规律异象与有效市场.ppt

1、2020/8/14,1,Pattern, Anomalies and Efficient Capital Markets 规律、异象与有效市场 朱宏泉 西南交通大学经济管理学院 Tel: 87601865 ,2020/8/14,2,投 资 策 略,长期投资：挑选对象 基本面分析 短线操作：把握时机 技术分析,2020/8/14,3,巴菲特：四大经典投资案例,可口可乐：投资13亿美圆，至2003年持有15年，盈利88亿美圆，增值6.8倍。 华盛顿邮报：投资1000万美圆，到2003年持有30年，盈利12亿，增值128倍。 吉列公司：投资6亿美圆，到2003年持有14年，盈利29亿，增值近5倍。

2、政府雇员保险：持有20年，投资4571万美圆，盈利23亿，增值50倍。,2020/8/14,4,投 资 策 略,技术分析： 追涨杀跌（动量策略） 逆向投资 市场可预测？市场有效？ 投资决策提供数据(预测)支持,2020/8/14,5,有 效 市 场,资本市场 信息市场：资本市场的运行过程，就是信息的收集、发布、传递、处理、运用和反馈的过程。 信息：过去（已发生）的信息 + 将来（预期）的信息；国家、地区、行业、市场、公司 资本市场有效：在处理信息方面是有效的 资产的价格“正确(correct)”地反应“所有可得的信息” 在一个有效市场中，资产价格“完全地反应了(fully reflect)”可

3、得信息。,2020/8/14,6,有 效 市 场,在有效市场中，价格是资源分配的精准信号：当公司通过证券融资时，证券能被正确定价；当投资者挑选投资对象时，付出公平的价格。 In short, if the capital market is to function smoothly in allocating resources, prices of securities must be good indicators of value.,2020/8/14,7,有效市场的三种形式： 弱有效(Weak Form): 价格完全反应了所有公共信息. 半强式有效(Semi-Strong Form):

4、 价格完全反应了所有公共和公司信息 强有效(Strong Form):价格完全反应了所有公共、公司和私有信息 在一有效市场中，基于现有的信息推测市场、单个资产未来的走势？,有 效 市 场,2020/8/14,8,按照中国2011年成品油消费量2.43亿吨来计算，此次调价将为中石油和中石化增收1468亿元,2020/8/14,9,上 证 综 指,2020/8/14,10,Examples,Size/small cap effect（规模/小公司效应） January effect（一月效应） Weekend effect（周末效应） Value effect（价值效应） Momentum eff

5、ect（动量策略） Closed-end fund discount（封闭式基金折价） Post-earnings announcement drift（盈余公告后价格漂移） Returns to IPOs（新股发行抑价） ,2020/8/14,11,Reinganum (JFE, 1983) showed that most of the size effect occurs during the first half of January from 1962-79. Difference in average daily returns between largest and smalle

6、st decile portfolios is about 81 basis points for the first two weeks (about 8 percent per year) t-statistic = 7.14;,January Effect,2020/8/14,12,From 1980-2002, this difference is about half as large as, but still reliably greater than zero (t-statistic 5); Interestingly, DFA US 9-10 Small Company P

7、ortfolio does not show a reliable turn-of-the-year effect from 1982-1995; Suggests that it is the smallest/least liquid stocks that cause this result.,January Effect,2020/8/14,13,January Effect,2020/8/14,14,2020/8/14,15,2020/8/14,16,Quarterly Trading Patterns of Financial Institutions,This article i

8、nvestigates whether different types of institutions have discernible trading motives in response to portfolio disclosures. Results show that banks, life insurance companies, mutual funds, and investment advisors who act as external managers generally have similar trading strategies. They sell more p

9、oorly performing stocks during the fourth quarter than the first 3 quarter than of the year, and such trading behavior is more pronounced for institutions whose stocks on average have underperformed the market. In contrast, property and liability insurance companies, pension funds, colleges, univers

10、ities, and foundations, who manage their own assets, show less inclination to window-dress their portfolios.,2020/8/14,17,Weekend Effect,French (JFE, 1980) showed that the average return to the S From 1978-2002, the weekend effect seems to have gone away. Could be an example where academic research

11、influenced trading to eliminate profitability?,2020/8/14,18,2020/8/14,19,Role of Speculative Short Sales in Price Formation: Case of the Weekend EffectHonghui Chen, Vijay Singal, JF, 2003,We argue that short sellers affect prices in a significant and systematic manner. In particular, we contended th

