<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?><feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/' xmlns:georss='http://www.georss.org/georss' xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609</id><updated>2011-11-27T16:43:51.949-08:00</updated><category term='行為財務學'/><category term='問題'/><category term='購屋'/><category term='股票風險溢酬'/><category term='資產配置'/><category term='讀書心得'/><category term='觀念釐清'/><category term='TIPS'/><category term='文章待讀'/><category term='遊記'/><category term='MPT'/><category term='股利'/><category term='ETF常識'/><category term='債券'/><category term='定期定額'/><category term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>David理財札記</title><subtitle type='html'>創格緣起：（1）盼望能多用Freemind做出有關財務觀念的心智圖。（2）內容將以財務觀念的探討為主。然而我並非學財經的，這個札記只是讀書筆記而已，不登大雅之堂。</subtitle><link rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default?max-results=100'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/'/><link rel='hub' href='http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><generator version='7.00' uri='http://www.blogger.com'>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>68</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>100</openSearch:itemsPerPage><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-5137311387232458671</id><published>2011-11-13T00:27:00.001-08:00</published><updated>2011-11-13T00:27:24.824-08:00</updated><title type='text'>「不理性的力量」讀後心得</title><summary type='text'>丹。艾瑞利。不理性的力量：掌握工作、生活與愛情的行為經濟學。The upside of irrationality: The unexpected benefits of defying logic at work and at home.  享樂宜間斷。  受苦宜連續。EX報稅或寫作業。  避免「享樂跑步機」效應。  </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/5137311387232458671/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/11/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5137311387232458671'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5137311387232458671'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/11/blog-post.html' title='「不理性的力量」讀後心得'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-2840134334320761428</id><published>2011-07-06T22:59:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-07-06T23:09:27.489-07:00</updated><title type='text'>資產配置的仿擬 Monte-Carlo</title><summary type='text'>(D:\my_documents\Dropbox\理財\財務報表\怪老子\EXCELM資產配置的仿擬 Monte-Carlo.xls ）    ▲ 8年，年化報酬分別為5與1%（股與債），每年存入60萬，期初為210萬。（風險以十年波動值的平均來估較為合理）    ▲ 21年（退休前），年化報酬分別為5與1%（股與債），除了子女留學階段每年額外存入60萬，期初為210萬。  </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/2840134334320761428/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/07/monte-carlo.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2840134334320761428'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2840134334320761428'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/07/monte-carlo.html' title='資產配置的仿擬 Monte-Carlo'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://lh4.ggpht.com/-_lYqfXWAqlQ/ThVMq92zsiI/AAAAAAAAUjs/WM_I4FL1ui4/s72-c/clip_image002%25255B9%25255D_thumb%25255B1%25255D.jpg?imgmax=800' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7177002545090748931</id><published>2011-06-29T16:27:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-29T16:27:14.369-07:00</updated><title type='text'>TD Ameritrade 可看晨星付費報告與投資組合X-Ray</title><summary type='text'>  ▲ TD 竟然可以看到晨星付費工具：投資組合的X-RAY。好感動。    ▲ 左欄可見到晨星付費才能看的「Analyst reports」。  ▲ ETF項的左欄有好多寶貴的東西，有空再慢慢看。  </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7177002545090748931/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/td-ameritrade-x-ray.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7177002545090748931'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7177002545090748931'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/td-ameritrade-x-ray.html' title='TD Ameritrade 可看晨星付費報告與投資組合X-Ray'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://lh6.ggpht.com/-6cyVVoB3hPY/Tgu0uS3F2ZI/AAAAAAAAUhY/KTNdu9rTofU/s72-c/clip_image002_thumb%25255B1%25255D.jpg?imgmax=800' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-8243011987306072594</id><published>2011-06-16T02:25:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-16T02:25:41.245-07:00</updated><title type='text'>讀「投資人宣言」</title><summary type='text'>金融海嘯前不久，我自上次買股後過了幾年，因為眼前一些雜誌（我訂了錢雜誌之類的）大吹大擂，原物料上漲、新興市場、油價期貨，別人都大賺特賺，加上通膨得厲害，我想錢愈來愈薄，所以就將幾十萬的儲蓄拿來買JF的一些基金。大約不到一年就遇上了海嘯。  （上次出清是因為沒有等到什麼利潤，而為了還清松柏林的房貸與爸的債務，所以賣掉股票，因為算來算去房貸成本與股市獲利，我可說是呆頭鵝被金融市場剝了兩層皮。）  那時心裡也很爭扎，對買基金很沒概念，心裡很不好受，不過也想攤平虧損，追買後又大跌，我心都涼了。  海嘯後，我也在台銀買進一些個股，只要有10%的資本利得我就賣出。這樣也有賺到一些錢，弭平在JF基金上的損失。現在想，那時運氣好，適逢海嘯後大盤從谷底爬起來的機會。  不過，真正叫我贖回JF基金的緣故是這個時候我讀到了綠角的網站，也開始涉獵一些理財的書籍。我發現JF的費用率太高，對投資人十分不利，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/8243011987306072594/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/blog-post_16.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8243011987306072594'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8243011987306072594'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/blog-post_16.html' title='讀「投資人宣言」'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3116677631957882729</id><published>2011-06-15T07:12:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-17T00:26:27.078-07:00</updated><title type='text'>iShares TIP 對債券配息的解釋（實質利率只有0.22%，卻有升息的風險）</title><summary type='text'> 以下數據是 TIP 的＠2011/06/16，      ▲ 這個也有負值的，如STIP。「實質的到期利率」就是貼現率，是債券未通膨調整之現金流的當前價值，其市價包括實質配息的部分，但是不包括通膨因子調整的部分。（怎麼會有負值，除非配息為負值，但配息怎麼能是負值？K=D/P      P=D/（K-G）  (K-G)*P=D  KP-GP=D  KP=D+GP  K=D/P+G  假定債券的配息是固定的，故G=0，  則K=D/P  AVERAGE 是所持有的債券的加權平均的意思。  又，P=D/K，意謂著當K       ============================================  Yield to maturity（The rate of return an investor would receive if a security is held to</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3116677631957882729/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/ishares-tip.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3116677631957882729'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3116677631957882729'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/ishares-tip.html' title='iShares TIP 對債券配息的解釋（實質利率只有0.22%，卻有升息的風險）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://lh5.ggpht.com/-pDrXlIHhTng/Tfi9Fj96TTI/AAAAAAAAUdQ/oDcS1CLxyB0/s72-c/clip_image002_thumb%25255B1%25255D.jpg?imgmax=800' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-1498895748554064495</id><published>2011-06-14T02:03:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-14T02:03:29.031-07:00</updated><title type='text'>2011年債券投資的意義</title><summary type='text'>一、考查歷史  二、探究理論  Bernstein先生的理由在於   短期債券的殖利率已經沒有比現金高多少    卻還要承受升息時的風險    所以建議直接持有現金    這等於是把現金與債券部位的duration縮短    可以減低升息所造成的衝擊     最近在想一個問題，債券的兩大天敵，一個是通膨，一個是升息。TIPS抗通膨債券能解決通膨的威脅，但面對升息似乎仍然無能為力，而且TIP的DURATION好像還滿長的，大約4.55年，而MATURITY 則為8.87年。  