臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究使用四階段資料包絡分析法分析2006年到2010年六十家台灣地區共同基金的效率。除了基金本身所具有的特質外，基金經理人的特質亦會影響基金的效率。本研究之模型係採用基金年報酬率為產出變數，基金費用率和基金淨值之年化標準差兩個投入變數。在第一階段使用DEA模型估計各基金之效率。第二階段透過Tobit複回歸模型來估計各種環境變數，是否會對理論投入值與實際投入值所產生的差額數值產生顯著性的影響。第三階段使用在第二階段中所得到的估計參數來調整總投入差額。最後一個階段利用經過調整後之投入值計算基金之效率值。在本研究結果顯示，女性經理人較男性經理人的績效表現好，資歷長的基金經理人所操作的基金績效並不會比資歷短的經理人來得好。

This thesis applies a four-stage data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach proposed by Fried et al. (1999), in order to study the operational environment-adjusted efficiency of sixty mutual funds in Taiwan from 2006 to 2010. In addition to the characteristics of funds, the characteristics of managers also significantly affect performance of mutual funds. There are one output (actual annual return) and two inputs (expense ratio and standard deviation) in the variable-returns-to-scale (VRS) DEA model. In the first stage, the VRS DEA is used to compute the performance of each fund. In the second stage, the Tobit regression is applied to adjust the inputs by excluding effects caused by environmental factors. In the third stage, the parameter estimated from the second stage is used to predict the total input slacks. In the last stage, the DEA model is run with slack-adjusted data in order to find out the performance of fund. The empirical results reveal that female manager will have lower risk and better performance than male mangers. Experienced managers may not perform better than new managers.

Content
Abstract (in Chinese) i
Abstract (in English) ii
Acknowledgement iii
Content iv
List of Tables v
List of Figures v
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Research motivation 1
1.2 Research purposes 2
1.3 Research objective 2
2.Literature review 4
2.1 Literature review of Data Envelopment Analysis approach 4
2.2 Literature review of mutual fund efficiency around the world 4
3.Methodology 8
3.1 CRS model of Data Envelopment Analysis 8
3.2 VRS model of Data Envelopment Analysis 9
3.3 Four-Stage DEA approach 10
Stage 1 : Using DEA for evaluating fund performance 10
Stage 2 : Decomposing fund performance by Tobit regression 11
Stage 3 : Adjusting output 11
Stage 4 : Re-evaluating DEA with adjusted data 13
3.4 Tobit regression model 13
4.Data and variables description 15
4.1 Sample funds 15
4.2 Input and Output variables 16
(1) Input variables 16
(2) Output variable 16
4.3 Environmental variables 16
(1) Characteristics of fund 17
(1) Characteristics of management 17
4.4 Descriptive Statistics 20
5.Results 23
5.1 Stage one: Initial DEA 23
5.2 Stage two: The effect of the operational environment 25
5.3 Stage three: Data adjustment 28
5.4 Stage four: Re-run CRS DEA model 29
6. Conclusion 32
References 34

