buy. He mobilized funds everywhere to buy in. He was making a heavy hand. His attitude was to buy more as the price fell, and the more it fell, the happier he was.

In the previous discussion about the Dao Maotai issue, I said, "Instead of blindly criticizing the unfairness of the world with lofty ideals, it's better to be down-to-earth and work hard." Many fellow investors don't understand the connection between making money by "moving bricks" and investing. In the world of investment, besides finding good companies, waiting for the right price, buying patiently, there's another key point: diligent "moving bricks" to earn money. Only by having a second income and saving more bullets can you, during bear markets or major declines, have the capacity to add positions, continue buying companies you believe in, and acquire more shares at lower costs. This is called accumulating stock volume. Warren Buffett, in his early years, was buying undervalued stocks while also roadshowing to raise more funds to invest in funds for profit. Later, at Berkshire Hathaway, he continued to use the massive float from GEICO and other insurance companies as his ongoing cash flow bullets, constantly buying his favorite stocks when the market was undervalued (for example, during the 2008 financial crisis, he had a large amount of cash to buy at lows). He truly achieved cycle crossing and gained enormous investment wealth. When I first started learning about investing, I was still in entrepreneurship, with a few hundred employees. After studying value investing for a while, I thought I had mastered it and was eager to do full-time investing, so I planned to sell my company and switch to investing. Fortunately, I met a benefactor who advised me to keep the company and continue investing, because having a continuous cash flow is one of the factors that keeps my mindset positive in the stock market. Even true value investors often encounter black swan events and major declines while fully invested; if they can't raise new funds, they can only lie down and wait.

Open a new account with a securities company and activate the Hong Kong Stock Connect. I usually don't buy Hong Kong stocks, and during a chat, the other party asked me which capital market I mainly invest in—US stocks, Hong Kong stocks, or A-shares. I was stunned for a long time, couldn't decide, and slowly said that mainly A-shares because I have limited access to company information. I also want to look at many US stocks and indeed need to, but due to my insufficient English skills, I can't fully understand the information they publish, so I dare not buy. After returning, I thought of this question again because I had thought about many things at the time. It seems I haven't bought US stocks before and couldn't express myself clearly all at once. I was hesitant back then. This is a question worth pondering and answering carefully. As a Chinese living on Chinese land, where should I invest? I don't understand the living habits, working habits, consumption habits, cultural habits, or business transaction and partnership customs of Americans. I don't know. Well, if I don't understand, I won't do or touch it—that's always right, right? So, I can use the elimination method. First, I eliminate the biggest pond in the world, the one with the most fish. Although Munger said fishing should be done where there are many fish, I am not familiar with this place. Everyone knows the fish here are big, fat, and plentiful, but I dare not fish there. What about Hong Kong? I am more familiar with it—first, I often go back and forth to Hong Kong; second, most companies listed in Hong Kong are Chinese domestic companies, similar to those in China. So, I won't exclude Hong Kong stocks. As for A-shares, there's no need to say more—they are definitely part of my portfolio. Thinking again, why should I consider the habits of so many local people?

Chapter 8 of "The Intelligent Investor" contains a passage: "It is precisely out of regard for human nature (rather than for financial profit and loss) that we advocate a mechanical approach to adjusting the proportions of bonds and stocks in an investor's portfolio. Perhaps the main benefit of this method is that it gives the investor something to do. As the market rises, he will continually sell the stocks he holds and reinvest the proceeds into bonds; when the market declines, he will do the opposite. A true investor can also derive satisfaction from the following idea: his actions are exactly opposite to those of the general public." This is a rebalancing method, and it is also a method that Buffett has been using consistently, achieving long-term success. He has indeed been following his teacher's advice, constantly selling stocks during market upswings, such as starting in 2023 when he liquidated his holdings in U.S. Bancorp, gradually sold off his heavily weighted Apple shares, and shifted into U.S. Treasury bonds. By the first quarter of 2025, his cash reserves had reached an astonishing $347.7 billion. With total assets of $1.16 trillion, this accounts for nearly 30% of his broad total assets; if calculated based on flexible liquidity assets, his assets are: $347.7 billion in cash + $269 billion in stock investments = $616.7 billion, with cash making up 56%. This is the highest cash holding Buffett has ever had in his history. To put it in perspective, during the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis, Buffett's cash reserves were only $44.3 billion, accounting for just 1% of his total assets.