三、  </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/1498895748554064495/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/2011.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1498895748554064495'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1498895748554064495'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/2011.html' title='2011年債券投資的意義'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4609268945821292275</id><published>2011-06-14T01:36:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-14T01:36:16.460-07:00</updated><title type='text'>《投資金律》 William Bernstein</title><summary type='text'>《投資金律》 William Bernstein    The four pillars of investing: Lessons for building a winning portfolio     如何衡量股票（或其指數）的公平價值？             何謂「貼現率」？（1）預期的投資報酬。（2）與利率環境有關。        Irving Fisher 提出「股利折現模型」(Discounted Divident Model, DDM)，這個公式很直觀，但也容易被濫用。 市場價值=股息現值/（貼現率-股息成長率）。         高登公式。 貼現率（市場報酬）=股息收益率+股息成長率。從高登公式似乎顯示我應該青睞高股息的股票。         作者在94頁指出，因為股票已經到了高峰，未來不可能有10%獲利的機會，大約只能維持債券的獲利水準，即6%，而債券也適用高登公式</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4609268945821292275/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/william-bernstein.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4609268945821292275'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4609268945821292275'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/william-bernstein.html' title='《投資金律》 William Bernstein'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-2297223011829101566</id><published>2011-06-13T20:40:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-13T20:40:37.899-07:00</updated><title type='text'>TIPS 的「行為」與價值</title><summary type='text'>保障本金贖回，是通膨調整過後的。  債券配息率也是經通膨調整後的。  因此，具有「黃金本位貨幣制度」的特徵。  如果美金貶值，意思也包括某種程度的通膨，同樣一塊美金，所能購買的外國產品變少了。  如果美元升息，TIPS的價格則一樣會受到傷害，這一點則大概是所有「中長期債券」的宿命。  </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/2297223011829101566/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/tips.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2297223011829101566'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2297223011829101566'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/tips.html' title='TIPS 的「行為」與價值'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3415307225091644567</id><published>2011-06-13T00:34:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-13T21:11:11.856-07:00</updated><title type='text'>為什麼要廣泛分散投資 Why diversification?</title><summary type='text'>一、熟讀股票市場的歷史的結果  四個支柱：理論、歷史、心理學、券商。  這四個支柱，我覺得「歷史」是最重要的。  「無法記取歷史教訓的人必會重蹈覆轍」。  LTMM失敗的例子，2000年網泡。1929年大蕭條。     二、戰爭歷史的陰影  「然而德國、日本、阿根廷與印度等國的投資者就沒那麼幸運，這些國家戰後遍地荒涼，投資者的報酬簡直少得可憐。」==》戰爭若發生在所投資的地區，比方說台灣，或美國，或中國，則投資部位可能會化為烏有。所以，建立廣泛分散的投資計畫是必要的。  「1913年時，沒有人看得出來美加瑞瑞未來的榮景，也沒人看得出德日阿印的瘡痍。」==》風險之所以稱為風險，往往也是人們看不見的。想要涉入「市場風險」提高報酬其實容易犯下「事後諸葛的偏誤」。所以，建立廣泛分散的投資計畫是必要的。     三、效率市場理論：套利空間微小、鯊魚理論的實踐  股票風險溢酬高或低呢？</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3415307225091644567/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-diversification.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3415307225091644567'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3415307225091644567'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-diversification.html' title='為什麼要廣泛分散投資 Why diversification?'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-9012300189500903103</id><published>2011-06-11T09:32:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-11T09:32:19.365-07:00</updated><title type='text'>偏好高配息類股（中鋼、中華電之類）的蔽病</title><summary type='text'>Homemade Dividends  Should retirees limit their spending to the interest and dividends they receive? Ken French says investors should be indifferent to how they raise cash, whether through dividends and interest, or through the sale of shares--a method Merton Miller called "homemade dividends." Despite the economic logic, some investors focus on dividends and interest. While this approach may </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/9012300189500903103/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/blog-post_11.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/9012300189500903103'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/9012300189500903103'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/blog-post_11.html' title='偏好高配息類股（中鋼、中華電之類）的蔽病'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3762848595566315751</id><published>2011-06-10T09:51:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2011-06-10T18:17:38.074-07:00</updated><title type='text'>投資偏好本國的利弊</title><summary type='text'>Fama and French answer topical and timeless questions.  Home Bias   Investors tend to overweight their equity portfolios with stocks from their home country market. Ken French says that, while home bias is still the norm, investors have significantly increased their allocation to foreign markets over the last 30 years. He explains that investors might overweight their home market for economic </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3762848595566315751/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3762848595566315751'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3762848595566315751'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2011/06/blog-post.html' title='投資偏好本國的利弊'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-5276995726985444167</id><published>2010-06-24T23:47:00.001-07:00</published><updated>2010-06-24T23:51:27.791-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='資產配置'/><title type='text'>新興市場的資產配置比例可能比所想像的還要高</title><summary type='text'>You May Have More in Emerging Markets Than You Thought  There's good news for those interested in capitalizing on growth in emerging markets--you probably already have more exposure than you think. When you look at where companies sell their products, not simply where they are domiciled or on what stock exchange their shares trade, an interesting picture emerges.  這篇文章提到人們在新興市場所投資的金額實際大於所預期的。</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/5276995726985444167/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/06/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5276995726985444167'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5276995726985444167'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/06/blog-post.html' title='新興市場的資產配置比例可能比所想像的還要高'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-935541907797649460</id><published>2010-01-27T22:26:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-27T22:26:18.342-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='TIPS'/><title type='text'>TIPS與一月期短期債券做為通膨避險工具的比較</title><summary type='text'>TIPS與一月期短期債券做為通膨避險工具的比較

