Investors are always searching the market for stocks that are undervalued and that can potentially create value. One way of finding undervalued stocks is to carefully analyze firms’ accounting ratios. Researchers have in the past found evidence that an investment in value stocks, often categorized as low P/E and low P/B ratio stocks, in most cases generates more value than an investment in growth stocks (categorized as high P/E and P/B). However, we found a lack of studies that investigates if this relationship exists on the Swedish market and if it holds true during the financial crisis. This resulted in the following research question:Would a portfolio consisting of value stocks outperform a portfolio consisting of growth stocks on NASDAQ OMX Stockholm?In order to answer the research question a quantitative method with a deductive approach has been applied and historical stock prices and accounting ratios over the time period 2005-2013 have been collected from Thomson Reuters Datastream. Returns were then calculated and portfolios of value and growth stocks were created based on the accounting ratios for every year. The returns where risk-adjusted with the help of the Sharpe-ratio before the Mann-Whitney U test was used in order to see if there is a significant difference between value and growth portfolios.For the price to earnings ratio the risk-adjusted returns of the value portfolio only outperformed the risk-adjusted returns of the growth portfolio two years out of the nine years tested. For the price to book measure the risk-adjusted returns of the growth portfolio outperformed the risk-adjusted value portfolio seven out of nine times.The results of the study seems to indicate that growth stocks outperform value stocks, contrary to much of the previous research that has concluded that value stocks outperform growth stocks. However, our findings were not statistically significant and we could not draw any clear conclusions from our results. The study did contribute with new knowledge however, by increasing the data available for value investing in Sweden and highlighting a need for more studies into smaller stock markets and for a period of financial distress, such as the financial crisis.

The Value investment and Growth investment are investment strategies of choosing stocks. These two methods are adopted by international financial investment institutions and mutual fund managers. The study is aim to learn when we classify value stock and growth stock by market-to-book ratio and price-earning ratio, if the investment return would be higher than TSEC weighted index. In addition, we seek for a better investment strategy to improve investment performance further. The study also looks into market abnormal effects , such as January effect, size effect¡Ketc, and also discuss about the variables of stocks holding period and debt ratio. The monthly and yearly investment return rates are used to calculate 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 year accumulated abnormal stock return ratio and evaluate if these variables affect investment performance of value stock and growth stock. The results are as following: 1. When classification of market-to-book ratio are adopted, the investment return of value stock is higher than growth stock. 2. When classification of market-to-book ratio are adopted, the investment return of low debt ratio stock is higher than high debt ratio stock. However, when classification of price-earning ratio are adopted, it is not obvious. 3. When bull market is formed in Taiwan stock market whose index is still low, invest in value stock could get a good long term investment performance. 4. Regarding the evaluation of risk, the vibration of growth stock is more than value stock. The vibration of TSEC weighted index is the least. 5. The January effect exists in Taiwan stock market. However, the size effect is not obvious. 6. TSEC weighted index and the Dow Jones Industrial index affect the investment return of value stock and growth stock; the TSEC weighted index, value stock and growth stock are positively correlated. The Dow Jones Industrial Index, value stock and growth stock are negatively correlated.

No description available.

本研究以投資風格為主軸,探討2001年七月到2010年六月間台灣股市的股票區分價值股(value stock)與成長股(growth stock),並篩選樂透型股票(lottery type stock)其具備低股價與高的公司特有風險,探討整體台灣股市依據相關分類的報酬率與風險並探討影響投資報酬率與風險的主要原因。結論如下: 以市價/淨值比、本益比與殖利率分類上，投資績效是價值股優於成長股，以市價/淨值比的價值效益最明顯,同時市價/淨值比之價值股表現亦高於其它分類組合。市價/淨值比、本益比與殖利率分類的二因子分類, 投資績效是價值股優於成長股，以市價/淨值與本益比兩因子做分類的價值效益最明顯。同時市價/淨值與本益比之價值股表現亦高於其它分類組合。不論多頭或空頭市場, 價值型的投資績效投擊敗成長型,空頭時期的價值型投資相對較抗跌,而成長型股票跌幅較市場大。 風險衡量上，樂透型股票的風險最高、成長股風險次之，價值股最低，但成長型投資績效較差，因此高風險不一定有高報酬。樂透型股票於此期間有異常超額報酬,報酬率高於價值型股票,但其風險(標準差)高於任何分類投資組合,夏普指數(每單位風險所獲得的超額報酬)則以(市價/淨值比、殖利率)分類的價值型組合最佳,主要原因為2001年六月股市屬於低檔,此期間加權股價指數上漲的50.09%,除金融海嘯期間股市大跌外,樂透型股票具備高波動性所以期間股市具備超額報酬。