The margin of safety is the central concept of investment. According to Benjamin Graham's view, "If a bridge is designed to carry a load of 30,000 pounds but only allows 10,000-pound trucks to pass, the extra 20,000 pounds is the safety margin," the safety margin is the starting point for investors to buy and is also the source of investment profits. Safety margin = intrinsic value of the company - purchase price of the company. Buying a stock with an intrinsic value of 1 yuan at a price of 0.4 yuan significantly increases the safety of your investment returns, and you can even sell at 0.8 yuan or 0.6 yuan. This was the operational method during Graham's era and is also the practical approach Buffett followed early in his career based on his teacher's guidance. With the global development of financial markets and the industrial revolution, this specific method has been continuously upgraded and iterated. Through the ongoing development by Buffett, Duan Yongping, and others, I believe that today's concept of the margin of safety has many differences from the earliest concept during Graham's era 90 years ago. The summary is as follows, progressing step by step. The first level of understanding: the stock price at purchase is sufficiently low. According to the concept and formula, to have a sufficient margin of safety, the purchase price of the stock must be low enough, at least below the company's intrinsic value. This should be quite understandable—just like eggs of the same quality, who would dislike a seller lowering the price to sell to you? Clearly, an egg worth 1 yuan is being offered at 0.8 yuan or even 0.4 yuan by the market. Isn't that good?

Because I saw children studying world maps and remembered some pictures I had seen before. It’s very interesting and I think it’s related to our investment work. I found these images to share with everyone. You can take a look. How is this different from how we invest, look at companies, and analyze markets? The Earth is a sphere. No matter how you think, view, or rotate it, the world is like this ball. Similarly, every company, no matter how you think or view it, is like this. But everyone has their own ideal image of a company in their mind, and that company only exists within your own cognitive system. Isn’t that similar to the Earth being an objective sphere? Fellow enthusiasts, what are your thoughts after seeing these images of the same world map and your own investments? $ALT $UPC $MAPO

During the National Day holiday, due to the needs of villa design, I spent the whole day chatting with a teacher from the Academy of Fine Arts. When discussing Mondrian's abstract paintings, we talked about an interesting story related to one of Mondrian's masterpieces, which I think is highly relevant to our investments and want to share. Dutch painter Piet Mondrian (March 7, 1872 – February 1, 1944) studied early on at the Royal Academy of Art in Amsterdam, receiving academic training and laying a solid foundation in realism. His early works were mostly landscapes, showcasing a traditional naturalistic style. Around 1911, Mondrian went to Paris to study Cubism, and his works began to become more simplified and geometric, such as the "Still Life with Ginger Jar" series. Later, Mondrian gradually felt the limitations of Cubism and started pursuing a more fundamental form of artistic expression, creating what he called "Neoplasticism," composed of horizontal and vertical lines, primary colors (red, yellow, blue), and three non-colors (white, gray, black). He believed that this pure abstraction could express the harmony and order of the universe. His iconic style includes works like "Composition with Red, Yellow, and Blue." The piece we discussed, "New York City No. 1," is a work from 1941 by Mondrian, composed of red, yellow, and blue lines intersecting at right angles (see attached). It was first exhibited in 1945 at the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York. Since this painting does not bear the artist's handwritten signature, the initial hanging orientation was likely based on the artist's name marked on the back of the frame by the estate manager.

