黃衫軍事件對泰國基金影響

The Effect of Thailand Political Crisis on the Performance and Risk Value of Funds Investment

張佳雯(Chia-Wen Chang)；張慧雯(Hui-Wen Chang)；彭開瓊(Kai-Chiung Peng)

泰國基金 ； 風險值 ； 投資績效 ； Thailand funds ； Value at Risk ； Performance

東亞論壇

483期（2014 / 03 / 01）

71 - 85

繁體中文

本文以2008年黃衫軍政變事件為分隔點，檢視政變前中後三期泰國基金的績效與風險值，探討黃衫軍政變對經濟層面的衝擊與投資泰國基金的影響。研究顯示，在基金績效表現方面，黃衫軍政變前後的平均月報酬率由1.48%下降到-12.62%再回到2.83%，Sharpe係數則由黃衫軍政變前後的0.17下降到-1.18再回到0.33，雖然政變時的報酬率是負值，影響了整個基金的績效，但是黃衫軍政變結束之後的報酬率卻超越了政變前期，顯示泰國政治軍事之動盪衝擊其經濟表現，但該國家卻能在短時間內快速地復甦，且績效更勝政變前，泰國經濟復甦之能力不容小覷。在基金風險值方面，黃衫軍政變發生前、中、後時期，平均風險值從4.52%升到9.10%再降至4.10%，代表經濟體系的復原快速。黃衫軍政變期間風險值的大幅增加代表政變的發生使當時的報酬率下跌風險大幅提高，在投資者信心劇減下龐大的資金抽離市場，是造成當時泰國基金價格大跌之原因。

This article investigates the economic effect of Thailand political crisis in 2008. Research shows that the average monthly return rate of the fund dropped from 1.48% to -12.62%, then raised to 2.83% after the Thailand political crisis. Sharpe ratio dropped from 0.17 to -1.18 then returned back to 0.33. Although the return of funds is negative, but it became higher after the crisis, during Thailand political crisis, this shows that though Thailand political crisis gave an impact on its economic performance, but the country could recover in a short time coming with a better fund performance compared with the past. At the aspect of risk value, the average value at risk raised from 4.52% to 9.10% during the Thailand political crisis then returned to 4.10%, During Thailand political crisis, the huge raise of risk value means the risk of a dropping return became higher investor's confidence was losing and, huge funds were pulled out of the market, causing the huge crash of Thailand funds then.

1. 江明珠、李政峰、欉清全(2011)。台灣不動產市場的下方風險─以台灣四個縣市為例。住宅學報，20(1)，1-23。
   連結：
2. 李沃牆、柯中偉(2011)。外匯投資組合之風險值評估─分量迴歸的應用。中原企管評論，9(1)，97-116。
   連結：
3. 張巧宜、林鴻儒(2010)。多空市場之股價指數報酬風險值研究。商管科技季刊，11(1)，77-107。
   連結：
4. 許英麟、陳弘吉、徐孟資(2012)。次貸風暴前後外匯匯率風險值之比較分析─以美元兌英鎊、歐元、日圓與新台幣為例。企業管理學報，93，15-45。
   連結：
5. 陳佩修(2009)。泰國的軍事政變與政治變遷。東吳政治學報，27(3)，65-116。
   連結：
6. 陳尚懋(2010)。泰國觀光產業的政治經濟分析。台灣東南亞學刊，7(1)，41-74。
   連結：
7. 蔡青龍、蔡攀龍(2012)。印尼和泰國的經濟發展、外人直接投資與國際勞工移動：IMDP分析架構之驗證。台灣東南亞學刊，9(1)，79-112。
   連結：
8. Biggs, D.,Hall, C.M.,Stoeckl, N.(2012).The resilience of formal and informal tourism enterprises to disasters: Reef tourism in Phuket, Thailand.Journal of Sustainable Tourism,20(5),645-665.
9. Christofferssen, P.(1998).Evaluating Interval Forecasts.International Economic Review,39,841-862.
10. Cortez, M.C.,Silva, F.,Areal, N.(2012).Socially responsible investing in the global market: The performance of US and European funds.International Journal of Finance and Economics,17(3),254-271.
11. Dalpino, C.(2012).Thailand in 2011: High tides and political tensions.Asian Survey,52(1),195-201.
12. Gottesman, A.,Morey, M.(2012).Mutual fund corporate culture and performance.Review of Financial Economics,21(2),69-81.
13. Kupiec, P.(1995).Techniques for Verifying the Accuracy of Risk Management Models.Journal of Derivatives,3,73-84.
14. Lintner, John(1965).The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets.Review of Economics and Statistics,47(1),13-37.
15. Sharpe, W. F.(1966).Mutual fund performance.Journal of Business,39(1),119-138.
16. Sharpe, W. F.(1964).Capital asset prices: A theory for market equilibrium under conditions of risk.Journal of Finance,19,425-442.
17. Treynor, J. L.(1965).How to Rate Management Investment Fund.Harvard Business Review,43,63-75.
18. Turtle, H.J.,Zhang, C.(2012).Time-varying performance of international mutual funds.Journal of Empirical Finance,19(3),334-348.
19. 陳登源、巫慧燕、黃建勝(2007)。基金管理。台北:雙葉。