學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 建立基金與ETF最適資產配置:基金績效指標與投資組合理論之應用
Using Performance and Portfolio Theory to Construct The Optimal Asset Allocation In Mutual Fund and ETF
作者 江宛庭
Chiang, Wan-Ting
貢獻者 黃泓智
Huang, Hong-Chih
江宛庭
Chiang, Wan-Ting
關鍵詞 共同基金
績效指標
投資組合理論
MV模型
ETF
日期 2018
上傳時間 2-八月-2018 16:20:58 (UTC+8)
摘要 本論文第一階段透過 29 項績效指標,設立兩道關卡之因子比例交集法,篩出資產,第二階段排序近一個月累積報酬率,依據投資人之基金規模需求,選出 5、10 或 30 檔基金進入投資組合,最後利用 Harry Markowitz 提出之 MV 模型進行資產配置,根據不同投資標的(基金或 ETF)、不同投資組合更換頻率(一個月、半年或一年)、不同基金規模(5 檔、10 檔或 30 檔),提供各 10 組資產配置策略,及其績效表現,並且與等權重投資組合進行比較。
     由實證結果可以發現,在相同篩選條件下,即相同因子及相同比例,利用MV 模型配置之投資組合,相較於等權重投資組合都有明顯之績效成長。由此證明了,Harry Markowitz 投資組合理論為有效之模型,能準確配置資產,且達到風險分散與績效提升之效果。
     另外,從基金之實證結果可看出,Martin ratio 為重要之績效指標,而從ETF 之實證結果可看出 CAPM beta 為重要之績效指標。
參考文獻 中文文獻:
     1.邱顯比、林清珮,1999。共同基金分類與基金績效持續性之研究。
     2.王佳真、徐辜元宏,2003。風險值的應用與台灣共同基金績效指標之持續性。
     3.徐清俊、姜志堅,2003。基金績效持續性與基金類型之相關性研究。
     4.傅澤偉、江俊忠,2009。運用風險值於不同類型基金績效與持續性之評估。
     5.劉永欽、陳香如、李翊萱,2012。國內共同基金淨值與未來績效及其持續性之關係。
     6.林明德,2012。以投資績效評估指標探討基金的篩選方式與策略。
     7.賴柏成,2013。以財務報表資訊與 Copula-GARCH 模型建構投資組合-應用在台灣股票市場。
     8.袁淑芳、曾琪雯,2014。國內指數型股票基金的淨值與操作績效、績效持續性之關係分析。
     9.邱宇惠,2016。台灣股票型基金績效評估排名相關性與持續性之研究。
     10.蕭鈞銓,2016。以基本面分析建構最適資產配置流程。
     11.于孟玉,2017。以基本面與投資組合理論建構台灣股票市場最適資產配置。
     英文文獻:
     1.Acar, E. & James, S. (1997). Maximum loss and maximum drawdown in financial market. Proceedings of International Conference on Forecasting Financial Markets, London, UK.
     2.Brown, S. J. & Goetzmann, W. N. (1995). Performance persistence. Journal of finance, 679-698.
     3.Brianton, G. (1998). Portfolio optimization. Risk Management and Financial Derivatives: A Guide to the Mathematics, 1st edition, Palgrave (trade), 4, 39-44.
     4.Carison, R. S. (1970). Aggregate Performance of Mutual Funds. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 5, 1-32.
     5.Clark, R. G., and Harindra de S. (1998). State-Dependent Asset Allocation. Journal of Portfolio Management, Winter.
     6.Chekhlov, A., Uryasev, S. & Zabarankin, M. (2005). Drawdown measure in portfolio optimization. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, 8(1), 13-58.
     7.Dowd, K. (2000). Adjusting for risk: An improved Sharpe ratio. International review of economics & finance, 9(3), 209-222.
     8.Eun C., Kolodny R. and Resnick B. (1991). U.S-based International Mutual Funds: A Performance Evaluation. Journal of Portfolio Management, 88-94.
     9.Eling, M. & Schuhmacher, F. (2007). Does the choice of performance measure influence the evaluation of hedge funds?. Journal of Banking and Finance, 31(9), 2632-2647.
     10.Eling, M. (2008). Does the measure matter in the mutual fund industry?. Financial Analysts Journal, 64(3), 54-66.
     11.Fabozzi, F. J. & Francis, J. C. (1977). Stability tests for alphas and betas over bull and bear market conditions. The Journal of Finance, 32(4), 1093-1099.
     12.Favre, L. & Galeano, J. A. (2002). Mean-modified value-at-risk optimization with hedge funds. The Journal of Alternative Investments, 5(2), 21-25.
     13.Grubel, H. G. (1968). Internationally diversified portfolios: welfare gains and capital flows. The American Economic Review, 58(5), 1299-1314
     14.Grinblatt, M. & Titman, S. (1992). The persistence of mutual fund performance. The Journal of Finance, 47(5), 1977-1984.
