????過去一年，高盛（Goldman Sachs）管理層一直在試圖重塑公司形象，讓這家總是被視為華爾街流氓的公司看起來不再像過去那么風(fēng)險(xiǎn)重重。不過，美國(guó)聯(lián)邦儲(chǔ)備委員會(huì)（Federal Reserve，簡(jiǎn)稱：美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)）看來似乎并不相信。

????周四收盤后，我們會(huì)對(duì)美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的想法有更清楚的認(rèn)識(shí)，屆時(shí)這家銀行業(yè)監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)將發(fā)布銀行業(yè)壓力測(cè)試的最終結(jié)果。

????初步結(jié)果顯示，如果再次爆發(fā)金融危機(jī)，高盛可能損失250億美元，高于美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)測(cè)算的其他任何一家銀行。

????按美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的測(cè)算值，高盛潛在的交易損失是老對(duì)頭對(duì)手摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）的兩倍還多。同為美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)測(cè)算，摩根士丹利潛在的交易損失不到120億美元。只有摩根大通（JPMorgan Chase）與高盛相近。美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)預(yù)計(jì)，這家由杰米?戴蒙執(zhí)掌的銀行可能產(chǎn)生235億美元的損失。

????高盛拒絕對(duì)壓力測(cè)試發(fā)表評(píng)論。高盛CEO勞埃德?布萊克費(fèi)恩早已宣布關(guān)閉自營(yíng)交易業(yè)務(wù)。最近，布萊克費(fèi)恩和高盛首席運(yùn)營(yíng)官加里?科恩也一直在警告?zhèn)菽?/p>

????高盛在最近提交的年報(bào)中稱，2012年高盛的日均風(fēng)險(xiǎn)價(jià)值（即可能損失的最高金額）是8,600萬美元，比2009年時(shí)低了60%。

????但美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)似乎認(rèn)為，高盛的交易業(yè)務(wù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)遠(yuǎn)沒有像它自己說的那樣大幅下降。如果按高盛測(cè)算的日均風(fēng)險(xiǎn)價(jià)值，可能要290個(gè)交易日，高盛才會(huì)達(dá)到美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)預(yù)測(cè)的250億美元潛在損失。但美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的壓力測(cè)試預(yù)計(jì)這些損失大部分會(huì)在2013年底前發(fā)生；壓力測(cè)試衡量的是，如果去年10月至明年經(jīng)濟(jì)出現(xiàn)滑坡，各家銀行可能拿出的表現(xiàn)。它意味著，就算連續(xù)一年多每天損失8,600萬美元(高盛自測(cè)日損失上限)，它可能也要更多一些時(shí)間才能達(dá)到美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的損失目標(biāo)。

????相比之下，摩根士丹利如果采用2012年交易業(yè)務(wù)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)測(cè)算，達(dá)到美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的損失測(cè)算值可能需要160天多一點(diǎn)。花旗(Citigroup)達(dá)到測(cè)算的交易損失可能需要107天。

????實(shí)際情形當(dāng)然不會(huì)完全是這樣。即便是在眼下這輪金融危機(jī)期間，大多數(shù)公司也不是每天都在虧錢。長(zhǎng)期以來，華爾街分析師們對(duì)于這些交易損失測(cè)算值向來都是半信半疑。事實(shí)上，所謂的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)價(jià)值(VaR)指標(biāo)是華爾街最不受信賴的指標(biāo)之一。這說明了一些問題。大多數(shù)人相信VaR在下一場(chǎng)金融危機(jī)中可能激增。不過，壓力測(cè)試顯示，很多銀行，（特別是高盛）向股東們報(bào)告的這項(xiàng)主要風(fēng)險(xiǎn)指標(biāo)可能有多不靠譜。

????而且，高盛的VaR并不包括這家公司通過私募股權(quán)和債券基金投資的近40億美元長(zhǎng)期投資可能發(fā)生的任何損失。但即便所有這些投資化為烏有，它還需要再損失210億美元。而且，就連這個(gè)數(shù)字也需要244天。

????摩根士丹利分析師貝斯?格拉色克估計(jì)，高盛潛在的交易損失以及在壓力測(cè)試中總體表現(xiàn)糟糕可能導(dǎo)致這家公司將明年的股票回購(gòu)金額削減1/3至40億美元。如果周四下午美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)確實(shí)是這樣說的，投資者不應(yīng)為縮減股票回購(gòu)計(jì)劃而遺憾。他們或許想問的是，高盛以及華爾街究竟做出了多少改變。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????In the last year or so, Goldman Sachs executives have tried to portray their firm, often seen as a Wall Street swashbuckler, as a lot less risky than it used to be. The Federal Reserve appears not to be convinced.

????We'll get a better idea of what the Fed thinks on Thursday after the market closes, when the bank regulator releases the final results of its stress tests.

????The preliminary results suggest Goldman could lose $25 billion from bad trades in another financial crisis, more than any other bank tested by the Fed.

????Goldman's (GS) potential trading losses were more than double what the Fed saw possible at Goldman's closest rival, Morgan Stanley (MS). The Fed put Morgan's trading risk at just under $12 billion. Only JPMorgan Chase (JPM) came close. The Fed estimated that Jamie Dimon's bank could have $23.5 billion in losses.

????Goldman declined to comment on the stress tests. In the past, CEO Lloyd Blankfein has said that the firm closed its proprietary trading operations. Recently, both Blankfein and Goldman COO Gary Cohn have been warning about a bond bubble.

????In its recently filed annual report, Goldman said that in 2012 the amount it risked in the market -- i.e. the maximum amount it could lose -- on average per day was $86 million, down 60% from what it was back in 2009.

????But the Fed seems to think the risk in Goldman's trading book hasn't dropped nearly as much as the bank says. By Goldman's risk estimate it would take the firm 290 trading days to lose the nearly $25 billion that the Fed suggests it could in a downturn. But the bulk of the estimated trading losses in the Fed's stress test, which tracks how the banks would do in an economic downturn that hypothetically started last October and runs through next year, are expected to take place by the end of 2013. That leaves Goldman a few days shy of its ability to get to the Fed's dubious goal, even if it were to lose $86 million -- the maximum it says it could lose -- everyday for more than a year.

????Morgan Stanley, by comparison, would reach its Fed loss mark in just over 160 days based on its estimates of the risk its trading desk took in 2012. Citigroup (C) would get to its allotted trading loss in 107 days.

????This is of course not really how things would work. Even during the financial crisis most firms didn't lose money trading every single day. Wall Street analysts have long taken these estimates of how much a firm's trading desk could lose with a grain of salt. Behind the scenes the so-called value-at-risk measure is one of the least trusted on Wall Street. And that's saying something. Most people believe VARs would spike in another financial crisis. Still, the stress test points out just how far off the main figure of risk that banks, but Goldman in particular, reports to its shareholders must be.

????What's more, Goldman's VAR doesn't include any losses it could have on the nearly $4 billion in long-term investments the firm has made through its own private equity and debt funds. But even if all those investments went to zero, it would still have to lose another $21 billion. Even that amount would take 244 days.

????Morgan Stanley analyst Betsey Graseck estimates that Goldman's potential trading losses and its poor showing in general in the stress tests means the firm may be forced to cut the amount it was expected to spend in share buybacks next year by a third to $4 billion. If that is indeed what the Fed says on Thursday afternoon, investors should do more than mourn the lost buybacks. They may want to question just how much Goldman, and Wall Street in general, has really changed.