References
Afrait S.N. Efficiency estimation of production functions. International Economic Review1972; 13; 568-598.
Aigner D, Lovell CAK, Schmidt P. Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. Journal of Econometrics 1977; 6; 21–37.
Ammon J.N. and Bernasek A. Are Women More Risk Averse? Economic Inquiry 2007; 36; 620-630.
Anderson RI, Brockman CM, Giannikos C, McLeod RW. A non-parametric examination of real estate mutual fund efficiency. International Journal of Business and Economics 2004; 3; 225-238.
Annaert J, van den Broeck J, Vennet RV. Determinants of mutual fund underperformance: A Bayesian stochastic frontier approach. European Journal of Operational Research 2003; 151; 617-632.
Basso A, Funari S. A data envelopment analysis approach to measure the mutual fund performance. European Journal of Operational Research 2001; 135; 477-492.
Boels, J. N. Efficiency squared: Efficiency computation of efficiency indexes. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Western Farm Economics Association 1966; 137-142.
Carhart MM. On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance 1997; 52; 57-82.
Chang K.P. Evaluating mutual fund performance: An application of minimum convex input requirement set approach. Computers & Operations Research 2004; 31; 929-940.
Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 1978; 2; 429-444.
Chen CR, Lee CF, Rahman S, Chan A. A cross-sectional analysis of mutual funds’ market timing and security selection skill. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 1992; 19; 659-675.
Chen CT, Hu JL and Liao JJ. Tourists' Nationalities and the Cost Efficiency of International Tourist Hotels in Taiwan. African Journal of Business Management 2010; 4; 3440-3446.
Chevalier J, Ellison G. Are some mutual fund managers better than others? Cross-sectional patterns in behavior and performance. Journal of Finance 1999; 54; 875-899.
Choi YK. Relative portfolio performance evaluation and incentive structure. Journal of Business 2006; 79; 903-921.
Daniel K, Grinblatt M, Titman S, Wermers R. Measuring mutual fund performance with characteristic-based benchmarks. Journal of Finance 1997; 52; 1035-1058.
Devaney M, Weber WL. Efficiency, scale economies, and the risk/return performance of real estate investment trusts. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 2005; 31; 301-317.
Drake, L. M., Hall, J. B. and Simper, R. The impact of macroeconomic and regulatory factors on bank efficiency: A non-parametric analysis of Hong Kong’s banking system. Journal of Banking and Finance 2006; 30; 1443-1466.
Fama EF. Component of investment performance. Journal of Finance 1972; 27; 551-567.
Fama EF, French KR. Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics 1993; 33; 3-56.
Farrell, M. J. The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of Royal Statistical Society 1957, 120, 253-281.
Golec JH. The effects of mutual fund managers’ characteristics on their portfolio performance, risk, and fees. Financial Services Review 1996; 5; 133–148.
Gregoriou GN, Sedzro K, Zhu J. Hedge fund performance appraisal using data envelopment analysis European Journal of Operational 2005; 164; 555-571.
Hendricks D, Patel J, Zeckhauser R. Hot hands in mutual funds: Short-run persistence of relative performance, 1974-88. Journal of Finance 1993; 38; 93-130.
Hu, JL and Chang, TP. Decomposition of Mutual Fund Underperformance. Applied Financial Economics Letters 2008;4; 363-367.
Jensen MC. The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945-1964. Journal of Finance 1968; 23; 389-416.
Kothari SP, Warner JB. Evaluating mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance 2001; 56; 1985-2010.
Kumar UD, Roy, AB, Saranga, H, Singal, K. Analysis of hedge fund strategies using slack-based DEA models. Journal of the Operational Research 2010; 61; 1746-1760.
Lovell CAK, Pastor JT. Units invariance and translation invariant DEA models. Operation Research Letters 1995;18; 147-151.
Murthi BPS, Choi YK, Desai P. Efficiency of mutual funds and portfolio performance measurement: A non-parametric approach. European Journal of Operational Research 1997; 98; 408-418.
Prather L, Bertin WJ, Henker T. Mutual fund characteristics, managerial attributes, and fund performance. Review of Financial Economics 2004; 13; 305-326.
Powell M and Ansic D. Gender Differences in Risk Behavior in Financial Decision-Making: an Experimental Analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology 1997;18; 605 –628.
Sengupta JK, Zohar T. Nonparametric analysis of portfolio efficiency. Applied Economics Letters 2001; 8; 249-252.
Sharpe WF. Mutual fund performance. Journal of Business 1966; 39; 119-138.
Sharpe WF. Asset allocation: Management style and performance measurement. Journal of Portfolio Management 1992; 18; 7-19.
Song G. and Guo W. Chinese Open-end Fund Operational Efficiency Appraisal Using Data Envelopment Analysis, International Conference on Risk Management and Engineering Management 2008, 570-575.
Treynor JL. How to rate management of investment funds. Harvard Business Review 1965; 43; 63-75.
Wermers R. Mutual fund performance: An empirical decomposition into stock-picking talent, style, transaction costs, and expenses. Journal of Finance 2000; 55; 1655-1703.