Q&amp;A: Seeking the Best Inflation Hedge
How do TIPS and one-month Treasury bills compare as inflation hedges?EFF: TIPs are obviously a great hedge against inflation, but there is still uncertainty about the short-term real return on long-term TIPS. A long-term TIPS is a long-term loan to the Government at a fixed real interest rate. Variation through time in the expected </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/935541907797649460/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/tips.html#comment-form' title='1 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/935541907797649460'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/935541907797649460'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/tips.html' title='TIPS與一月期短期債券做為通膨避險工具的比較'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>1</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4979811191947181612</id><published>2010-01-24T17:18:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-24T17:52:39.847-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>我的理財觀</title><summary type='text'>基督徒的理財觀

猶記得大學時在圖書館拜讀社會學家韋伯《新教倫理與資本主義精神》一書，韋伯將歐美的經濟強盛，歸功一大部分於基督教。我覺得其理甚明，因為基督信仰給人很堅定的信念，要努力忠信工作（馬太福音第25章），要貢獻社會人群（愛鄰舍），要在一切事上榮耀神、彰顯神；不可以不勞而獲或以卑鄙的手段攫取財富（提前3章與6章），不可欺壓弱者。物質財富不是終極目的，也不能帶給人真正的滿足，只有達成神的旨意才是最完滿的人生（提前6章）。

相關經節可在此查詢。


========================
提前
3:1 人若1渴望得2監督的職分，就是羨慕善工；這話是可信的。
3:2 所以作1監督的必須2無可指責，3只作一個妻子的丈夫，節制適度，4清明自守，5端正規矩，6樂意待客，7善於教導；
3:3 1不醉酒滋事，2不打人，只要3和藹，4不爭競，5不貪財；
3:4 1好好管理自己的家，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4979811191947181612/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_24.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4979811191947181612'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4979811191947181612'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_24.html' title='我的理財觀'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4355898302017660281</id><published>2010-01-22T02:44:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-22T04:56:00.361-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='遊記'/><title type='text'>遊記一則：大湖「花巷草弄」草莓餐</title><summary type='text'>雖然原則上這篇不算是理財性質的文章。只因為今天用餐的地點感覺甚佳，頗值得紀念，特為文以誌之。