Background Introduction: In July 1999, at the Sun Valley Summit in Idaho, Warren Buffett delivered this speech. At that time, the US technology and internet bubble was on the verge of bursting, and many ".com" companies had skyrocketed in valuation without profits or even revenue. Buffett, who avoided investing in tech stocks, found his returns during the tech bull market quite mediocre, and some media even published sarcastic articles such as "Is Buffett too old to eat?" and "Buffett pulled up another slide, which came from a 70-page list that included all American car companies. The list had 2,000 car companies: automobiles were the most significant invention of the first half of the 20th century. They had a huge impact on people's lives. If you witnessed how the country developed during the early days of the automobile's invention, you might say: this is a field I must invest in. However, among the over 2,000 car companies from decades ago, only 3 survived. Moreover, at one point, the sale prices of these 3 companies were below their book value, meaning less than the amount of capital initially invested and retained. Therefore, although automobiles had a tremendous positive impact on America, they had the opposite effect on investors. Sometimes, identifying failures is much easier. I believe that after this, everyone can draw an obvious conclusion: what you should do is short sell poorly managed companies." Buffett has always disliked investing in four-wheeled businesses (later, his investment in BYD was mainly because

"Many people believe that management and investment are two completely different things. In fact, management and investment are interconnected and share many similarities. If you understand the basic principles of investing, you will become a better entrepreneur; if you understand the basic principles of management, you will become a more successful investor." This quote from Buffett's speech is similar to what he has said before: When investing in stocks, people should think of themselves as business analysts rather than market analysts, securities analysts, or macroeconomic analysts. Because I see myself as a business operator, I can become an excellent investor; because I see myself as an investor, I can become an excellent business manager. I am glad I heard this when I was learning value investing, and I think it is very insightful. This is also why I see many entrepreneurs who have run physical businesses transition into investing more smoothly than ordinary workers, especially those who have been successful in their businesses, seem to find it easier to accept and understand value investing. Buffett himself is a good example. I have always said: The world’s greatest misconception about Buffett is that he is a stock god. Because, in my view, he is actually a successful entrepreneur. Today, Berkshire Hathaway owns 189 wholly owned and controlling subsidiaries, such as See’s Candies, GEICO Insurance, etc., with a total of over 390,000 employees and total assets exceeding $1 trillion. Additionally, it has invested in more than 40 publicly listed companies, such as Apple, Occidental Petroleum, and others. So, do you still think Buffett is just good at investing?

"Time is the friend of excellent companies, the enemy of mediocre ones." You might think this principle is dull, but I learned it through profound lessons — those who focus on the long term have a huge competitive advantage over those who focus on the short term. — Bezos
Value investing is generally a long-term investment, but long-term investment does not automatically equal value investing. A period of good operational and stock price returns does not necessarily mean it is value investing. — Duan Yongping
Many people believe that value investing means long-term investing. However, this long-term is disliked and hard to stick to, so they think it’s difficult. Some people I know even say they agree with value investing, but because it requires long-term commitment, they feel it’s less profitable than short-term trading, so they choose not to learn or practice value investing. I can only smile because I know he thinks my process of picking ten-bagger stocks is too complicated and takes too long to achieve the quick gains or large returns he seeks in the short term. In fact, it’s precisely because they don’t understand value investing that they find it difficult and believe it requires a very long time. The great Duan Yongping once said, “Value investing is generally long-term investing, but long-term investing does not automatically equal value investing.” As many know, Buffett often says he will never sell Coca-Cola stock in his lifetime. Lin Yuan says he only buys and never sells Kweichow Moutai, and he will never sell it in his lifetime. Fisher said Motorola and Texas Instruments will never be sold easily due to large gains during holding, and they are to be held lifelong. These are obviously long-term investments, and also value investments. Moreover, the cases of these people are all first