12、at speculative short sales contribute the weekend effect: the inability to trade over the weekend is likely to cause these short sellers to close their speculative positions on Friday and reestablish new short positions on Mondays causing stock prices to rise on Friday and fall on Mondays. We find e

13、vidence in support of this hypothesis based on a comparison of high short-interest stocks and low short-interest stocks, stocks with and without actively traded options, IPOs, zero short-interest stocks, and highly volatile stocks.,2020/8/14,20,2020/8/14,21,The day-of-the-week regularity in the stoc

14、k markets of China,Abstract: This paper examines the day-of-the-week effect in the stock markets of China. We find negative returns on Tuesday after January 1, 1995. This Tuesday anomaly disappears after taking the non-normality distribution and spillover from other countries into account. The findi

15、ng suggests that this day-of-the-week regularity in China may be due to the spillover from the Americas. The evidence of the day-of-the-week anomaly in China is clearly dependent on the estimation method and sample period. When transaction costs are taken into account, the probability that arbitrage

16、 profits are available from the day-of-the-week trading strategies seems very small. This conclusion is obviously consistent with an efficient market approach.,2020/8/14,22,2020/8/14,23,2020/8/14,24,中国证券市场星期效应逐渐消失的经验证据丁荣余, 张兵,摘要: 本文研究证实了中国证券市场在早期具有明显的星期五效应, 而在星期一和星期二的收益普遍较低。结算制度和信息披露制度是造成我国股市早期星期效应的

17、主要原因, 在T+ 1 交易制度下, 星期五的高收益率是要补偿两天的资金成本和风险成本; 而信息披露制度的变革导致星期效应的不同表现。然而, 滚动样本检验和分年度检验发现从1997 年开始中国证券市场星期效应消失。这说明了中国证券市场有效性在不断提高。,2020/8/14,25,上海期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应研究郭彦峰、黄登仕、魏宇，西南交通大学经济管理学院,期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应可以为投资者在期货市场上投机、套利和避险提供重要的决策依据。本文对上海期货市场主要品种的隔天、交易期和非交易期收益和波动的周日历效应进行实证检验, 研究期间为2002年1月 2006年12月。 结果显示：

18、收益和波动的周日历效应存在于上海期货市场, 但发生时间依据品种不同而有所差异, 铜期货和铝期货呈现收益周一正效应, 橡胶期货周一的非交易期收益和周三的交易期收益显著大于零, 各类型波动的分布在一周中各交易日也不一致。此外, 铜期货和铝期货还表现出波动的不对称性。,2020/8/14,26,上海期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应研究,2020/8/14,27,上海期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应研究,2020/8/14,28,上海期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应研究,2020/8/14,29,上海期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应研究,2020/8/14,30,上海期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应研究,202

19、0/8/14,31,上海期货市场收益和波动的周日历效应研究,2020/8/14,32,DFA US 9-10 Small Company Portfolio had an alpha (risk-adjusted excess return) of 20 basis points from 1982-2002; About half as large as the estimate from 1936-75, and not reliably greater than zero (t-stat = 0.67).,Size Effect,2020/8/14,33,Size Effect,Banz

20、 (JFE, 1981) and Reinganum (JFE, 1981) showed that small-capitalization firms on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) earned higher average returns than is predicted by the Sharpe (1964) Lintner (1965) capital asset-pricing model (CAPM) from 1936-75; Dimensional Fund Advisors started a small cap index

21、 fund in 1982 to mimic the Banz strategy;,2020/8/14,34,Value Effect,Basu (1977, 1983) noted that firms with high earnings-to-price (E/P) ratios earn positive abnormal returns relative to the CAPM; Fama and French (1992, 1993) have argued that size and value (as measured by the book-to-market value o

22、f common stock) represent two risk factors that are missing from the CAPM; Dimensional Fund Advisors started an index fund in 1993 of small firms with high B/M ratios (the DFA US 6-10 Value Portfolio);,2020/8/14,35,DFA US 6-10 Value Portfolio had an alpha (risk-adjusted excess return) of -20 basis p