今天一家三口連同召會的盧弟兄夫婦與鼎翔弟兄夫婦前往大湖「花巷草弄」用餐。


外院美美的欄杆就不拍照了，這是裡頭的門面。

 
餐廳主人的園藝很好，處處都有綠化，賞心悅目。


門口頗有特色的園藝造景。


聽說餐廳主人是學景觀設計的，看來實至名歸。

 
門前庭院的一隅。


門前庭院的一隅。


草莓餐裡的草莓都是自種的，標榜有機無毒。


一般人都怕草莓用的農藥很重。不過這裡的草莓似乎較OK一些。也因為不施灑生長激素，所以裡面草莓看起來比別處小一些，不過口感卻更好一些。


這是套餐的前菜，草莓生菜沙拉，生菜很新鮮，草莓好吃又令人放心。


今天因為非假日，餐廳主人招待小孩的點心。一整個很可愛，「就甘心」。



內人點的草莓雞腿套餐。


我點的草莓紅酒牛肉套餐。所用的紅酒是料理專用的</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4355898302017660281/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_22.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4355898302017660281'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4355898302017660281'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_22.html' title='遊記一則：大湖「花巷草弄」草莓餐'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://lh5.ggpht.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/S1l0nbMOXNI/AAAAAAAAHJE/EcOHNeJvBO8/s72-c/20100122%20212.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-1745017147166328015</id><published>2010-01-21T06:23:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-21T06:30:40.254-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='股票風險溢酬'/><title type='text'>股票風險溢酬</title><summary type='text'>資料來源： 
GLOBAL EVIDENCE ON THE EQUITY RISK PREMIUM  Global Evidence on the Equity Risk Premium讀後感 


 

 

 








 
</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/1745017147166328015/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_21.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1745017147166328015'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1745017147166328015'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_21.html' title='股票風險溢酬'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://lh6.ggpht.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/S1hhrDMBOdI/AAAAAAAAHFQ/2mV1yQWUj1U/s72-c/201001212207.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3104644666064355619</id><published>2010-01-17T20:22:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-17T20:22:15.908-08:00</updated><title type='text'>美國券商的評比</title><summary type='text'>SmartMoney's 2009 Broker Survey</summary><link rel='related' href='http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/stocks/smartmoney-2009-broker-survey/?page=8' title='美國券商的評比'/><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3104644666064355619/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_17.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3104644666064355619'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3104644666064355619'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_17.html' title='美國券商的評比'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6867901678298859392</id><published>2010-01-17T19:21:00.001-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-17T19:21:16.446-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='定期定額'/><title type='text'>Vanguard ETF 清單</title><summary type='text'>（連結）</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6867901678298859392/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/vanguard-etf.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6867901678298859392'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6867901678298859392'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/vanguard-etf.html' title='Vanguard ETF 清單'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-2702917322432173551</id><published>2010-01-13T22:59:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-16T07:27:22.968-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>債券專書摘記與心得（續一）</title><summary type='text'>Investment-grade bonds provide higher yields than Treasury securities; consequently, when market rates of interest increase, investors in investment-grade bonds lose less of their principal in bond price fluctuations than they would for Treasury securities. 投資級債券比國庫券更能對抗升息。理由是前者的殖利率通常較國庫券高一些。

Consequently, investors, who do not want to go through the difficulties in pricing individual bonds </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/2702917322432173551/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_13.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2702917322432173551'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2702917322432173551'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_13.html' title='債券專書摘記與心得（續一）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3933246200260458794</id><published>2010-01-12T00:02:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-13T06:44:29.110-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>債券專書筆記</title><summary type='text'>The coupon yield is the stated yield of the bond issue and is determined when the bond is issued. 票面上的殖利率。

The current yield   is the annual rate of return from a bond based on the income received in relation to the purchase price of the bond. It is calculated by dividing the bond's coupon by the purchase price or market price of the bond:      Current yield = (Coupon interest amount 票面上的殖利率)/ (</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3933246200260458794/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/coupon-yield-is-stated-yield-of-bond.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3933246200260458794'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3933246200260458794'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/coupon-yield-is-stated-yield-of-bond.html' title='債券專書筆記'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://lh3.ggpht.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/S0wJJZTVI5I/AAAAAAAAHBk/dBDJgXCJXk4/s72-c/discountbond20100112.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-8937874570611581744</id><published>2010-01-09T16:16:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-11T19:51:38.924-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>債券之再思或迷思</title><summary type='text'>BND的存續期間 duration 為4.2年，亦即：

升息1%，本金賠   4.2%。
升息2%，本金賠   8.4%。
升息3%，本金賠 12.6%。
升息4%，本金賠 16.8%。
升息5%，本金賠 21.0%。
升息6%，本金賠 25.2%。（這是當下衝擊，而不考慮「利息再投資」的結果。）

