電子類股交易值佔大盤交易值約60%，近年來更不斷成長，即見其市場重要性，故本研究以電子類指指數為標竿指數，以多因子模型與非流動性指標為依歸，用以區別股性與客觀的評分排名，最後透過二次規劃求解最適權重，建構目標追蹤誤差3%的電子類股增值型指數基金。
本研究以主成分分析法綜合多因子模型與流動性效果，實證結果發現多因子模型在樣本期間2004/1到2009/12的平均解釋能力為52.4%，其中以累積因子溢酬測試因子穩定性發現穩定因子如下: 槓桿因子、價值因子、價值成長比因子、盈餘品質因子。以截面回歸 (Cross-regression)測試非流動性指標的有效性，實證發現子期間顯著解釋與報酬預期為正向關係。最後，透過主成分分析，結合多因子模型與非流動性指標效果，在適當的限制下輔以二次規劃求解，本研究得出在樣本期間內，電子類股增值型指數基金其資訊比率0.69、追蹤誤差3%。進一步支持多因子模型與非流動性指標的增值效果。

In Taiwan, the trading value of electronics related stocks makes up over 60% of Taiwan stock market and has grown gradually to the recent high of 70.03% in Dec. 2009. The high correlation between the TAIEX and TAIEX Electronic Index raises our interest to build a fund aiming to outperform TAIEX Electronic Index performance with similar risk as index by constructing an enhanced fund. We are keen to investigate if active management gain higher return than passive one according to our empirical study. This paper presents a combination effect of multi-factor model in the electronic sector and illiquidity, that expected returns are increasing in illiquidity. The major outcome is that we construct single industry Multi-Factor Model (MFM) and test for its prediction ability. The other is we form a proxy for illiquidity and incorporate it into the multi-factor model using Principal Component Analysis (PCA). The objective of this study is to discover mispriced stocks and make adjustments to build an enhanced fund, targeting 3% tracking error.
As a result, the most stable factors based on cumulative return in forecasting electronic sector are Leverage, Value3, ValueToGrowth, EarningQulity respectively. The average explanatory power of electronic multi-factor model (ELE-MFM) is around 52.4% over the sample from 2004/1 to 2009/12. For illiquidity measure, we run cross-regression of stock return on illiquidity and other stock characteristics from the period of 2000/1 to 2009/12. What we find is sub-period is the significant evidence for the work of illiquidity. With the PCA combination of electronic multi-factor model and illiquidity measure into scores coming from the first principal component, we rank stocks through it. With the appropriate constraint rules added into our quadratic programming, the portfolio using the techniques combining multi-factor model and liquidity measures shows IR 0.69, TE 3% and Alpha 2.04% in our sample period. The work of the electronic Multi-Factor Model (MFM) and the illiquidity measure showing satisfactory result support enhanced skills.

I.Introduction 6
1.1 Introduction and Background 6
1.2 Active and Passive management 9
1.3 The objective of this study 10
1.4 Research structure 11
II.Literature review 12
2.1 Modern portfolio theory 12
2.2 Illiquidity and stock return 13
2.3 The method of enhancement 14
III.Methodology 16
3.1 Data description 16
3.2 The stocks included 18
3.3 Benchmark 18
3.4 Multi-factor risk model (MFM) 19
3.5 Illiquidity 24
3.5 PCA Scores 27
3.7 Optimized weight 29
3.8 Performance analysis 30
IV.Empirical results 32
4.1 MFM ranking 32
4.2 Illiquidity ranking 39
4.3 Portfolio performance 44
4.4 Sensitivity analysis 49
V.Conclusion and Suggestions 55
5.1 Conclusion 55
5.2 Suggestion 57
REFERENCES 58
APPENDIX 61