23、oints per month from 1994-2002 (t-statistic = -0.59); Did they make the market efficient for the value effect?,Value Effect,2020/8/14,36,2020/8/14,37,The three-factor model (Fama and French, 1993,1996):,2020/8/14,38,价值股与成长股不同市场表现的实证研究蔡海洪、吴世农,国外大量的实证研究发现价值股的市场表现显著地优于成长股, 对这个现象的解释主要分为过度反应假说和风险改变假说两大学派

24、。本文以上海证券交易市场A 股为样本, 以权益的账面价值与市场价值比作为标准划分价值股组合和成长股组合; 实证结果发现价值股组合的收益明显优于成长股组合, 而且两种组合的收益各自都呈现出反向修正的模式, 符合过度反应假说; 同时本文采用资产资本定价模型来检验两种组合, 实证结果不支持风险改变假说。,2020/8/14,39,价值股与成长股不同市场表现的实证研究蔡海洪、吴世农,2020/8/14,40,价值股与成长股不同市场表现的实证研究蔡海洪、吴世农,2020/8/14,41,基于成长性的我国中小上市公司价值投资策略陈晓红,王琦,尝试在价值投资策略中加入企业成长性的考虑因素, 以2003200

25、4 年在深沪两市的中小上市公司为研究对象, 将其划分为高成长性的价值股、一般价值股和非价值股三大类, 并通过实证检验了三类公司在滞后考察期内( 2005 年5 月2007 年1 月) 的市场表现, 证明了基于成长性的价值投资策略在我国中小上市公司中的投资可行性.,2020/8/14,42,在我国中小上市公司中, 高成长性的价值股的市场表现是否优于一般的价值股和魅力股？ 价值股: 具有较高的账面价值/ 市场价值( B/M) 、盈利/ 股票价格( E/ P) 、分红/股票价格( D/ P) 或现金流量/ 股票价格( C/ P) 的股票； 成长性：突变级数法 成长性排名前（后）60 名的公司定义为高

26、（低）成长性公司，B/M 值排名前（后）60 名的公司定义为（非）价值股公司。 高成长性的价值股、一般价值股和魅力股三大类。,基于成长性的我国中小上市公司价值投资策略陈晓红,王琦,2020/8/14,43,基于成长性的我国中小上市公司价值投资策略陈晓红,王琦,2020/8/14,44,基于成长性的我国中小上市公司价值投资策略陈晓红,王琦,2020/8/14,45,Momentum Effect,DeBondt and Thaler (1985) found an anomaly whereby past losers (stocks with low returns in the past t

27、hree to five years) have higher average returns than past winners (stocks with high returns in the past three to five years), which is a “contrarian” effect. Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) found that recent past winners (portfolios formed on the last year of past returns) out-perform recent past losers

28、, which is a “continuation” or “momentum” effect.,2020/8/14,46,The measure of momentum is the difference between the returns to portfolios of high and low prior return firms, where prior returns are measured over months -2 to -13 motivated by Jegadeesh and Titman,Momentum Effect,2020/8/14,47,Momentu

29、m Effect,Momentum effects seem to exist after the period of the academic study; Risk-adjusted excess returns are about 1% per month, t-statistics around 2.8; Even the Fama-French “three factor model” cannot explain momentum returns; Size and value (Book/market) are the additional factors, beyond the

30、 market factor motivated by the CAPM.,2020/8/14,48,2020/8/14,49,Relative strength strategies in Chinas stock market: 19942000 Changyun Wang Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 2004,12 A negative average return to relative strength strategy over a horizon of 6 months to 2 years,2020/8/14,50,In this paper,

31、 we examine the profitability of intermediate - and long-horizon relative strength strategies (buying past winners and selling past losers) over the July 1994 December 2000 interval in Chinas stock market. We find a negative average return to relative strength strategy over a horizon of 6 months to

32、2 years. We also document that firm size, book-to-market, and beta effects are qualitatively similar to those in the US and other markets, that is, small stocks outperform large stocks, value stocks outperform growth stocks, and betas do not appear to be associated with average stock returns. Furthe

33、r, we show that, when returns are adjusted for the three factors in Fama and French J. Financ. Econ. 33 (1993) 3, the predictable pattern in returns disappears. Hence, the stock return behavior in China is not inconsistent with the rational risk-based.,2020/8/14,51,References,Narasimhan Jegadeesh an