Many people believe that value investing is very difficult, and they also think that value investing requires long-term commitment. This long-term aspect is disliked by many and hard to stick with, so they consider it difficult. Some people I know even say they agree with value investing, but because it requires a long-term approach, they feel it's less profitable than short-term trading, so they choose not to learn or practice value investing. I can only smile because I know they think the process of holding ten-bagger stocks is too painful and takes too long, making it impossible to achieve the short-term gains or large returns they seek. In fact, it is precisely because they don't understand value investing that they find it difficult and believe it requires a long time. First, value investing and long-term holding are not necessarily connected. Perhaps it's because they've heard some of Buffett's methods like discounted cash flow analysis, which requires understanding a company's lifetime cash value before investing, leading them to think it's a long-term strategy. It could also be because Buffett often says he will never sell certain stocks like Coca-Cola (though he has said similar things about many stocks, he has also sold some), making it seem too long-term. If we buy a stock and are required to hold it for a lifetime, how do we make money? What I need is to make money from trading, then buy a villa or yacht, and achieve financial freedom (I believe this is the idea of some friends around me). In reality, value investing has never explicitly linked to a specific time frame; it only involves choosing entry and exit points. Of course, before buying, there is waiting, and before selling, there is also waiting. But what is waiting? Does it necessarily mean long-term? Obviously not. If you buy today and a selling point appears after a week, why not sell?

The confidence to invest comes from a belief in your investment philosophy. In today's era of social media, 24/7 nonstop news, current events, and social hotspots, combined with the secondary processing of the same event by various bloggers, create an overwhelming flow of information that floods each of us. However, we need to understand that most of the information you encounter is noise, not signal. Useful signals are those that can guide you to take the right actions. If you can adhere to value investing with a long-term perspective on information, then short-term market fluctuations may present opportunities rather than dangers. Benjamin Graham, the founder of Value Investing 1.0, once said: Price fluctuations have only one important meaning—that when prices fall sharply, they create opportunities for wise buying; when prices rise sharply, they provide opportunities for wise selling. If investors panic or become overly worried due to unreasonable declines in the market value of their stocks, they are turning their fundamental advantages into fundamental disadvantages. Therefore, true investment wisdom lies in identifying value mismatches amid volatility, maintaining rational discipline in emotionally driven markets, capturing high-quality assets that are unfairly sold off in panic, and being cautious of valuation bubbles bursting during exuberance. Every intense fluctuation is a test of your investment faith and an opportunity for wealth redistribution. Only by traversing cycles can you reap the compound benefits of time and value. So, calm your mind, block out external noise, return to the essence of investing—buy stocks as buying companies—and proactively accept the “risk” of market fluctuations for the promise of future substantial investment returns.

Warren Buffett's Shareholder Letter 2025 (Final Letter) To My Shareholder Friends: Starting this year, I will no longer write Berkshire Hathaway's annual reports, nor will I give lengthy speeches at the annual shareholder meetings. As the British say, I am going to "go quiet." — Well, sort of. Greg Abel will take over as CEO at the end of the year. He is an excellent manager, a tireless worker, and an honest communicator. I wish him a long tenure. I will continue to talk about Berkshire Hathaway with everyone and my children through the annual "Thanksgiving Letter." Berkshire's individual shareholders are a special group—they are eager to share their wealth with those less fortunate. I cherish this connection. Please allow me a brief reflection this year, then I will discuss how I plan to allocate my Berkshire Hathaway shares, and finally share some thoughts on career and life. Reflection and Gratitude As Thanksgiving approaches, I am both surprised and grateful to still be alive at 95. When I was young, I never expected to live this long. In 1938, I nearly died. At that time in Omaha, hospitals were divided into "Catholic Hospitals" and "Protestant Hospitals." Our family doctor, Harley Hotz, was a friendly Catholic who would come to see patients with a black bag. He called me "Little Captain," and his fees were modest. One day, I had severe stomach pain, and Dr. Hotz came to see me, saying I would be fine by the next morning. Later, after dinner and a few rounds of bridge, he still couldn't shake his concern about my symptoms. Late at night, he asked me to

