臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近來由於Stern Stewart & Co.極力提倡經濟附加價值(EVA®)的概念後，EVA已陸續有公司採用，而學界也在進行相關研究。EVA為剩餘利潤（RI）的修正，其將會計數字所受到的扭曲(distortion)加以調整而後計算之。該公司宣稱經濟附加價值不但可做為內部管理用的績效衡量指標，亦可做為外部報導之財務衡量指標，其認為EVA是唯一與公司內在市場價值（intrinsic market value）直接相關的衡量指標，並且是驅使股價上漲的動力。
本研究根據上述該公司之宣稱，主要探討在解釋當期股票報酬、預測未來股票報酬時，四個衡量指標：非常項目前利益(Earnings before Extraordinary Items, EBEI)，來自營運之現金流量(CFO)，剩餘利潤及經濟附加價值哪一個較為攸關，以及拆解成五要素(CFO、Accrual、ATInt、Capchg、Adj)後，各要素是否提供增額資訊內涵；並將公司依照不同特性區分後，檢視四指標攸關程度有無變化。實証結果彙總如下：
（一） 解釋當期股票報酬模型：
1. 攸關資訊內涵：
其中以EBEI最優，其次依序為EVA、RI、CFO。
2. 增額資訊內涵：
其中以Accrual、CFO增額資訊內涵較大，其他三者增額資訊內涵較有限。
（二） 預測未來股票報酬模型：
1. 攸關資訊內涵：
其中仍以EBEI最優，其次依序為EVA、RI、CFO。
2. 增額資訊內涵：
其中以CFO提供最多增額資訊內涵，其他要素提供較有限的增額資訊內涵且在統計量上並不顯著。
（三） 依公司特性區分：
1. 高資本密集度組在有區分指標正負值方法時，EBEI、RI、EVA三者解釋能力相當，CFO最小。而低資本密集度組則和所有樣本的排序結果相同。
2. 小β值組在有區分指標正負值方法時，EBEI、RI、EVA三者解釋能力互有領先，CFO依然最小。而大β值組則和所有樣本的排序結果相同。
3. 小規模組的RI超越EVA，但是差異十分小，形成EBEI>RI>EVA>CFO的排序。而大規模組則和所有樣本的排序結果相同。
4. 其他依照成長性、無形投資比重、財務結構、獎酬制度區分特性時，其結果和所有樣本的排序結果相同。

More recently, due to the advocacy by the Stern Stewart & Company, economic value added (EVA®) has been increasingly used by firms and studied among academics. EVA, which is a variant of residual income, adjusts the distortions caused by accounting numbers. Stern Stewart & Company claims that EVA can be used as an internal and external performance measure. It also claims that EVA is the only performance measure to tie directly to the intrinsic market value and that it is the fuel that drives the stock market value up.
According to the claims cited above, this study provides empirical evidence on which of the four performance measures, EBEI, CFO, RI and EVA, has more relative information content in explaining contemporaneous stock return and forecasting future stock return. I also examine whether components of EVA provide incremental information content in explaining contemporaneous stock return and forecasting future stock return. Third, I divide all samples into different subgroups by specific features to examine whether the results differ from those of the pooled cross-sectional analysis. The empirical results are as follows:
1. Explaining contemporaneous stock return
‧ Relative information content
The results show EBEI has the highest Adjusted R2 followed by EVA, RI and CFO.
‧ Incremental information content
Accrual and CFO provide more incremental information content among five components, while the others have limited incremental contribution.
2. Forecasting future stock return
‧ Relative information content
The ranking is the same as that of the contemporaneous stock return model.
‧ Incremental information content
CFO has the highest incremental information content among five components. The others provide limited incremental contributions and are insignificant statistically.
3. Subsample analysis
‧ The adjusted R2 of the EBEI model is similar to those of the RI and EVA models in the high capital intensive subset when the performance measure is divided into positive and negative values.
‧ The adjusted R2 of the EBEI model is similar to those of the RI and EVA models in the smallβvalue subset when the performance measure is divided into positive and negative values.
‧ In the small firm size subset, the adjusted R2 of the EBEI model dominates that of the RI model, RI slightly outperforms EVA, and all three are better than CFO.
‧ The ranking of the other subsets remains identical to that of the pooled cross-sectional analysis.

