| 研究生: |
謝孟劭 Hsieh, Meng-Shao |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
網路關注度與ESG評級對台灣股票型基金與ETF之資金流量探討 The Impact of Internet Attention and ESG Ratings on Fund Flows in Taiwanese Equity Funds and ETFs |
| 指導教授: | 楊曉文 |
| 口試委員: |
張景宏
岳夢蘭 |
| 學位類別: |
碩士
Master |
| 系所名稱: |
商學院 - 金融學系 Department of Money and Banking |
| 論文出版年: | 2026 |
| 畢業學年度: | 115 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 45 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 投資人關注度 、Google 搜尋量指數 、ESG 評級 、基金資金流量 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | Investor Attention, Google Search Volume Index, ESG Ratings, Fund Flows |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:20 下載:0 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
投資人在資訊爆炸的環境中,受限於有限之認知資源,往往傾向先關注吸引其目光之少數標的,使網路關注度成為驅動資金配置之潛在因素;與此同時,ESG 永續投資近年蓬勃發展,永續品質是否影響投資人之資金配置決策亦日益受到重視。基於此一背景,本研究以 Chen, Chen and Lai (2021) 之「網路搜尋、基金資金流量與績效」為理論基礎,將關注度框架延伸至台灣市場,並進一步納入台灣經濟新報(TEJ)建構之 TESG 永續評級。鑑於既有文獻已證實 ESG 資訊對個股市場具有實質影響,本研究進一步檢視此一影響能否延伸至基金市場,亦即網路關注度與 ESG 品質是否能驅動台灣股票型開放式基金與 ETF 之資金流量。
本研究蒐集 48 檔基金自成立日至 2024 年 11 月之完整 Google 搜尋量資料,透過多段查詢與重疊期校準建構長期追蹤資料(panel data),其中 3 檔因觀察期不足而排除,最終分析樣本涵蓋 45 檔基金、1,326 筆基金月觀察值,平均每檔基金觀察 29.5 個月。
實證結果顯示三項主要發現。第一,在控制基金個體效應與時間效應後,網路關注度與 ESG 品質對資金流量皆無穩健顯著之影響,與既有文獻於美國市場所觀察到之關注度驅動效應相異,也顯示個股市場之 ESG 影響未能直接延伸至台灣基金市場。第二,真正穩健驅動台灣基金資金流量者為費用率與基金規模,二者均呈顯著負向關係。第三,透過時間異質性分析發現,台灣基金資金流量之驅動因子具有時間條件性。本研究以高股息 ETF 熱潮為界,將樣本劃分為前期(2017–2021)與後期(2022–2024),發現費用率敏感度與規模影響於 2022 年後發生顯著之結構性轉變,基金配息率之吸金作用也於高股息 ETF 普及後顯著減弱。
Constrained by limited cognitive resources, investors tend to focus first on assets that capture their attention, rendering internet attention a potential driver of capital allocation. Meanwhile, the rapid growth of ESG investing has raised the question of whether sustainability quality shapes investors' allocation decisions. Building on Chen, Chen, and Lai (2021), this study extends the investor-attention framework to Taiwan and incorporates the TESG sustainability ratings from the Taiwan Economic Journal (TEJ). Given the established influence of ESG information in the equity market, we examine whether it extends to the fund market—that is, whether internet attention and ESG quality drive the flows of Taiwanese equity open-end funds and ETFs.Using complete Google search volume data for 48 funds from inception through November 2024, we construct panel data via multi-segment queries and overlapping-period calibration. After excluding 3 funds with insufficient observations, the final sample comprises 45 funds and 1,326 fund-month observations, averaging 29.5 months per fund.
Three main findings emerge. First, after controlling for both fund and time fixed effects, neither internet attention nor ESG quality significantly affects fund flows—diverging from the attention-driven effect documented in the U.S. and indicating that the equity-market ESG effect does not extend to Taiwanese funds. Second, the robust drivers of fund flows are the expense ratio and fund size, both significantly negative. Third, a time-heterogeneity analysis shows that these drivers are time-contingent: partitioning the sample at the high-dividend ETF boom into earlier (2017–2021) and later (2022–2024) periods, we find that sensitivity to the expense ratio and fund size shifted significantly after 2022, while the flow-attracting effect of dividend yield weakened following the proliferation of high-dividend ETFs.