34、d Sheridan Titman, 2001. Profitability of Momentum Strategies: An Evaluation of Alternative Explanations. Journal of Finance 56, 699-720. Moskowitz, T.J., and Grinblatt, M., 1999, Does industries explain momentum? Journal of Finance 54, 1249-1290. Kang, Joseph, Ming-Hua Liu, and Sophie X.Y. Ni, 2002

35、, Contrarian and momentum strategies in the China stock market: 1993-2000, Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 10, 243-265. George, T.J, and C.Y., Hwang, 52-week high and momentum investing, Journal of Finance, 2004, 2145-2176.,2020/8/14,52,2020/8/14,53,Earnings and Price Momentum,This paper examines whe

36、ther earnings momentum and price momentum are related. Both in time-series as well as in cross-sectional asset pricing tests, we find that price momentum is captures by the systematic component of earnings momentum. The predictive power of past returns is subsumed by a zero-investment portfolio that

37、 is long on stock with high earnings surprises and short on stocks with low earnings surprises. Further, returns to the earnings-based zero-investment portfolio are significantly related to future macroeconomic activities, including growth in GDP, industrial production, consumption, labor income, in

38、flation, and T-bill returns.,2020/8/14,54,Momentum and Credit Rating Doron Avramov, Tarun Chordia, Gergana Jostova, and Alexander Philipov Journal of Finance, forthcoming,2020/8/14,55,Momentum and Credit Rating,This paper establishes a robust link between momentum and credit rating. Momentum profita

39、bility is large and significant among low-grade firms, but it is nonexistent among high-grade firms. The momentum payoffs documented in the literature are generated by low-grade firms that account for less than 4% of the overall market capitalization of rated firms. The momentum payoff differential

40、across credit rating groups is unexplained by firm size, firm age, analyst forecast dispersion, leverage, return volatility, and cash flow volatility.,2020/8/14,56,2020/8/14,57,We test whether momentum strategies remain profitable after considering market frictions induced by trading. Intraday data

41、are used to estimate alternative measures of proportional and non-proportional (price impact) trading costs. The price impact models imply that abnormal returns to portfolio strategies decline with portfolio size. We calculate break-even fund sizes that lead to zero abnormal returns. In addition to

42、equal- and value-weighted momentum strategies, we derive a liquidity-weighted strategy designed to reduce the cost of trades. Equal-weighted strategies perform the best before trading cost and the worst after trading costs. Liquidity-weighed and hybrid liquidity/value-weighted strategies have the la

43、rgest break-even fund size: $5billion or more (relative to December 1999 market capitalization) may be invested in these momentum strategies before the apparent profit opportunities vanish.,2020/8/14,58,2020/8/14,59,The Illusion Nature of Momentum ProfitLesmond, Schill, and Chunsheng Zhou,Our paper

44、re-examines the profitability of relative strength or momentum trading strategies (buying past strong performs and selling past weak performers). We find that standard relative strength strategies require frequent trading in disproportionately high cost securities such that trading cost prevent prof

45、itable strategy execution. In the cross-section, we find that those stocks that generate large momentum returns are precisely those stocks with high trading costs. We conclude that the magnitude of the abnormal returns associated with these trading strategies creates an illusion of profit opportunit

46、y when, in fact, none exits.,2020/8/14,60,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,本文以中国深沪A 股股票市场为考察对象, 分析了价值反转投资策略的有效性。作者通过实证分析发现: 在中国深沪A 股股票市场上, 以帐面价值与市场价值比(BPM) 、BPM-GS 等指标构造的价值反转投资策略可以产生显著的超额收益率, 并且其显著程度因持有期不同而不同。接着, 作者利用CAPM 模型、Fama-French 三因素模型并引入了协偏度和协峰度, 构造出多风险因子模型来解释价值反转投资策略超额收益率。我们发现: 在经过传统风险因素调整后, 价值反转投

47、资策略效果依然明显; CAPM模型无法解释价值反转投资策略超额收益率; Fama-French 三因素模型对价值反转投资策略超额收益率的解释能力最为显著, 但对于有些价值投资策略, 在Fama-French 三因素基础上加上协偏度和协峰度因子后, 模型的解释能力有所提高。,2020/8/14,61,基本面指标: 帐面价值与市场价值比(BPM) 市盈率倒数(EPP) 现金流净额与价格比(CPP) 派息率(DPP) 主营业务收入增涨率(GS),中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8/14,62,组合构造的方法: 两类四种 第一类为一维反转投资策略, 分别单独以BPM, C