 BND目前的SEC yield 大約是3.49%。從這樣的yield來看，BND真的不是太好的投資，只求不賠而已。因此債券在我的配置中，大概只能說「不賠就是贏」，擔任比較消極防禦的部分。

剛才再次讀綠角一系列有關債券的文章（如這篇），有幾項心得：
「債券購買當時的殖利率，其實就是債券收益的良好估計值。（見這篇）」唯需提醒自己，這裡的收益是名目收益。再者，這是否適用於債券型ETF？此外，這是需要長期（或許是10年）才能發揮的效果，如果中途發生升息、經濟衰退，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/8937874570611581744/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_5356.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8937874570611581744'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8937874570611581744'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_5356.html' title='債券之再思或迷思'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6437626147180193473</id><published>2010-01-09T16:07:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-10T05:06:23.532-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='購屋'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>債券與房屋貸款一樣都怕升息。</title><summary type='text'>債券於升息之後，會有本金的損失。但大幅升息後，債券比較有買的價值，因為可以撿便宜。

房屋貸款於升息後，利息支付加重，使背負房貸者的支出增加。這時候因為貸款成本變高，購屋者怯步，房市冷淡，供過於求，可能會有房屋跌價的情形。

總之，升息前買債券是不利的。至於房貸則較無定論，畢竟房屋有時是不得不買的。

最後，timing是很難的，目前只知利息已接近0，故已無下跌空間，而利息上升，只是時間與幅度的問題而已。</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6437626147180193473/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_3478.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6437626147180193473'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6437626147180193473'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_3478.html' title='債券與房屋貸款一樣都怕升息。'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-829003478956113415</id><published>2010-01-09T06:48:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-09T06:48:20.981-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>債券將是未來投資的夢魘：2010年不智的投資之舉</title><summary type='text'>       Rekenthaler ReportBad Investment Ideas for 2010I always did like the Grinch a lot better before those meddling Whoville residents swelled up his heart.
In tribute to that (ig)noble creature, I offer Bad Investment Ideas for 2010. Unlike all those sappy happy Best Investment Ideas pieces from my fellow Morningstar analysts that congest your inbox and befoul your spirits, this article </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/829003478956113415/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/2010.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/829003478956113415'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/829003478956113415'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/2010.html' title='債券將是未來投資的夢魘：2010年不智的投資之舉'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-9193614428313375121</id><published>2010-01-09T01:55:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2011-06-11T22:43:57.687-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>債券是目前熾手可熱的投資項目，人多的地方不要去</title><summary type='text'>
Don't Get Burned by Your Bonds
If you've determined your portfolio needs more bonds now, here are some thoughtful ways to structure your allocation to the hot asset class. 債券是目前熾手可熱的投資項目，要小心。PrintReprintsCommentRecommend (-)           
By           Christine Benz |           01-07-10 |           06:00 AM | E-mail Article"If you were recommending model portfolios for retirees today, would you </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/9193614428313375121/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_09.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/9193614428313375121'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/9193614428313375121'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post_09.html' title='債券是目前熾手可熱的投資項目，人多的地方不要去'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-9092021505850633689</id><published>2010-01-09T00:11:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-09T00:11:37.788-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>BND 的yield處在低點...</title><summary type='text'>BND
Fixed-Income Characteristics as of 11/30/2009             &lt;!--End CBD--&gt;          &lt;!--CBD: Table--&gt;  

 Total Bond Market ETFBarclays US Aggregate Bond Index
Number of Bonds41548434
Yield to Maturity 3.1%3.2%
Average Coupon4.9%4.7%
Average Maturity 6.3 years6.4
Average Quality*AA1/AA2AA1/AA2
Average Duration 4.2 years4.2 years
Short-Term Reserves1.1%—
Fund Total Net Assets$67.7 billion—
Share</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/9092021505850633689/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/bnd-yield.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/9092021505850633689'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/9092021505850633689'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/bnd-yield.html' title='BND 的yield處在低點...'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7132999463572528471</id><published>2010-01-07T22:59:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2010-01-09T16:18:23.099-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>影響債券收益的因素：收益、利率、通膨、情緒</title><summary type='text'>
There's More to Investing Than Yield
Focusing too closely on income could leave you poorer in the end.


By           Christopher Davis |           01-05-10 |           06:00 AM | E-mail Article
These days, income-oriented investors are a lot like the proverbial man in the desert, who is thirsty but short on water. With interest rates at ultra-low levels, bond yields are generally pretty paltry.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7132999463572528471/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7132999463572528471'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7132999463572528471'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post.html' title='影響債券收益的因素：收益、利率、通膨、情緒'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7411197313424902466</id><published>2009-12-07T21:31:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2009-12-07T21:31:54.603-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='購屋'/><title type='text'>買房子的省思</title><summary type='text'>最近黃金直直漲，原油也是。股市則只有雜訊起伏，餘則無太變化。美國大印紙鈔，世界各國也都舉債救經濟，杜拜破產。接著呢？