     15.Gregoriou, G. N. & Gueyie, J. P. (2003). Risk-adjusted performance of funds of hedge funds using a modified Sharpe ratio. The Journal of wealth management, 6(3), 77-83.
     16.Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77-91.
     17.Jensen, M. J. (1968). The performance of mutual fund in the period 1945-1964. Journal of Finance, 23, 389-416.
     18.Kahneman, D.,Tversky, A.(1979).Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk.Econometrica,47,263-291.
     19.Levy, H. and M. Sarnat (1970),“International diversification of investment portfolios,” American Economic Review, 60,4, 668-675.
     20.Li, D., & Ng, W. L. (2000). Optimal dynamic portfolio selection: Multiperiod mean-variance formulation. Mathematical Finance, 10(3), 387-406.
     21.Levy, H. and Lerman, Z. (1988). The Benefits of International Diversification in Bonds. Financial Analysis Journal, Vol. 44(5), 56-64.
     22.Pflug, G. C. (2000). Some remarks on the value-at-risk and the conditional value-at-risk. Probabilistic constrained optimization, 272-281.
     23.Siegel, J. (1991). Does it pay stock investors to forecast the business cycle. Journal of Portfolio Management, Vol. 18, 27-31.
     24.Sharpe, W. F. (1966). Mutual fund performance. Journal of Business, 39, 119- 138.
     25.Shadwick, W. F. & Keating, C. (2002). A universal performance measure. Journal of Performance Measuremen, 6(3), 59–84.
     26.Treynor, J. L. (1965). How to rate management of investment funds. Harvard Business Review, 43(1), 63–75.
     27.Zakamouline, V. (2009). The Choice of Performance Measure Does Influence the Evaluation of Hedge Funds.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
風險管理與保險學系
105358009
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105358009
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 黃泓智zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Huang, Hong-Chihen_US
dc.contributor.author (作者) 江宛庭zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) Chiang, Wan-Tingen_US
dc.creator (作者) 江宛庭zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Chiang, Wan-Tingen_US
dc.date (日期) 2018en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2-八月-2018 16:20:58 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 2-八月-2018 16:20:58 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-八月-2018 16:20:58 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0105358009en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/119158-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 風險管理與保險學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 105358009zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本論文第一階段透過 29 項績效指標,設立兩道關卡之因子比例交集法,篩出資產,第二階段排序近一個月累積報酬率,依據投資人之基金規模需求,選出 5、10 或 30 檔基金進入投資組合,最後利用 Harry Markowitz 提出之 MV 模型進行資產配置,根據不同投資標的(基金或 ETF)、不同投資組合更換頻率(一個月、半年或一年)、不同基金規模(5 檔、10 檔或 30 檔),提供各 10 組資產配置策略,及其績效表現,並且與等權重投資組合進行比較。
     由實證結果可以發現,在相同篩選條件下,即相同因子及相同比例,利用MV 模型配置之投資組合,相較於等權重投資組合都有明顯之績效成長。由此證明了,Harry Markowitz 投資組合理論為有效之模型,能準確配置資產,且達到風險分散與績效提升之效果。
     另外,從基金之實證結果可看出,Martin ratio 為重要之績效指標,而從ETF 之實證結果可看出 CAPM beta 為重要之績效指標。
zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1
     第一節 研究動機與研究背景 1
     第二節 研究目的 4
     第三節 研究流程 5
     第二章 文獻探討 7
     第一節 基金績效指標文獻探討 7
     第二節 投資組合理論文獻探討 8
     第三章 研究方法 11
     第一節 前言 11
     第二節 因子比例交集法介紹 12
     第三節 基金績效指標介紹 13
     第四節 投資組合理論介紹 25
     第四章 實證結果分析 29
     第一節 實證分析樣本來源 29
     第二節 回測績效指標說明 29
     第三節 投資組合績效分析 31
     第五章 結論與未來方向建議 49
     第一節 結論 49
     第二節 未來方向建議 49
     參考文獻 50
zh_TW
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105358009en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 共同基金zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 績效指標zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 投資組合理論zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) MV模型zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) ETFen_US
dc.title (題名) 建立基金與ETF最適資產配置:基金績效指標與投資組合理論之應用zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Using Performance and Portfolio Theory to Construct The Optimal Asset Allocation In Mutual Fund and ETFen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文文獻:
     1.邱顯比、林清珮,1999。共同基金分類與基金績效持續性之研究。
     2.王佳真、徐辜元宏,2003。風險值的應用與台灣共同基金績效指標之持續性。
     3.徐清俊、姜志堅,2003。基金績效持續性與基金類型之相關性研究。
     4.傅澤偉、江俊忠,2009。運用風險值於不同類型基金績效與持續性之評估。
     5.劉永欽、陳香如、李翊萱,2012。國內共同基金淨值與未來績效及其持續性之關係。
     6.林明德,2012。以投資績效評估指標探討基金的篩選方式與策略。
     7.賴柏成,2013。以財務報表資訊與 Copula-GARCH 模型建構投資組合-應用在台灣股票市場。
     8.袁淑芳、曾琪雯,2014。國內指數型股票基金的淨值與操作績效、績效持續性之關係分析。
     9.邱宇惠,2016。台灣股票型基金績效評估排名相關性與持續性之研究。
     10.蕭鈞銓,2016。以基本面分析建構最適資產配置流程。
     11.于孟玉,2017。以基本面與投資組合理論建構台灣股票市場最適資產配置。
     英文文獻:
     1.Acar, E. & James, S. (1997). Maximum loss and maximum drawdown in financial market. Proceedings of International Conference on Forecasting Financial Markets, London, UK.