In the late 1960s, Professor Walter Mischel( from Stanford University conducted a famous marshmallow experiment on delayed gratification. Researchers gathered a group of children around 4 years old in a classroom, asking them to sit quietly for 15 minutes. Each child had a marshmallow in front of them. They could eat it immediately, but if they waited for the staff to return after 15 minutes, they would receive a second marshmallow. As a result, only about 30% of the children successfully obtained two marshmallows. The researchers followed up with all the participating children and found that those who received the two marshmallows as a reward were more successful in life many years later. Mischel explained the experiment results as: individuals with higher delayed gratification ability are willing to sacrifice short-term benefits for a more valuable future. So, how many people can do it? Are those who succeed truly thinking clearly about the future? Or is it just innate? In this experiment, four-year-old children were chosen as subjects. What were their thoughts? Clearly, some children understood that as long as they put in effort (sit quietly for 15 minutes), resist short-term temptation (the marshmallow in front of them), they could succeed (get two marshmallows). Is this a matter of innate nature? If it is innate, it means these people will continue to behave this way in the future. But what if this experiment involved adults? The situation would be completely different. However, adults face much more complex realities than a simple marshmallow temptation. Fellow players, all adults, look at the real-world scenarios faced by adults.

On November 11, 2025, Berkshire Hathaway published Warren Buffett's final letter to shareholders, announcing his official retirement this year. He will no longer be rambling at shareholder meetings or writing shareholder letters in the future. He has just celebrated a full 60-year tenure at Berkshire Hathaway, and this choice of retirement timing is the result of multiple considerations. Anyway, I think it’s perfect. In the future, we might still read his Thanksgiving letters every year, which would be nice. So, after Buffett’s succession, can Berkshire Hathaway still maintain the investment returns of the Buffett era? Let me introduce his successor, Greg Abel.
1. About Greg Abel’s Background and Career
In 1962, Greg Abel was born into a working-class family in Canada. His father worked as a salesman, and the family’s financial situation was not affluent. During his student years, Abel was passionate about sports, especially hockey. Every day after school, he would gather with friends to enjoy the fun of hockey until his family called him home for dinner. As he grew older, Abel began taking on part-time jobs to ease his family’s financial burden. He once distributed flyers for his father’s company, walking through streets and alleys to deliver flyers to potential customers; he also worked filling fire extinguishers. Although the work was monotonous, he always took it seriously and never did it perfunctorily. In 1984, Abel graduated from the University of Alberta in Canada with a degree in Business. During college, he systematically studied business management, economics, accounting, and other professional knowledge, laying a solid foundation for his career.

The confidence in investing comes from a belief in the investment philosophy. Buffett started doing business and investing from a young age. After more than ten years of effort, by the age of 26, he finally integrated business and investing together. Until today in 2025, at 96 years old, he remains on the front line of investment, both striving and enjoying. However, although Buffett has achieved astonishing wealth that rivals nations over these 70 years, a closer analysis reveals some different insights worth savoring. The return rates during Buffett's various investment phases over the past 75 years are: youth period (1950-1956) approximately 55% - 60%; private partnership period (1956-1969) before fees 30%; Berkshire period (1965-2024) at 19.4%. When combined and broken down, these annualized returns are all higher than the same period's S&P 500 annualized return. We know that Buffett has always liked to benchmark his investment performance against the S&P 500 index of the same period. It can be said that he has been continuously surpassing the S&P 500 index throughout his life. This long-term stable excess return is not derived from short-term gains or speculative operations but from his adherence to value investing principles, a deep understanding of the essence of business, and strong risk control capabilities. Especially during the massive Berkshire phase, even with a huge capital base, he continued to outperform the market, which is quite rare. Behind this is his strict screening of economic moats, management quality, and reasonable pricing, as well as restraint during bull markets,