錢泛濫後，接著就是錢的實質購買力降低，也就是通膨。不論是哪一種投資管道都難逃其影響。傳統債券與定存因為最無力對抗通膨，可能是受影響最深的。

如果經濟持續低迷，紙幣失去信用，就只剩下黃金、不動產與實物有價值而已。

各國可能會讓利率陡升，救紙幣制度，結果則是房地產與公債價格下跌，同時經濟也更加低迷；也可能會造成國與國之間的違約（破產），使國際貿易凍結，經濟也同樣會惡化；也可能會像日本實施零利率，結果就是經歷一陣資產跌價後，穩住，然後維持通縮的經濟局面。

這幾種可能性之中，日本的經驗是相較較不那麼惡劣的一種。不過也是歹戲拖棚。

在這種狀況中，世界上大概還是會有些國家，可以倖免於難的，所以做好「分散的」資產配置仍為當務之急。

對我而言，薪水是固定的，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7411197313424902466/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/12/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='2 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7411197313424902466'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7411197313424902466'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/12/blog-post.html' title='買房子的省思'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>2</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3660041488212679977</id><published>2009-11-10T22:08:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T22:30:29.558-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='MPT'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>轉貼FF的文章：Does Your Optimizer Need a Tune-Up?</title><summary type='text'>Q&amp;A: Does Your Optimizer Need a Tune-Up?
The realized equity premium for U.S. stocks relative to long-term government bonds has been negative for the 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25-year periods ending in 2008 despite substantially greater standard deviation for stocks. How do I use this information to develop a sensible portfolio based on mean-variance optimization?到2008年末止，5, 10, 15, 20, and 25</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3660041488212679977/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/ffdoes-your-optimizer-need-tune-up.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3660041488212679977'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3660041488212679977'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/ffdoes-your-optimizer-need-tune-up.html' title='轉貼FF的文章：Does Your Optimizer Need a Tune-Up?'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7245691128935192744</id><published>2009-11-10T19:36:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T19:36:23.177-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>市場下跌的好處：形成良好的投資機會</title><summary type='text'>以下資料取自綠角財經筆記：

總結來說，大多投資人以一種團塊的概念來看待自己的投資資金。他不允許他手中的團塊出現嚴重虧損，卻看不見當下的市場下跌會替以後未投入的資金(有時往往是更大的一塊)創造良好的投資機會。

團塊的觀點，也讓這些投資人的時間觀成為一條單線道，一條由許許多多短期進出組成的道路。這樣單一道路，自然讓人非常害怕終點等著的，到底是什麼東西。

真正的長期投資人，不論是投入或是領出，往往都分散在很長的時間內。每一筆投入的錢，都將經歷不同的起點與終點。他的投資之路，是一條多線道路，每一條道路的狀況有好有壞，但平均起來，就是不好也不壞的成果。

過度擔憂投資報酬率，往往反而讓人忽視了一生中最重要的金錢來源，自己的本業收入。而這才是值得多付出心力的事情。
</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7245691128935192744/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post_1773.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7245691128935192744'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7245691128935192744'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post_1773.html' title='市場下跌的好處：形成良好的投資機會'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6388502734447462124</id><published>2009-11-10T16:42:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T21:00:16.259-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>MPT（現代資產配置理論）遭受的衝擊</title><summary type='text'>下文節錄自 2009/11/09 晨星 fund spy 專欄 （全文連結在此）

金融海嘯後人們對MPT的批評（未必公正）
Two bear markets in one decade have shaken investors' faith in the tenets of Modern Portfolio Theory and the asset-allocation strategies the theory spawned. Critics say that blind faith in MPT led to lopsided asset allocation. The theory did not properly account for systemic risk, which caused investors to allocate too heavily in </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6388502734447462124/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/mpt.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6388502734447462124'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6388502734447462124'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/mpt.html' title='MPT（現代資產配置理論）遭受的衝擊'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6579796989361298192</id><published>2009-11-10T16:34:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T22:04:46.235-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='MPT'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>金價驚驚漲：黃金長期看只能避險與保值，其本身不能創造財富</title><summary type='text'>下文節錄自 2009/11/11 晨星 fund spy 專欄 （全文連結在此） 
It's not just commodities funds or investors, however, who are interested. More than a handful of diversified-stock mutual funds have added the metal, both in the form of gold bullion and gold exchange-traded funds. 近來許多共同基金都將黃金列入資產配置之中。

The bulk of the other funds somewhat new to investing in gold, though, have more-ominous reasons for owning the metal-</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6579796989361298192/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post_10.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6579796989361298192'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6579796989361298192'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post_10.html' title='金價驚驚漲：黃金長期看只能避險與保值，其本身不能創造財富'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-8937115606779384967</id><published>2009-11-04T19:25:00.000-08:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T22:33:39.418-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='購屋'/><title type='text'>購屋與投資作法</title><summary type='text'>因為最近要買房子，理財作法上勢必產生很大的改變，該如何因應呢？我困擾了一陣子，剛好ffaarr在綠角財經筆記中有一篇回應，我覺得很有參考價值，全文收錄如下：