     2.Brown, S. J. & Goetzmann, W. N. (1995). Performance persistence. Journal of finance, 679-698.
     3.Brianton, G. (1998). Portfolio optimization. Risk Management and Financial Derivatives: A Guide to the Mathematics, 1st edition, Palgrave (trade), 4, 39-44.
     4.Carison, R. S. (1970). Aggregate Performance of Mutual Funds. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 5, 1-32.
     5.Clark, R. G., and Harindra de S. (1998). State-Dependent Asset Allocation. Journal of Portfolio Management, Winter.
     6.Chekhlov, A., Uryasev, S. & Zabarankin, M. (2005). Drawdown measure in portfolio optimization. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, 8(1), 13-58.
     7.Dowd, K. (2000). Adjusting for risk: An improved Sharpe ratio. International review of economics & finance, 9(3), 209-222.
     8.Eun C., Kolodny R. and Resnick B. (1991). U.S-based International Mutual Funds: A Performance Evaluation. Journal of Portfolio Management, 88-94.
     9.Eling, M. & Schuhmacher, F. (2007). Does the choice of performance measure influence the evaluation of hedge funds?. Journal of Banking and Finance, 31(9), 2632-2647.
     10.Eling, M. (2008). Does the measure matter in the mutual fund industry?. Financial Analysts Journal, 64(3), 54-66.
     11.Fabozzi, F. J. & Francis, J. C. (1977). Stability tests for alphas and betas over bull and bear market conditions. The Journal of Finance, 32(4), 1093-1099.
     12.Favre, L. & Galeano, J. A. (2002). Mean-modified value-at-risk optimization with hedge funds. The Journal of Alternative Investments, 5(2), 21-25.
     13.Grubel, H. G. (1968). Internationally diversified portfolios: welfare gains and capital flows. The American Economic Review, 58(5), 1299-1314
     14.Grinblatt, M. & Titman, S. (1992). The persistence of mutual fund performance. The Journal of Finance, 47(5), 1977-1984.
     15.Gregoriou, G. N. & Gueyie, J. P. (2003). Risk-adjusted performance of funds of hedge funds using a modified Sharpe ratio. The Journal of wealth management, 6(3), 77-83.
     16.Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77-91.
     17.Jensen, M. J. (1968). The performance of mutual fund in the period 1945-1964. Journal of Finance, 23, 389-416.
     18.Kahneman, D.,Tversky, A.(1979).Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk.Econometrica,47,263-291.
     19.Levy, H. and M. Sarnat (1970),“International diversification of investment portfolios,” American Economic Review, 60,4, 668-675.
     20.Li, D., & Ng, W. L. (2000). Optimal dynamic portfolio selection: Multiperiod mean-variance formulation. Mathematical Finance, 10(3), 387-406.
     21.Levy, H. and Lerman, Z. (1988). The Benefits of International Diversification in Bonds. Financial Analysis Journal, Vol. 44(5), 56-64.
     22.Pflug, G. C. (2000). Some remarks on the value-at-risk and the conditional value-at-risk. Probabilistic constrained optimization, 272-281.
     23.Siegel, J. (1991). Does it pay stock investors to forecast the business cycle. Journal of Portfolio Management, Vol. 18, 27-31.
     24.Sharpe, W. F. (1966). Mutual fund performance. Journal of Business, 39, 119- 138.
     25.Shadwick, W. F. & Keating, C. (2002). A universal performance measure. Journal of Performance Measuremen, 6(3), 59–84.
     26.Treynor, J. L. (1965). How to rate management of investment funds. Harvard Business Review, 43(1), 63–75.
     27.Zakamouline, V. (2009). The Choice of Performance Measure Does Influence the Evaluation of Hedge Funds.
zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/THE.NCCU.RMI.006.2018.F08-