本研究以2000年至2014年間上市之航運業為研究對象，欲探討不以價值投資法(Value Investing)，或成長投資法(Growth Investing)來尋求投資績效是否能夠超越加權指數。而是以獲利性﹑安全性﹑成長性及公司價值四大方面選取代表性的選股指標，以其涵蓋價值股及成長股分類，探討是否可以得到超額報酬，同時亦觀察其投資組合風險與大盤相較為何?實證結果發現﹕ 1.選股六指標在不同的投時間以t檢定發現所選出的投資組合報酬率與大盤報酬率 的相關性並不明顯。 2.在持有一年至五年間的投資組合以迴歸分析其報酬與大盤報酬顯示有相關性， 但並非每項指標都有顯著相關性。以長期來看，數據中得到股東權益報酬 (ROE)﹑純益率﹑自由現金流量﹑負債比率﹑股價淨值比(PBR)﹑長期營收成 長率此六指標對公司報酬顯示有解釋能力。但判斷各指標投資組合報酬與大盤 報酬是否有相關時，在長期營收成長率這項指標較無解釋能力。 3.經過各項驗證及檢驗後可發現以四大條件挑選的公司是可以打敗大盤，但其然 而系統性風險可能與市場相當或低於市場風險。故本研究所設定之四大篩選條 件不能保證同時可達到高報酬﹑低風險的境界。 ;The main purpose of this study is to examine investment performance of stock picking based on typical financial textbooks beyond that guided by Value or Growth Investment. We choose four major areas which including profitability、security、growth and company value for the selection of stocks and check out if excess returns can be obtained. At the same time, we also compare its investment portfolio risk and market risk. The empirical results show that: 1.These 6 stock indices tested by t test at different investment time periods were significantly different from the return of selected portfolios and the return of the market . 2.Portfolios held between one to five years by regression analysis reveal their returns and their remunerations were correlated with market return, but not every index has significant relevance. In the long term, we found the data obtained in ROE, net profit rate﹑free cash flow﹑ net debt ratio﹑PBR and long-term revenue growth rate all have the ability to explain the company′s remuneration. However, the long-term revenue growth rate was less significant when judging the relevance between every portfolio return and market return. 3.After the verification and test conditions, we found the companies which selected by four major areas were able to beat the market. Moreover, the systematic risk might be comparable to market risk or lower than the market risk. In sum, the filters does not guarantee to achieve higher returns and lower risk.