48、PP, EPP, GS 为标准, 在每年6 月底将符合条件的股票以升序排成10个组合, 再根据对组合内股票的投资比例分为等权投资和权重投资两种。 第二类为二维反转投资策略: 以BPM, CPP, EPP 和GS 两两组合成6 种策略, 每种策略中按两个指标独立以升序分为三组, 比例为30%,40% ,30%, 组合构造出9组投资组合, 再根据对组合内股票的投资比例分为等权投资和权重投资两种。 投资组合在每年6 月末形成,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8/14,63,组合收益率的计算方法： 买入持有收益率计算法 组合月平均收益计算法,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性

49、实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8/14,64,样本: 上海证券交易所和深圳证券交易所上市的A 股股票。剔除了: ( 1) 金融类股票，( 2) 在构造投资组合时, 上年末股东权益合计、净收益和经营活动产生的现金流入净额为负的公司发行的股票。( 3) 构造组合时, 处于停牌状态的股票。 时间：19922001年,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8/14,65,规模因子与BPM因子的模拟投资组合构造如下: 以1993年至2000年间每年6月底以上市公司总市值的中位数为界限, 将股票分为小规模(S) 股票组合和大规模股票组合(B) , 并利用t - 1 年末公司的BP

50、M值将股票分为低(L) 、中(M) 和高(H) 三个组合, 比例分别为30% , 40% , 30% 。从而将股票按总市值和BPM值独立分组, 交叉形成6 个组合, 即SPL, SPM, SPH, BPL, BPM, BPH 组合。计算t年7月到t+ 1年6月共12个月每个组合的价值权重月收益( 以每只股票总市值占所在组合总市值的比例为投资比例) 。,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8/14,66,2020/8/14,67,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8/14,68,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8

51、/14,69,结论: 价值反转投资策略在中国深沪A 股市场上可以取得较显著的投资效果, 但显著程度因构造指标的不同和持有期限而异。规模效应对超额收益率有一定的影响,但并非决定性作用.,中国股市价值反转投资策略有效性实证研究肖军、徐信忠,2020/8/14,70,中国股票市场惯性和反转投资策略实证研究杨炘、陈展辉,基于19922001年的沪深A股市场的全样本数据，采用Jegadeesh 和Titman(2001年)方法，研究中国股市惯性和反转投资策略。结果表明，在中国A股市场基本不存在惯性现象,而存在显著的反转现象。过去112个月的赢家或者输家在未来的表现并没有显著差异，“追涨杀跌”的投资策略并

52、不能获利。而过去3042个月的输家的月平均收益率高达3.8%4.4%，显著高于过去的赢家2.1%以上，高于无风险利率3.54%，高于市场组合1.89%，在未来36个月累计收益率高达136.7%。过去的输家组合的因子和流通市值均处于中上水平，并没有太大的风险。结果可为机构投资者提供一种可行的投资策略。,2020/8/14,71,中国股票市场惯性和反转投资策略实证研究杨炘、陈展辉,2020/8/14,72,中国股票市场惯性和反转投资策略实证研究杨炘、陈展辉,2020/8/14,73,中国股票市场惯性和反转投资策略实证研究杨炘、陈展辉,2020/8/14,74,中国股票市场惯性和反转投资策略实证研究

53、杨炘、陈展辉,2020/8/14,75,封闭基金折价,封闭式基金：交易价格(P)，净资产(net asset value, NAV). 通常 P NAV。Why？,2020/8/14,76,2020/8/14,77,2020/8/14,78,封闭基金折价,基金基本层面的经济因素: 代理成本(Expenses); 资本利得税(Tax Liabilities); 资产流动性(Liquidity of Assets); 管理者所有权的构成(Management Ownership);,2020/8/14,79,封闭基金折价,资产净值偏差: 封闭式基金的折价是因基金的资产净值被高估而导致的。通常投资者

