為使投資組合績效評估的考量因素更完善，令評估結果更具參考力，本研究欲探究扣除交易成本後，投資標的類型是否會影響基金績效評估結果，進而改變基金投資策略的選擇。
本研究以夏普指數為基金績效評估模型，以國內2015年至2019年間的股票型基金及指數股票型基金為研究對象，探討基金交易成本與績效的關聯，及採用被動式、主動式投資策略的不同類型基金之績效優劣。
實證發現，基金的交易成本與績效的關聯甚微，扣除交易成本後，採用被動式投資策略的基金績效表現較採用主動式投資策略的基金優異，但兩者之績效優劣比較結果，仍會因科技型、價值型、一般型、中小型等投資標的類型而有差異。本研究結果顯示評估投資組合績效時需有適當的比較基準，亦需考量交易成本，以及在金融市場有效率運作時，投資人透過被動式投資策略，較可能長期並穩定的獲利。

In order to improve the considerations of portfolio performance evaluation and increase the reference value of the evaluation results, the purpose of this research is to explore whether the fund performance evaluation results will be affected by the type of investment objectives after deducting transaction costs, and change the investment strategy of the fund.
In order to explore the relationship between fund transaction costs and performance, this study uses the Sharpe Index as the fund performance evaluation model, and takes Equity Funds and Exchange Traded Funds (ETF) from 2015 to 2019 as the research objects. Then compare the performance results of various types of funds with passive investment strategies and funds with active investment strategies.
The empirical results show that the transaction cost and performance of the fund have only a low degree of correlation. After deducting transaction costs, the fund performance of the passive investment strategy is better than that of the active investment strategy. In addition, differences in the types of investment objectives such as technology, value, general and small-and-mid types will also cause differences in fund performance.
The results of this study indicate that when evaluating the performance of the investment portfolio, appropriate benchmarks and transaction costs need to be established. When the financial market is efficient, investors are more likely to obtain long-term and stable profits through passive investment strategies.

一、中文文獻
1.甘宸鍏. (2018). 標竿企業資訊內涵及投資價值之研究-以台灣上市公司為例.
2.吳怡瑩. (2017). 美國重大金融事件對股票市場之影響: 德國與臺灣之比較. 中興大學應用經濟學系所學位論文(2017 年), 1-40.
3.呂依穎. (2018). 基金特徵對基金績效的影響-以台灣開放型股票基金實證. 臺灣大學國際企業學研究所學位論文, 1-52.
4.周賓凰, 池祥萱, 周冠男, & 龔怡霖. (2019). 行為財務學: 文獻回顧與展望. 證券市場發展季刊: 行為財務學特別專刊, 1.
5.杭君怡. (2018). 台灣股市效率再檢定-以大立光, 宏達電為例. 臺灣大學經濟學研究所學位論文, 1-48.
6.林孝貞. (2016). 中國股票市場效率檢定.
7.林佳靜. (2004). 日本股票型基金與指數型基金之分析. 台灣金融財務季刊, 5(3), 143-158.
8.林震岩. (2007). 多變量分析: SPSS 的操作與應用. 台北: 智勝.
9.邱皓政, & 林碧芳. (2017). 統計學: 原理與應用, 台北: 五南圖書出版股份有限公司.
10.邱顯比. (2010). 基金理財的六堂課, 台北: 天下文化.
11.唐群雅. (2011). 台灣開放型股票基金績效與特性分析.
12.徐中琦. (2007). 投資學，台中市：滄海書局.
13.張儷馨. (2011). 基金績效實證研究及其相關特性因素之探討.
14.陳美慧. (2019). 主動式基金與被動式基金投資績效差異之比較研究. 國立臺北大學國際財務金融碩士在職專班碩士論文.
15.陳韋欣. (2012). 共同基金特性與規模效果之關係. 中正大學財務金融學系學位論文, 1-63.
16.陳軒逸. (2019). 主動式基金與美國先鋒集團指數股票型基金(ETF)長期持有下交易成本與績效差異之研究-以投資美國市場為例. 國立中山大學管理學院高階經營碩士學程在職專班碩士論文.
17.彭冠璋. (2014). 台灣存託憑證之市場效率性.
18.曾家琪, & 蔡璧徽. (2016). 台灣上市公司營收預期宣告與股價反應分析.
19.黃心怡. (2018). 投資風格轉移與基金管理之探討. 財金論文叢刊(29), 1-13.
20.詹世澤. (2013). 基金費用率對基金績效之關聯性分析. 臺北大學國際財務金融碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-61.