但有一些細節可能意見不同，我並不贊同要類似設定像「十年賺了40-60%」才拿出來用，我覺得很多時候報酬%數是其次，而是應該以要預計要用錢的時間為 主。例如像是是子女的出國基金，假如子女的求學有一定的計畫，這部分是時間到就必須要用，而且可能是很大一筆，所以不能「看天吃飯」。去希望剛好十年左右 就一定能有40-60%可「停利」，而是儘可能要使這一筆十年後要用的錢不要被迫在要用時殺在最低點。因此十年後要用的錢，應該和三十年後要用的錢分開處 理，分別用不同的配置來處理（我上個回應有講到，愈接近要用錢就應該風險部位愈低，甚至提早幾年市場狀況很不錯就把股票部位早點全贖回作定存）

至 於房貸車貸的情況非常不同，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/8937115606779384967/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8937115606779384967'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8937115606779384967'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post.html' title='購屋與投資作法'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-2734740367131638466</id><published>2009-10-29T19:12:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-10-29T19:12:02.474-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>小心 expense ratio 並不包括券商佣金與稅金</title><summary type='text'>美國晨星的 the short answer  專欄，2009/10/30有篇專文（Are There Hidden Fees in Your Mutual Fund? A fund's expense ratio is only a portion of your total costs.）解析基金的expense ratio （以下簡稱 ER）並不涵蓋所有的費用，該文使我最感到震驚的部分是，基金執行買賣股票的券商手續費（佣金），並不包括在ER之中。茲全文引用，並以中文摘要如下：

I'm often surprised that many investors--even those who are quite savvy--aren't aware that a mutual fund's expense ratio doesn't encompass all of the </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/2734740367131638466/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/expense-ratio.html#comment-form' title='3 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2734740367131638466'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2734740367131638466'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/expense-ratio.html' title='小心 expense ratio 並不包括券商佣金與稅金'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>3</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-5166495070904460152</id><published>2009-10-20T17:39:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T22:35:26.826-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>高波動性本身就是一大缺點（實例說明）</title><summary type='text'>今天美國晨星有一篇文章，A Closer Look at One of 2009's Big Winners，以Oppenheimer International Small Company        (OSMAX)為例，說明有些基金偏離指數，而有不尋常表現（包括名列前矛的績效）時，都是投資人該十分謹慎小心的訊號。

因為，這代表基金經理人拿投資人的錢賭很大。經理人可能賭對而為投資人賺大錢，也可能賭錯而讓投資人虧掉老本，一文不名。

這支基金OSMAX在2009年大賺127%，理由如下：

重壓某些國家。
重壓某些sectors。
匯率走勢有利。
這支基金在過去的績效表現，熊市大壞（2008年賠掉66%），牛市大好（2009年賺127%）。

我想，高波動性本身就是一大缺點。

有人或許會想2008年只賠66%，來年又賺127%，不就賺一倍了嗎？

換種說法更清楚，更能打破這種迷思，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/5166495070904460152/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/blog-post_20.html#comment-form' title='1 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5166495070904460152'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5166495070904460152'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/blog-post_20.html' title='高波動性本身就是一大缺點（實例說明）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>1</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6224495033024651603</id><published>2009-10-13T18:09:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-10-13T20:38:48.357-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>「擇時進出」行不通（2008下半年到2009年）</title><summary type='text'>晨星fund spy 的這篇文章，再次以統計數字顯示，大多數嘗試擇時進出的投資人都是不成功的，想要擇時買低賣高，是一條行不通的路。

So I haven't been surprised to see the recent expansion in the gap between official and investor returns--especially for mid-cap funds, which have posted the best returns this year among diversified domestic-stock funds. For example, the average reported annualized return for mid-cap growth funds for the 10-year period through </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6224495033024651603/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/20082009.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6224495033024651603'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6224495033024651603'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/20082009.html' title='「擇時進出」行不通（2008下半年到2009年）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6306652925314898852</id><published>2009-10-12T21:25:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-10-12T21:26:21.549-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='讀書心得'/><title type='text'>投資「格言」</title><summary type='text'>幾則讓我受益最深的「格言」： 
投資人失敗的主要原因是他們太過注意股市目前的狀況！（Graham 231p. PDF)
企圖打敗大盤是輸家的遊戲，合理的期望是扣除成本與稅負後的整體股市報酬。（Bogle) 
Gibson 認為不要擇時進出股市的原因：就算你知道何時該出場，你也很難得知何時該進場。而一出一進的交易成本，使得 market timing 要長期多次成功顯得不可能。這是我要採取 buy-and-hold 戰略的有力原因。
</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6306652925314898852/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6306652925314898852'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6306652925314898852'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/blog-post.html' title='投資「格言」'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4159032690061479710</id><published>2009-10-05T23:58:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T16:52:49.529-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='讀書心得'/><title type='text'>John Bogle「夠了」讀後心得</title><summary type='text'>博格的「夠了」這本書的價值，直接見綠角的讀後感。