54、的收益由两部份组成：红利(Dividends)和资本利得(Capital gains)。对未实现的资本所得和流动性差的资产征税，是资产净值被高估的原因之一；另一个可能的原因是构成基金投资组合的证券的流动性与基金股份的流动性不一致. 然而“资产净值偏差”论既与封闭式基金上市时溢价销售的现象不相符，也与基金在封转开、或者是清盘时基金股份的交易价格回归到资产净值的事实不一致。,2020/8/14,80,代理成本: 基金收取的(高额)管理费是导致折价的主要原因。如果管理费用高出合理水平、或者是投资者预期基金管理者未来管理能力会变差，则代理成本问题便会导致基金折价。 然而，如果这种观点能成立，封闭式基金

55、既不可能溢价发行；也不应存在折价率随时间的变化而变化、或者是不同的封闭式基金间折价率的大小不相同，当它们收取的管理费相同时。,封闭基金折价,2020/8/14,81,税负时机(TAX TIMING): 在美国，投资者的资本利得需交纳个人所得税，而资本损失则可冲抵个人其它所得税。因此，最优的“税负时机”交易策略(Tax-timing strategies)是: 对资本利得投资者应尽可能地延后实现，以减少资本利得税；而当资本损失发生时，则应立即实现，以减免投资者个人的其它所得税。因此，“税负时机”论认为，当投资于封闭式基金时，投资者不再拥有普通股票的这种时机选择权，因而，基金应折价交易。 然而，相

56、关的研究表明，在美国仅有5%至7%的投资者在投资交易时会考虑“税负时机”策略，以减少税负，90%以上的投资者采取的都是买入并持有策略；并且“税负时机”论也与英国的情况不相符，更不能解释基金在发行之初，交易价高于其资产净值这一现象。,封闭基金折价,2020/8/14,82,封闭基金折价,行为金融学(Investor Sentiment): 市场中非理性投资者情绪波动所形成的风险，它使得基金的股票价格偏离其资产净值，作为理性投资者所承受额外风险的补偿。Lee等(1990，1991) 、De Long等(1990，1992); 投资者情绪假设仅能解释折价率变化的7%(Brauer,1993)；非理性

57、投资者不会增加机构投资者的风险(Sias,1997)，而且这一假设与英国的实际情况不相符.,2020/8/14,83,细算基金五年收益 (2003-4-7),进入2003年3月以来，首批5只封闭式基金已逐步运行满了5年。与同期储蓄及国债相比，在这5年里，是买封闭式基金收益大，还是储蓄和买国债收益大?下面我们就来进行比较。 首批5只封闭式基金按发行先后分别是金泰、开元、兴华、安信、裕阳，时间从1998年3月23日至7月17日。这5只封闭式基金5年的单位派现之和分别是0.402元、0.8015元、0.904元、1.149元、0.9028元。按发行价1.01元计算分红收益率分别是39.80%、79.

58、36%、89.50%、113.76%、89.39%。而同期的储蓄收益率为26.1%（按1998年7月1日降息后5年期储蓄年息5.22%计算），同期国债收益率为32.1%（按1998年5年期国债平均利率6.42%计算）。可以看出，封闭式基金的收益率要高于同期储蓄和国债，而且要高出一大块。,2020/8/14,84,细算基金五年收益 (2003-4-7),但是当时能够获得1.01元申购中签筹码的人终究是少数。而大多数人是基金上市后在二级市场上购买的。我们按上市首日开盘价买入计算，收益又如何呢？5只封闭式基金上市首日开盘价分别是1.45元、1.37元、2.01元（兴华因上市时正值开元、金泰交易价在峰

59、顶，所以开盘一步到位）、1.68元、1.36元。按这个价买入5年来分红收益率分别为27.72%、58.50%、44.98%、68.39%、66.38%。仍然高于同期储蓄，除金泰外也均高于同期国债。,2020/8/14,85,细算基金五年收益 (2003-4-7),然而目前基金已折价交易，如果以现在的折价交易价格卖出，那收益又会怎样呢？2003年2月21日（星期五）5只封闭式基金的收盘价分别为0.78元、0.83元、0.94元、0.89元、0.82元。如果以这个价卖出，以1.01元发行价持股的收益率分别为17.03%、61.53%、82.57%、101.88%、70.57%，除金泰外均比同期储蓄和国债收益高。而按开盘价买入的收益率分别为-18.48%、19.09%、8.26%、21.37%、26.68%，多数低于同期储蓄收入，更低于同期国债收入，且金泰已经亏损。,2020/8/14,86,The IPO Market,2020/8/14,87,The IPO Market,Terminology: First-day return = 100% x (Closing price offer price)/ offer price; First-