21.練有為, & 鄭素珍. (2012). 效率市場假說再審視: 台灣期貨市場個案研究 (2004-2011). 大漢學報(26), 55-77.
22.鄭伊真. (2012). 基金特性對基金績效在不同股市波動下之非線性探討. 淡江大學財務金融學系碩士班學位論文(2012 年), 1-67.
23.盧秋玲, 張清發, & 沈仰斌. (2017). 積極比例是否解釋台灣共同基金績效? 證券市場發展季刊, 29(3), 1-37.
24.謝劍平. (2018). 投資學：基本原理與實務，台北市：智勝文化事業有限公司.
25.鍾紹熙, & 邱暢輝. (2013). 指數股票型基金與共同基金交易成本及績效之研究.
26.闕河士, 菅瑞昌, 方怡, & 劉怡欣. (2011). 基金管理策略對績效之影響. 管理與資訊學報 16.
27.顏嘉佑. (2018). 探討共同基金績效與基金持股特性之關聯性-以臺灣股票型基金為例. 成功大學財務金融研究所碩士在職專班學位論文, 1-25.
二、英文文獻
1.Bogle, J. C. (2002). An index fund fundamentalist. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 28(3), 31-38.
2.Carhart, M. M. (1997). On persistence in mutual fund performance. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 57-82.
3.De Bondt, W. F., & Thaler, R. (1985). Does the stock market overreact? The Journal of Finance, 40(3), 793-805.
4.Droms, W. G., & Walker, D. A. (1995). Determinants of variation in mutual fund returns. Applied Financial Economics, 5(6), 383-389.
5.Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417.
6.Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1993). Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics.
7.Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1977). Knowing with certainty: The appropriateness of extreme confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3(4), 552.
8.Haslem, J. A., Baker, H. K., & Smith, D. M. (2008). Performance and characteristics of actively managed retail equity mutual funds with diverse expense ratios. Available at SSRN 1128983.
9.Ippolito, R. A. (1989). Efficiency with costly information: A study of mutual fund performance, 1965–1984. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 104(1), 1-23.
10.Jagannathan, R., & Wang, Z. (1996). The conditional CAPM and the cross‐section of expected returns. The Journal of Finance, 51(1), 3-53.
11.Jensen, M. C. (1968). The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945-1964. The Journal of Finance, 23(2), 389-416.
12.Jensen, M. C., Black, F., & Scholes, M. S. (1972). The capital asset pricing model: Some empirical tests.
13.Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2013). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Handbook of The Fundamentals of Financial Decision Making: Part I (pp. 99-127).
14.Kosowski, R., Timmermann, A., Wermers, R., & White, H. (2006). Can mutual fund “stars” really pick stocks? New evidence from a bootstrap analysis. The Journal of Finance, 61(6), 2551-2595.
15.Li, X., & Xu, J. (2002). A note on New Zealand stock market efficiency. Applied Economics Letters, 9(13), 879-883.
16.Malkiel, B. G. (2005). Reflections on the efficient market hypothesis: 30 years later. Financial Review, 40(1), 1-9.
17.Markowitz, H. (1959). Portfolio selection. Investment Under Uncertainty.
18.Petajisto, A. (2013). Active share and mutual fund performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 69(4), 73-93.
19.Prather, L., Bertin, W. J., & Henker, T. (2004). Mutual fund characteristics, managerial attributes, and fund performance. Review of Financial Economics, 13(4), 305-326.
20.Ross, S. (1976). The Arbitrage Theory of Capital Asset Pricing, Journal of Economics Theory, Dec.
21.Sharpe, W. F. (1963). A simplified model for portfolio analysis. Management Science, 9(2), 277-293.
22.Sharpe, W. F. (1966). Mutual fund performance. The Journal of Business, 39(1), 119-138.
23.Shleifer, A. (2000). Inefficient Markets: An Introduction to Behavioural Finance: OUP Oxford.
24.Shleifer, A., & Summers, L. H. (1990). The noise trader approach to finance. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4(2), 19-33.
25.Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). The limits of arbitrage. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 35-55.
26.Treynor, J., & Mazuy, K. (1966). Can mutual funds outguess the market. Harvard Business Review, 44(4), 131-136.
27.Volkman, D. A., & Wohar, M. E. (1995). Determinants of persistence in relative performance of mutual funds. Journal of Financial Research, 18(4), 415-430.
28.Wermers, R. (2000). Mutual fund performance: An empirical decomposition into stock‐picking talent, style, transactions costs, and expenses. The Journal of Finance, 55(4), 1655-1695.