Presented to the Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Economics and Social Sciences

Đăng ngày | Thể loại: | Lần tải: 0 | Lần xem: 4 | Page: 152 | FileSize: 0.88 M | File type: PDF
of x

Presented to the Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Economics and Social Sciences. When there are frictions in setting nominal wages, however, a riseintherealwagerequiresthatinflationbeallowedtodriftdown.Theinflation targeting central bank, seeing this drift down in inflation, cuts the interest rate to keep inflation on target. In our model, this cut in the interest rate triggers a credit boom and makes the economic expansion much bigger than is socially optimal. In a situation like this, a central bank that ‘leans against the wind’ when credit expands sharply would raise welfare by reducing the magnitude of the boom-bust cycle..... Giống các tài liệu khác được bạn đọc giới thiệu hoặc do sưu tầm lại và giới thiệu lại cho các bạn với mục đích nghiên cứu , chúng tôi không thu tiền từ thành viên ,nếu phát hiện tài liệu phi phạm bản quyền hoặc vi phạm pháp luật xin thông báo cho chúng tôi,Ngoài giáo án bài giảng này, bạn có thể download tiểu luận miễn phí phục vụ học tập Vài tài liệu tải về sai font không xem được, nguyên nhân máy tính bạn không hỗ trợ font củ, bạn tải các font .vntime củ về cài sẽ xem được.

https://tailieumienphi.vn/doc/presented-to-the-faculty-of-economics-and-social-sciences-of-the-university-of-f-2ez2tq.html

Nội dung


University of Fribourg (Switzerland) Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences F U N D A M E N T A L E Q U I T Y V A L U A T I O N S t o c k S e l e c t i o n b a s e d o n D i s c o u n t e d C a s h F l o w Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Economics and Social Sciences by PASCAL S. FROIDEVAUX from Le Noirmont (JU) Accepted by the Faculty’s Council on 1 July 2004 at the proposal of Professor Jacques Pasquier-Dorthe, University of Fribourg, Switzerland (First Reporter) and Professor Tung X. Bui, University of Hawai’i, USA (Second Reporter) Fribourg (Switzerland) 2004 II «The Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences at the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) neither approves nor disapproves the opinions expressed in a doctoral dissertation: they are to be considered those of the author (decision of the Faculty council of 23 January 1990)». III Table of Contents Table of Contents...............................................................................................................................III List of Tables and Figures...................................................................................................................V Abbreviations and Symbols ............................................................................................................ VIII Abstract................................................................................................................................................1 1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................2 PART I: COMMON STOCK INVESTMENT AND VALUATION.............................................3 2. THE INVESTMENT PROCESS..............................................................................3 2.1 MARKET EFFICIENCY: MODERN PORTFOLIO THEORY VS. FUNDAMENTAL ANALYSIS ..........4 2.2 VALUATION – MORE ART THAN SCIENCE? .............................................................................7 3. EQUITY VALUATION MODELS..........................................................................8 3.1 ASSET BASED VALUATION......................................................................................................8 3.2 ABSOLUTE VALUATION OR DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW MODELS..........................................10 3.2.1 Dividend Discount Models............................................................................................11 3.2.2 Free Cash Flow Discount Models .................................................................................12 3.2.3 Residual Income Models...............................................................................................13 3.3 RELATIVE VALUATION OR PRICE MULTIPLE MODELS .........................................................15 3.4 WHAT IS USED AND WHAT WORKS IN PRACTICE..................................................................17 PART II: THE FUNDAMENTAL EQUITY VALUATION MODEL .......................................21 4. THE FUNDAMENTAL EQUITY VALUATION MODEL................................21 4.1 OVERVIEW OF THE FUNDAMENTAL EQUITY VALUATION MODEL .......................................21 4.2 DETERMINING THE NOMINATOR: CASH FLOW, CASH FLOW GROWTH AND THE GROWTH DURATION .............................................................................................................25 4.2.1 The Cash Flow to Discount...........................................................................................25 4.2.2 Fundamental Cash Flow Growth...................................................................................29 4.2.3 The Fundamental Growth Duration...............................................................................36 4.3 DETERMINING THE DENOMINATOR: THE FUNDAMENTAL DISCOUNT RATE ........................38 4.3.1 Risk and the Required Rate of Return...........................................................................39 4.3.2 The Fundamental Risk Premium...................................................................................41 4.3.3 The Fundamental Discount Rate ...................................................................................48 IV PART III: EMPIRICAL TEST OF THE FUNDAMENTAL EQUITY VALUATION MODEL.............................................................................................................................................50 5. TEST OF THE FUNDAMENTAL EQUITY VALUATION MODEL..............50 5.1 PREVIOUS RESEARCH............................................................................................................50 5.2 RESEARCH DESIGN................................................................................................................52 5.3 EMPIRICAL RESULTS.............................................................................................................60 5.3.1 Input Specification Results............................................................................................60 5.3.2 Portfolio Strategy Results..............................................................................................62 5.3.3 Industry Specific Results...............................................................................................68 5.4 DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW VALUATION IN HIGH-TECH INDUSTRIES....................................77 6. RESULTS, IMPLICATIONS AND CONSEQUENCES.....................................82 6.1 SUMMARY AND RESULTS......................................................................................................83 6.2 INVESTING IN NON-EFFICIENT MARKETS..............................................................................85 6.3 POSSIBLE LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH.................................................................92 References..........................................................................................................................................99 Appendix..........................................................................................................................................110 V List of Tables and Figures Table 5.1: Average returns; Different input specifications; Buy-Sell; All industries; Top 10; 1994-2002 ..................................................................................................................................61 Figure 5.2: Returns and excess returns; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 6 month holding period.............................................................................................................................63 Figure 5.3: Returns and excess returns; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period.............................................................................................................................63 Figure 5.4: Returns and excess returns; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 3 year holding period.............................................................................................................................64 Figure 5.5: Holding period returns; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002.................................64 Figure 5.6: Annual excess returns; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period..........................................................................................................................................65 Figure 5.7: Annual returns; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period........66 Table 5.8: Returns, volatility and correlation coefficients of annual returns to S&P 500 returns; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period.............................................67 Figure 5.9: Trading results; All industries; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period.........67 Table 5.10: Total returns; Industrial industry, 1993-2002; 6 month, 1 year and 3 year holding periods........................................................................................................................................69 Figure 5.11: Annual excess returns; Industrial industry; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period.............................................................................................................................70 Figure 5.12: Holding period returns; Industrial industry; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002.......................71 Figure 5.13: Trading results; Industrial industry; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period..........................................................................................................................................71 Table 5.14: Total returns; Healthcare industry; 1993-2002; 6 month, 1 year and 3 year holding periods........................................................................................................................................72 Figure 5.15: Annual excess returns; Healthcare industry; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period.............................................................................................................................73 Figure 5.16: Trading results; Healthcare industry; ‘Best estimate’; 1993-2002; 1 year holding period..........................................................................................................................................74 Figure 5.17: Total returns; Consumer discretionary industry; 1993-2002; 6 month, 1 year and 3 year holding periods...................................................................................................................74 Figure 5.18: Annual excess returns; Consumer discretionary industry; ‘Best estimate’; 1993- 2002; 1 year holding period........................................................................................................75 ... - tailieumienphi.vn 710460

Tài liệu liên quan


Xem thêm