基于成本

doi:10.12066/j.issn.1007-2861.1914

上海大学学报(自然科学版) ›› 2019, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (1): 155-163.doi: 10.12066/j.issn.1007-2861.1914

基于成本"粘性"下的投资组合模型

蔡宇欣¹^,², 任永平¹()

1. 上海大学管理学院, 上海 200444
2. 复旦大学管理学院, 上海 200433

收稿日期:2017-03-14 出版日期:2019-02-28 发布日期:2019-02-26
通讯作者: 任永平 E-mail:ypren@shu.edu.cn

Investment portfolio model considering cost stickiness

CAI Yuxin¹^,², REN Yongping¹()

1. School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China
2. School of Management, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China

Received:2017-03-14 Online:2019-02-28 Published:2019-02-26
Contact: REN Yongping E-mail:ypren@shu.edu.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

均值-方差 (mean variance, MV) 模型及均值-绝对偏差 (mean absolute deviation, MAD) 模型均为早期经典的投资组合模型. 在这 2 类模型的基础上, 考虑上市公司的成本"粘性"特征, 建立了适合现代投资理论的成本"粘性"下的均值-方差 (cost stickiness MV, CSMV) 投资组合模型及成本"粘性"下的均值-绝对偏差 (cost stickiness MAD, CSMAD) 模型. 以中国综合 A 股市场 2004---2015 年各资产的年、月平均收益率为测试样本及 2006---2015 年各资产的年、月平均收益率为检验样本的实证分析表明, 成本"粘性"下的均值-方差投资组合模型比传统的均值-方差投资组合模型的收益率表现更好, 成本"粘性"下的均值-绝对偏差模型明显优于均值-绝对偏差模型的收益率表现.

关键词: CSMV模型, CSMAD模型, 成本"粘性", 实证分析

Abstract:

The mean variance (MV) model and the mean absolute deviation (MAD) model are early classic portfolio models. Using the modern investment theory, this paper studies these two models by considering cost stickiness. Using the average annual and monthly income rates of the Chinese integrated stock market in the period of 2004---2015 as test samples, and the income rates in 2006---2015 as check samples, an empirical analysis shows that the profit of cost stickiness MV (CSMV) model is better than the MV model, and the profit of cost stickiness MAD (CSMAD) model is also better than the MAD model.

Key words: cost stickiness mean variance (CSMV) model, cost stickiness mean absolute deviation (CSMAD) model, cost stickiness, empirical analysis

中图分类号:

F406.7

蔡宇欣, 任永平. 基于成本"粘性"下的投资组合模型[J]. 上海大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 25(1): 155-163.

CAI Yuxin, REN Yongping. Investment portfolio model considering cost stickiness[J]. Journal of Shanghai University（Natural Science Edition）, 2019, 25(1): 155-163.

图/表 9

表1

图1

表2

表3

图2

图3

表4

图4

图5

参考文献 11

[1]	Markowitz H . Portfolio selection[J]. The Journal of Finance, 1952,7(1):77-91.
[2]	Konno H, Yamazaki H . Mean-absolute deviation portfolio optimization model and its applications to Tokyo stock market[J]. Management Science, 1991,37(4):519-531.
[3]	Young M R . A minimax portfolio selection rule with linear programming solution[J]. Management Science, 1998,44(4):673-683.
[4]	Cui X T, Zhu S S, Duan L , et al. Mean-variance portfolio optimization with parameter sensitivity control[J]. Optimization Methods and Software, 2016,31(3):755-774.
[5]	Banker R D, Chen L . Predicting earnings using a model based on cost variability and cost stickiness[J]. Accounting Review, 2006,81(2):285-307.
[6]	Xue S, Hong Y . Earnings management, corporate governance and expense stickiness[J]. China Journal of Accounting Research, 2016,9(1):41-58.
[7]	Anderson M C, Banker R D, Janakiraman S N . Are selling, general, and administrative costs "Sticky"?[J]. Journal of Accounting Research, 2003,41(1):47-63.
[8]	Banker R, Byzalov D, Chen L . Employment protection legislation, adjustment costs and crosscountry differences in cost behavior[J]. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2013,55(1):111-127.
[9]	Weiss D . Cost behavior and analysts' earnings forecasts[J]. Accounting Review, 2010,85(4):1441-1471.
[10]	孙铮, 刘浩 . 中国上市公司费用"粘性"行为研究[J]. 经济研究, 2004(12):26-34.
[11]	王明虎, 席彦群 . 产权治理自由现金流量和企业费用粘性[J]. 商业经济与管理, 2011,239(9):68-73.

基于成本"粘性"下的投资组合模型

Investment portfolio model considering cost stickiness

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 11

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价