1.Ammann, M. and H. Zimmermann (2001) ,"Tracking error and tactical asset
allocation,"Journal of Financial Analysis, 57 (2), 32-43.
2.Andrews, C., D. Ford & K. Mallison (1986),"The design of index funds and
alternative replication," The Investment Analysis, October, 16-23.
3.Carhart, M. M. (1997),“On persistence in mutual fund performance," Journal of
Finance, 52(1), 57-82.
4.Collins, B. M. and F. J. Fabozzi (1989), "Portfolio and Investment Management,"
Probus Publishing Company, 183-200
5.Goodwin, T. H. (1998), "The information ratio,"Financial Analysts Journal,
54(4), 34-43.
6.Grinold, R. C. and R. N. Kahn (1995), "Active portfolio management," Chicago:
Probus Publishing Company.
7.Jorion, P. (2002), "Enhanced index funds and tracking error optimization,"
Working paper, University of California at Irvine.
8.Jorion, P. (2003), "Portfolio optimization with tracking-error constraints,"
Financial Analysts Journal, 59 (5), 70-82.
9.Meade, N. and G. R. Salkin (1989), "Index funds construction and performance
measurement," Journal of the Operational Research Society, 40, 871-879.
10.Riepe, M. W. and M. D. Werner (1998), "Are enhanced index mutual funds
worthy of their name?" Journal of Investing, 18 (3), 6-15.
11.Amihud, Y. (2002). Illiquidity and stock returns: cross-section and time-series effects. Journal of Financial Markets 5, 31–56.
12.Amihud, Y., Mendelson, H. (1986). Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread. Journal of Financial Economics 17, 223–249.
13.Fama, E.F., MacBeth, J.D. (1973). Risk, return, and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of Political Economy 81, 607–636.
14.DiBartolomeo, D.(2000), "The Enhanced Index Fund as an Alternative to Indexed Equity Management. " Working paper, Northfield Information Services,Boston, MA.
15.Fama, Eugene F. and Kenneth R. French, (1992), " The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns, " Journal of Finance, Vol. 47, No. 2, June, pp.427-465.
16.S. Shyu, Y. Jeng , W.H. Ton, K.J. Lee and H.M. Chuang (2006), "Taiwan Multi-factor Model Construction: Equity Market Neutral Strategies Application, Department of Finance," Managerial Finance, Vol. 32, No. 11, pp. 915-947. National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan.
17.Atkins, A.B., Dyl, E.A. (1997). Transactions costs and holding periods for common stocks. Journal of Finance 52, 309–325.
18.Banz, R.W. (1981). The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of Financial Economics 9, 3–18.
19.Barry, C.B., Brown, S.J. (1984). Differential information and the small firm effect. Journal of Financial Information 13, 283–294.
20.Berk, J. (1995). A critique of size-related anomalies. Review of Financial Studies 8, 275–286.
21.Berkman, H., Eleswarapu, V.R. ( 1998). Short-term traders and liquidity: a test using Bombay stock exchange data. Journal of Financial Economics 47, 339–355.
22.Boudoukh, J., Richardson, M., Smith, T. (1993). Is the ex ante risk premium always positive? Journal of Financial Economics 34, 387–408.
23.Fama, E.F., French, K.R. (1992). The cross section of expected stock returns. Journal of Finance 47, 427–465.
24.Stoll, H.R., Whaley, R.H. (1983). Transaction costs and the small firm effect. Journal of Financial Economics 12, 57–79.
25.Carhart, M. M. (1997),“On persistence in mutual fund performance," Journal of Finance, 52 (1), 57-82.
26.Chen, R. C., C. F. Lee, S. Rahman and A. Chan (1992), "A cross-sectional analysis of mutual funds' market timing and security selection skill," Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 19, 659-675.
27.Droms, W. G. and D. A. Walker (1996), "Mutual fund investment performance," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 36 (3), 347-363.
28.Riepe, M. W. and M. D. Werner (1998), "Are enhanced index mutual funds worthy of their name?" Journal of Investing, 18 (3), 6-15.
29.Rudd, A. (1980), "Optimal selection of passive portfolios," Financial Management, 4, 57-66.
30.Viet, E. T. and J. M. Cheney (1982), "Are mutual funds market timer?" Journal of Portfolio Management, 8 (2), 35-42.
31.Sharpe, William F. (1964), "Capital Asset Price: A Theory of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions of Risk," Journal of Finance, Vol. 19, No. 3, September, pp. 425-442.
32.Goldfarb, D. and Idnani, A. (1982). Dual and Primal-Dual Methods for Solving Strictly Convex Quadratic Programs. In Numerical Analysis J.P. Hennart, ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. pp. 226-239.
33.Goldfarb, D. and Idnani, A. (1983). A numerically stable dual method for solving strictly convex quadratic programs. Mathematical Programming 27, 1-33.
34.Malkiel, B.G. (1995), "Return from investing in equity mutual fund 1971 to 1991," Journal of Finance, 50 (2), 679-698.
35.Meade, N. and G. R. Salkin (1989), "Index fundsconstruction and performance measurement," Journal of the Operational Research Society, 40, 871-879.
36.BARRA (1998), ―United States Equity Version 3 (E3), ―Risk Model Handbook.