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.

Abstract Mutual fund, which has become a popular domestic investment tool possess a lot of advantages. However, how on earth investors could choose the fund that worth investing is often confusing. This research begins from the qualities of mutual fund itself and it¡¦s manager. I¡¦ll discuss the influence that the type of fund, achievement in the past, scale of fund, turnover rate, risks and investors¡¦ age, sex, schooling record and experiences would have on its achievement. Hoping through these different sides of thinking would provide a direction for investors when choosing Mutual fund. This research was done in the period from January, 1997 to January, 2002, after excluding some of the survivorship bias, we sift through the whole information in the five years, and we acquire 59 open type that would be used as sample fund in this research. We adopt Jensen-performance-estimated model and 4-factor model as achievement measure standard. By setting tests of Pearson Correlation Coefficients and Durbin-Watson, plus OLS, we estate mate Jensen-performance-estimated model and 4-factor model, and the result of its alpha would be cross-analyzed with the multiple linear regression model, thus we¡¦ll clearly see the relation of quality between mutual fund and their managers. Before going on the cross-analysis, in order to seek for the best estimating method, we test heteroscedasticity by residual pattern and Breusch-Pagan Test. Since it comes out there is no heteroscedasticity, we still conduct the process by OLS to observe how the relation between the qualities of mutual fund itself and that of managers will affect on fund achievement. We found 4-factor model is more convincing among all other achievement evaluation model though the results vary from types of model. In the achievement index, a positive and remarkable difference type of fund is from Jensen index,, which coincided with Dahlquist, Engstrom, and Soderlind(2000)¡BJia-ling Hong(2000). Under 4-factor model, global fund and region ones appear obvious negative related, but high-tech types and general are not convincing at all. Besides, the influence of reward in the past and the scale of it shows the conclusion that two model are related positively in achievement side of short and long term, but negative in scale. Moreover, the risks can¡¦t explain the achievement difference, and turnover-rate doesn¡¦t affect achievement directly, the outcome coincided with the prove of Ippolito(1989) . Finally, which this research shows that the types results vary from managers personal qualities, but most of them can¡¦t explain the achievement differences. We only catch that under Jensen index, managers who get their MBA degree abroad tends to have positive relation in achievement of fund.