第一章 緒論
第一節 研究動機‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 1
第二節 研究目的‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 2
第三節 研究架構‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 3
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 經濟價值與公司評價之探討‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 6
第二節 經濟附加價值之探討‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧10
第三節 實証研究文獻探討‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧16
第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究假說‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧22
第二節 研究變數之定義‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧24
第三節 資料分析方式‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧28
第四節 樣本選取與資料來源‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧36
第四章 實証分析─Pooled Cross-Sectional Analysis
第一節 敘述統計分析‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧37
第二節 解釋當期股票報酬模型‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧39
第三節 預測未來股票報酬模型‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧45
第五章 實証分析─依公司特性分析
第一節 依成長性區分‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧53
第二節 依資本密集度區分‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧55
第三節 依公司規模區分‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧57
第四節 依無形投資比重區分‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧58
第五節 依風險大小區分‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧60
第六節 依財務結構區分‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧61
第七節 依獎酬制度區分‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧62
第六章 結論與建議
第一節 研究結論‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧65
第二節 研究限制‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧67
第三節 研究建議‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧67
參考文獻‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧69

中文部分
張素鈴，民國八十八年，公司評價新趨勢-EVA(經濟附加價值)在台灣應用的可行性，中央財管所未出版碩士論文
張耿豪，民國八十八年，經濟附加價值資訊內涵之研究--以台灣上市公司為例，交大科管所未出版碩士論文
黃正誠，民國八十八年，負盈餘研究--以資訊觀點與衡量觀點分析，台大會計所未出版碩士論文
英文部分
Bacidore, Jeffrey M., John A. Boquist, Todd T. Milbourn, and Anjan V. Thakor., 1997. “The search for the best financial performance measure,” Financial Analysts Journal 53 (May):11-20
Ball, R. and P. Brown., 1968. “An empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers,” Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 663-681
Bao, Ben-Hsien and Da-Hsien Bao., 1998. “Usefulness of value added and abnormal economic earnings: An empirical examination,” Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 25 (January /March):253-263
Beaver, W. H. 1981., Financial Reporting: An Accounting Revolution. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Biddle, G., Seow, G., and Siegel, A., 1995. “Relative versus incremental information content,” Contemporary Accounting Research 12:1-23
Biddle, Gary C., Robert M. Bowen, and James S. Wallace., 1997. “Does EVA® beat earnings? Evidence on associations with stock returns and firm values,” Journal of Accounting and Economics 24:301-336
Biddle, Gary C., Robert M. Bowen, and James S. Wallace., 1999. “Evidence on EVA®,” Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 12 (Summer) ：69-79
Chen, Shimin and James L. Dodd., 1997a. “Usefulness of operating income, residual income, and EVA: Value-relevance perspective,” working paper (Novenber)
Chen, Shimin and James L. Dodd., 1997b. “Economic value added (EVA™): An empirical examination of a new corporate performance measure,” Journal of Managerial Issues 9 (Fall):318-333
Dierks, Paul A. and Ajay Patel., 1997. “What is EVA, and how can it help your company?,” Management Accounting 79 (November):52-58
Dodd, James L. and Jason Johns., 1999. “EVA reconsidered,” Business & Economic Review 45(April-June):13-18
Garstka, Stanley J. and William N. Goetzmann., 1999. “The development of corporate performance measures: Benchmarks before EVA,” Working Paper (September)
Mills Roger, Sean Rowbotham and John Robertson., 1998. “Using economic profit in assessing business performance,” Management Accounting 76 (November):34-38
O’Byrne, Stepben F. 1996., “EVA® and market value,” Journal of applied corporate finance 9 (Spring):116-125
O''''Hanlon, John and Ken V. Peasnell., 1998. “Wall Street''''s Contribution to Management Accounting: The Stern Stewart EVA Financial Management System,” Management Accounting Research 9 (December):421-444
Ohlson, J., 1995. “Earnings, book value, and dividends in security valuation,” Contemporary Accounting Research 11:661-687
Stern, Joel M., G. Bennett Stewart III and Donald H. Chew, Jr., 1996. “EVA®: An integrated financial management system,” European Financial Management 2:223-245
Stewart, III G. Bennett., 1994. “EVA™: Fact and fantasy,” Journal of applied corporate finance 7 (Summer):71-84
Stewart, III G. Bennett., 1999. The Quest for Value: A Guide for Senior Managers, NY: Harper Business
Velez-Pareja, Ignacio., 1999. “Value Creation and its Measurement: A Critical Look at EVA,” http://www.ssrn.com (August)
Wallace, James S., 1997. “Adopting residual income-based compensation plans : Do you get what you pay for ? ,” Journal of Accounting and Economics 24:275-300
Watts, R., and J. Zimmerman., 1986. Positive Accounting Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Young, S. David., 1999. “Some reflections on accounting adjustments and economic value added,” Journal of Financial Statement Analysis 4 (Winter):7-19