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.

1.Banz,Rolf W.,1981,The relationship between return and market value of common stock,Journal of Financial Economics 9,3-18。
2.Bernard, V. 1994. Accounting-based valuation methods, determinants of market-to-book ratios, and implications for financial statements analysis. Working paper, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor。
3.Brigham and Houston,2001,Divided Policy-stock Repurchase﹐Fundamentals of Financial Management, 14,568-571。
4.Fama, E. F. and K. R. French, 1992,”The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns,” Journal of Finance, 47, 427-466。
5.Greig, A.‚ Fundamental analysis and subsequent stock returns, Journal of Accounting and Economics ,Vol.15(2-3) ,(1992),pp.413-442。
6.Jensen,M.C.(1986).Agency costs of cash flow,corporate finance,and takeovers.American Economic Reviews,76,322-329。
7.Ruhner, R(1987)﹐Assessing International Diversification of West German Corporations.Strategic Management Journal,8,25-37.
8.Wilcox, J. W. (1984)﹐The P/B-ROE Valuation Model, Financial Analysts Jourmal, Vol.40, No.1, 58-66。
1.邱寶桂(2002)，IPOs公司掛牌後股價表現影響因素之研究，淡江大學財務
金融所碩士論文。
2.周夢柏(2002)，應用財務比率分析研究我國商業銀行獲利能力之實證究。
3.呂國征(2007)，應用財務比率分析海運業經營績效之研究，銘傳大學國際企
業學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。
4.邱碧芳(2002), 公司財務危機預警資訊之研究考慮現金流量因素，朝陽科
技大學財務金融系碩士論文。
5.張漢傑(2002)，從損益表攻擊性資訊透視股價漲跌，會計研究月刊第202期。
6.江啟瑞（1999），選股指標與投資組合之績效探討，台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文。
7.盧麗安（1996），財務基本分析與臺灣股價表現，國立中山大學碩士論文。
8.吳璟昇(1997)，價值型與成長型股票投資績效之研究，國立政治大學財務管理研究所碩士論文。
9.陳美純（2001），資訊科技投資與智慧資本對企業績效影響之研究，國立中央大學資訊管理研究所博士論文。
10.吳育賢(2003)，策略聯盟與供應鏈績效之研究－以台灣半導體及光電業為例，私立淡江大學碩士論文。
11.黃國彰(2007)，各項選股指標於台灣股票市場的實用性探討－應用對象與應用時機之研究，國立台灣大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
12.楊慶豪(2007)，台灣股票市場投資策略分析之研究－價值投資與成長投資之比較﹐國立中山大學財務管理學研究所碩士論文。
13.陳君愷(2004)，不同選股策略下的投資績效與風險衡量，國立成功大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
14.劉若蘭 (1995)，財務比率資訊內涵之實證研究，東吳大學會計學研究所碩士論文。