灰關聯分析在財務風險評估上的應用-以台灣上市家電業為例; Applying Grey Relation Analysis On Financial Risk Assessment -A Case Study For Listed Household Appliances Industry In Taiwan-

NCU Institutional Repository > 管理學院 > 財務金融研究所 > 博碩士論文 > Item 987654321/46569

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/46569

题名:	灰關聯分析在財務風險評估上的應用-以台灣上市家電業為例;Applying Grey Relation Analysis On Financial Risk Assessment -A Case Study For Listed Household Appliances Industry In Taiwan-
作者:	陳漢昭;Han-chao Chen
贡献者:	財務金融研究所
关键词:	財務指標;經營績效;財務風險;灰關聯分析;熵值權重;Financial Index;Management Achievements;Financial Risk;Grey Relation Analysis;Entropy Weighting Method
日期:	2010-12-21
上传时间:	2011-06-04 16:32:46 (UTC+8)
出版者:	國立中央大學
摘要:	2008年，老牌上市家電公司歌林(1606)因巨額應收帳款的收現問題導致財務危機，在2008年11月6日黯然下市,投資人受傷慘重，令人不勝唏噓。為何連一向給人老牌穩重的歌林(1606)也會出事呢？因此本研究藉由此事件，透過財務指標並且嘗試由風險角度的概念來探討公司經營績效的問題。本研究使用鄧聚龍教授(1982)所提出的灰關聯分析法及Shannom(1948)的熵值權重法，透過財務報表所得到的二十三項財務比率，評估我國家電業上市公司之年度經營績效排名，另外，從風險角度的概念，試著在繁多的財務資訊中找出重要的財務風險指標，透過所選取出來的財務風險指標，驗證其家電業公司在經營績效上，風險相對程度的區別能力如何？藉以提供投資大眾如何運用財務報表所提供的資訊，避開風險程度相對較高的公司，其實證結果如下： 1. 92~96年度二十三項財務比率平均綜合績效評比中，三洋(1614)排名第一名、大同(2371)第二名、東元(1504)第三名、歌林(1606)倒數第二名、聲寶(1604)最後一名。 2. 二十三項財務指標中，萃取出來代表財務風險變數指標前五名依序為：現金比率、利息保障倍數、速動比率、長期資金佔固定資產比率、流動比率。其中有四項落在償債能力這構面，因此家電業在探討經營績效時，償債能力構面確實有其必要納入分析及探討。 3. 92~96年度五項財務指標平均風險績效評比中，三洋(1614)排名第一名、東元(1504)第二名、大同(2371)第三名、聲寶(1604) 倒數第二名且每況愈下、歌林(1606)為最後一名。因此相較於二十三項財務比率平均綜合績效評比，更有區別力。 4. 94~98年度風險績效再評估中發現，三洋(1614)排名第一名、東元(1504)第二名、大同(2371)倒數第二名、聲寶(1604)最後一名，因此投資人須避開大同(2371)及聲寶(1604)此兩家公司。 In 2008, the old brand listed household appliances company KOLIN(1606) in Taiwan was broken financial crisis, because its large amount account receivable's taking cash question, and low-spirited out of stock In November 6, 2008, the investor was injured seriously, and makes one sob extremely. Why will always gives to investor the established brand steady kolin (1606) also to have an accident? Therefore this research because of this matter, by financial norm and attempts by the risk angle concept to discusses the company’s management achievements question. This research use Grey Relation Analysis offered by Professor Deng Julong(1982) and Shannom(1948) Entropy Weighting Method, twenty three financial indicators which obtains by the financial statement, to assess household appliances listed companies in Taiwan annual management achievements place. Moreover, from the risk angle's concept, tries to discover the important financial risk index in many financial information, by financial risk target which was selected, confirms how the difference ability of the relative risk degree in the electrical industry company management achievements? Provides populace invests the information which provided by the financial statement, to avoids the risk degree relatively high companies, This paper gets the following results : 1. Between 2003 and 2007, the average management achievements assessed by twenty three financial index: SANYO(1614) was the first, TATUNG(2371) was the second, TECO(1504) was the third, KOLIN(1606) was second to last, SAMPO(1604) was the last. 2. In twenty three financial index, the extract comes out to represent financial risk variable index first five is in order: cash ratio, interest safeguard multiple, quick ratio, the long-term fund account for the fixed asset ratio, the current ratio. And four items fall on the debt-paying ability this construction surface, therefore family electrical industry in discussion management achievements, the debt-paying ability construction surface has necessary to integrate the analysis and the discussion truly. 3. Between 2003 and 2007, the average risk achievements assessed by five financial index: SANYO(1614) was the first, TECO(1504) was the second, TATUNG(2371) was the third, SAMPO(1604) was second to last and progressively worse, KOLIN(1606) was the last. Therefore, compares the average management achievements assessed by twenty three financial index, its has more differencial strength. 4. Between 2005 and 2009, the average risk achievements again assessed by five financial index and to discover that: SANYO(1614) was the first, TECO(1504) was the second, TATUNG(2371) was second to last, SAMPO(1604) was the last. Therefore the investor must avoid TATUNG (2371) and SAMPO (1604) this two companies.
显示于类别:	[財務金融研究所] 博碩士論文

文件中的档案:

档案	描述	大小	格式	浏览次数
index.html		0Kb	HTML	968	检视/开启

在NCUIR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

社群 sharing

数据加载中.....