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 4
第三節 研究貢獻 4
第四節 研究架構 5
第二章 文獻回顧 6
第一節 投資人關注度與基金資金流量 6
第二節 市場發展階段與散戶行為差異 7
第三節 ESG 評級分歧、偏好與基金資金流量 7
第四節 高股息 ETF 競爭與台灣市場特殊性 8
第三章 研究方法 9
第一節 研究流程 9
第二節 研究假說 10
第三節 實證模型 12
第四節 變數說明 15
第四章 實證結果分析 20
第一節 研究樣本說明 20
第二節 敘述性統計 22
第三節 實證結果 25
第五章 結論與建議 40
第一節 研究結論 40
第二節 研究限制與建議 41
參考文獻 43
吳怡臻(2025)。投資人情緒與高股息ETF報酬率的關係 (未出版碩士論文) 。國立成功大學,台南市。https://thesis.lib.ncku.edu.tw/thesis/detail/4b9eaf fb0c5703ceb54c122af5989b5a/
投信投顧公會(2025)。2024 調查報告。https://www.sitca.org.tw/ROC/MonthRpt/ MR2006.aspx?PGMID=MR06
臺灣集中保管結算所(2025)。2024 臺股回顧。https://www.tdcc.com.tw/ portal/zh/news/content/4028c0b492fbdd1f019444131f610104
Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2008). All that glitters: The effect of attention and news on the buying behavior of individual and institutional investors. Review of Financial Studies, 21(2), 785–818.
Berg, F., Kölbel, J. F., & Rigobon, R. (2022). Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings. Review of Finance, 26(6), 1315–1344.
Birk, K., Jacob, S., & Wilkens, M. (2025). What attracts sustainable fund flows? Prospectus versus ratings. Journal of Asset Management, 26(2), 216–237.
Bollen, N. P. B. (2007). Mutual fund attributes and investor behavior. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 42(3), 683–708.
Capelle-Blancard, G., & Monjon, S. (2014). The performance of socially responsible funds: Does the screening process matter? European Financial Management, 20(3), 494–520.
Chen, H.-Y., Chen, H.-C., & Lai, C. W. (2021). Internet search, fund flows, and fund performance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 129, Article 106166.
Chevalier, J., & Ellison, G. (1997). Risk taking by mutual funds as a response to incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 105(6), 1167–1200.
Christensen, D. M., Serafeim, G., & Sikochi, A. (2022). Why is corporate virtue in the eye of the beholder? The case of ESG ratings. The Accounting Review, 97(1), 147–175.
Da, Z., Engelberg, J., & Gao, P. (2011). In search of attention. Journal of Finance, 66(5), 1461–1499.
Hartzmark, S. M., & Solomon, D. H. (2019). The dividend disconnect. Journal of Finance, 74(5), 2153–2199.
Hartzmark, S. M., & Sussman, A. B. (2019). Do investors value sustainability? A natural experiment examining ranking and fund flows. The Journal of Finance, 74(6), 2789–2837.
Hirshleifer, D., & Teoh, S. H. (2003). Limited attention, information disclosure, and financial reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 36(1–3), 337–386.
Investment Company Institute, 2020. 2020 Investment company fact book, a review of trends and activities in the U.S. Investment company industry .
Jacobsen, B., & Nyborg, K. G. (2022). Online attention and mutual fund performance: Evidence from Norway. Finance Research Letters, 49, 103139.
Khan, M., Serafeim, G., & Yoon, A. (2016). Corporate sustainability: First evidence on materiality. The accounting review, 91(6), 1697-1724.
Kräussl, R., Oladiran, T., & Stefanova, D. (2024). A review on ESG investing: Investors' expectations, beliefs and perceptions. Journal of Economic Surveys, 38(2), 476–502.
Krüger, P. (2015). Corporate goodness and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics, 115(2), 304–329.
Lai, H.-H., Chang, T.-P., Hu, C.-H., & Chou, P.-C. (2022). Can Google search volume index predict the returns and trading volumes of stocks in a retail investor dominant market? Cogent Economics & Finance, 10(1), 2014640.
Pástor, Ľ., Stambaugh, R. F., & Taylor, L. A. (2021). Sustainable investing in equilibrium. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 550–571.
Renneboog, L., Ter Horst, J., & Zhang, C. (2008). Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(9), 1723–1742.
Renneboog, L., Ter Horst, J., & Zhang, C. (2011). Is ethical money financially smart? Nonfinancial attributes and money flows of socially responsible investment funds. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 20(4), 562–588.
Sirri, E. R., & Tufano, P. (1998). Costly search and mutual fund flows. The Journal of Finance, 53(5), 1589–1622.
Solomon, D. H., Soltes, E. F., & Sosyura, D. (2014). Winners in the spotlight: Media coverage of fund holdings as a driver of flows. Journal of Financial Economics, 113(1), 53–72.
Swamy, V., Dharani, M., & Takeda, F. (2019). Investor attention and Google Search Volume Index: Evidence from an emerging market using quantile regression analysis. Research in International Business and Finance, 50, 1–17.
全文公開日期 2031/08/04