| 研究生: |
林國龍 Lin, Kuo-Long |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
共同基金評等持續性之探討-以晨星評等為例 A Study of Rating Persistence for Mutual Fund -Evidence from Morningstar Ratings |
| 指導教授: |
顏盟峯
Yen, Meng-Feng |
| 學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
| 系所名稱: |
管理學院 - 高階管理碩士在職專班(EMBA) Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA) |
| 論文出版年: | 2015 |
| 畢業學年度: | 103 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 32 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 評等機構 、晨星評等 、評等持續性 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | mutual fund, Morningstar ratings, rating persistence |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:134 下載:0 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
基金評等眾多的國際機構中,常見最具權威性者約有理柏(Lipper)、晨星(Morningstar)與標準普爾公司(S&P)數家。這些評等機構的評級,投資者一定程度作為投資參考,投信公司發行基金或金融保險機構進行投資組合包裝,也都會將基金評級列為參考要項,基金評級之重要不言可喻!本研究以晨星公司2004年11月30日至2014年12月31日間,在台灣地區上架,包括該期間仍存在或曾經存在但已消滅之各類基金評級為資料,進行分類研究,探究的目標為這些評級究竟是否具有持續性。研究採用Fama-Macbeth迴歸方法,將資料分成不分類、股票型、債券型三組,分別再區分為一個月、三個月、六個月及十二個月滾動,各自分成數組為應變數,與三年、五年、十年及總回報評等(自變數)進行橫斷面迴歸,並以貝它P-value驗證迴歸的斜率估計值是否顯著。另外也檢驗調整後R平方看是否具有解釋力,同時進行皮爾森相關係數檢驗,以驗證兩者有無正相關。研究結論顯示不論是何種組別,所有的結論都指向具有極高的顯著性且呈正相關,而調整後R平方也趨近於1,故具有很高解釋力;換言之,晨星評等具有持續性。此結論或可說明晨星評等為何會成為投信公司發基金重要參考其原因。
This paper explores whether Morningstar ratings are persistent or not. Our data is provided by the research department of Franklin Templeton Investments company. Sample period is from 2004/12/31 to 2014/11/30. According to the literature, we mainly use two methods to test rating persistence for mutual funds according to the category. One is the Fama-MacBeth cross-sectional regression, the other is based on the Pearson correlation coefficient. We find that the ratings of fixed-income funds tend to show persistence based on historical returns of the precedent 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, and a mixed window of these three evaluation periods.
1. Ahmad, R. A., Mohd, Z. M., Zakiah, H., Siti S. A. and Razman, H. R. (2013) Investor's fortune and the role of Lipper in determining unit trusts performance differential, Proceedings of The 2nd Applied International Business Conference, University Malaysia Sabah, Kota. Kinabalu, Sabah
2. Blake, C. R. and Morey, M. R. (2000) Morningstar ratings and mutual fund performance. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 35(3), 451–483.
3. Brown, S. J. and Goetzmann, W. N. (1995) “Performance Persistence,” Journal of Finance 50, 679-698.
4. Carhart, M. M. (1997) On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 57–82
5. Chen, Y.-T. (2010) A Study on the Performance Persistence of Socially Responsible Mutual Funds. National Cheng Kung University, Graduate Institute of Finance, Master Thesis
6. Del Guercio, D. and Tkac, P. A. (2008) Star power: The effect of Morningstar ratings on mutual fund flows. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 43(4), 907–936.
7. Füss, R., Hille, J., Rindler, P., Schmidt, J. and Schmidt, M. (2010) From rising stars and falling angels: On the relationship between the performance and ratings of German mutual funds. The Journal of Wealth Management, 13(1), 75–90.
8. Gerrans, P. (2004) Australian managed fund ratings and individual investors. Australian Journal of Management, 29(1), 87–107.
9. Gerrans, P. (2006) Morningstar ratings and future performance. Accounting and Finance, 46(4), 605–628.
10. Jensen, M. C. (1968) The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945-1964. Journal of Finance, 23(1), 389–416.
11. Khorana, A. and Nelling, E. (1998) The determinants and predictive ability of mutual fund ratings. Journal of Investing, 7(3), 61–66.
12. Loviscek, A. L. and Jordan, W. J (2000) Stock selection based on Morningstar’s ten-year, five-star general equity mutual funds. Financial Services Review, 9(2), 145–158.
13. Morey, M. R (2002) Rating the raters: An investigation into mutual fund rating services. Journal of Investment Consulting, 5(2), 30–50.
14. Morey, M. R. (2005) The kiss of death: A 5-star Morningstar mutual fund rating? Journal of Investment Management, 3(2), 41–52.
15. Morey, M. R. and Gottesman, A. A. (2006) Morningstar mutual fund ratings redux. The Journal of Investment Consulting, 8(1), 25–37.
16. Sawicki, J. and Thomson, K (2000) An investigation into the performance of recommended funds: do the managed funds ‘approved’ by research companies outperform the non gratae, Advances in Pacific Basin Financial Markets, 6, 101–124.
17. Treynor, J. L. (1965) How to Rate Management of Investment Funds. Harvard Business Review, 43, 63-75
18. 陳昱廷,“社會責任共同基金績效持續性之研究”,碩士論文,國立成功大學財務金融研究所(2000)
19. 黃純蘭, “台灣國內/外基金評等方法之探討”,碩士論文,義守大學資訊管理研究所(2007)
20. 黃鴻文, “共同基金績效評估方法—文獻探討與食證主題研究”,碩士論文政治大學國際貿易系研究所(1999)
21. 孔秀琴、李玫郁、蔡永聰, “擇時、四四三三法則與貝它避險策略下基金之績效分析—短期效率市場之驗證” ,台灣銀行臺灣銀行季刊第六十二卷第一期(1995)
22. 網頁“ http://tw.morningstar.com/ap/main/default.aspx”晨星網頁
23. 網頁“ http://lipperleaders.com/”理柏網頁
校內:2025-12-31公開