分享讀這本書的一些心得：

  政府經濟數字、股票分析師、企業財務報表，幾乎都有粉飾太平的嫌疑。我想這就是為什麼基本面投資人常常也會碰壁的原因之一。如果連政府與大企業的財務數字都不可信了，還有什麼是可以信任的呢？「算計太多，信任太少」，果然一語中的。（119頁）

  企業併購的開銷很大，當企業都不事生產，只知道在併購中獲利中飽私囊時，股東根本就無利可圖，錢都被金融業與惡質的CEO等一行人給A走了。（123頁）這本書對資本主義的省思很深，特別是大力抨擊「金融資本主義」，這種主義違反了公平、正義、道德等核心的價值。是誰謀殺了資本主義？答案是貪婪而自利的資本家與推波助瀾的業界人士。

  Bogle 有一種很崇高的理想，這本書帶給我最大的收穫其實不只是在理財觀念上而已，更擴及於人生處世的責任、貢獻等自我實現、圓滿自足的概念。

 這很符合 </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4159032690061479710/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/john-bogle.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4159032690061479710'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4159032690061479710'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/10/john-bogle.html' title='John Bogle「夠了」讀後心得'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SvoKd3NVVPI/AAAAAAAADyY/ttjrzxbRzNo/s72-c/maslows-hierarchy1.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-5216741553146280971</id><published>2009-09-16T22:45:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-16T22:47:37.495-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>蒙地卡羅分析之弊 （譯文）</title><summary type='text'>Q&amp;A: Bear Markets and Monte Carlo Analysis
How useful was Monte Carlo-type analysis in preparing for the recent downturn in the economy and stock market? Is there an alternative approach that investors should consider in an effort to address the uncertainty of future returns? 統計上的蒙地卡羅分析對股市崩盤有何用途？投資人是否有任何其他方式，可以用來評估期望報酬的不確定性？EFF: Monte Carlo analysis is overkill here. All one really needs is good </summary><link rel='related' href='http://www.dimensional.com/famafrench/2009/09/qa-bear-markets-and-monte-carlo-analysis.html' title='蒙地卡羅分析之弊 （譯文）'/><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/5216741553146280971/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_16.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5216741553146280971'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5216741553146280971'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_16.html' title='蒙地卡羅分析之弊 （譯文）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3849684522492775018</id><published>2009-09-06T05:22:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-06T18:31:59.635-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='行為財務學'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='問題'/><title type='text'>EMH如何解釋「資產面臨泡沬化」？</title><summary type='text'>最近閱讀的文獻中，慢慢從中有些自己的想法，但也產生一些困惑。困惑在：1、EMH很有說服力，但作為模型理論，仍有其限制。主要的限制就是「股價沒有定論、無法預測」，因為新資訊不斷出現，股價就不斷變動。更大的問題則是這些資訊顯然不全都是客觀可估計的，更多的是行為財務學中所討論到的主觀不可估計的東西。如投資人的過度樂觀（過度悲觀則不會有問題）；可能會使 buy and hold策略失效。==》自問自答：如果真的是 buy and hold，而且投資人正在聚財期（股價最好長期低靡，期望報酬才會高），則樂觀與悲觀的交錯出現又復歸均數的現象，並不會有太大的影響。市場風險無可迴避，但市場具有均數復歸的特性。股票有風險溢酬之謎，長期看沒有理由沒有好的報酬。特別放眼看的是全球股市的話，不要拿日本或美國失落的十年來作特異取樣的說明。2、到底如何才能避免某種資產面臨泡沬化呢？「擇時」已被證實是行不通的，唯一的路</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3849684522492775018/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/emh.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3849684522492775018'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3849684522492775018'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/emh.html' title='EMH如何解釋「資產面臨泡沬化」？'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-2637159925349554971</id><published>2009-09-06T05:02:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-06T05:04:28.060-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='行為財務學'/><title type='text'>A SURVEY OF BEHAVIORAL FINANCE 讀後（1）</title><summary type='text'>  A survey of behavioral science 理性財務學 以貝式定理（機率論）處理新資訊 ~ statgun.com &gt; Research &gt; Bayes-law   ~ google.com.tw &gt; Url ? ...   ~ google.com.tw &gt; Url ? ...    主觀期望效用論 SEU  事實則是，投資人的交易行為並無法用上述理論來解釋   套利能夠消除市場的不理性嗎？ 不能，section 2詳述。 2.1效率市場 雖然這書是講行為財務學，但對EMH（效率市場假說）的解釋很清楚，令人驚艷。 不過EMH並沒有假定投資人都是理性的！（這裡的陳述易使人混淆，FF講的還是比較清楚些）   股價是期望未來現金流總合的折現值 而期望來自於所有可得的資訊  貼現率也會變動。  這兩個函數其實都在變動，所以股價也時時在變動。   EMH下，沒有白吃的午餐，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/2637159925349554971/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_06.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2637159925349554971'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2637159925349554971'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_06.html' title='A SURVEY OF BEHAVIORAL FINANCE 讀後（1）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SqOkzgEOraI/AAAAAAAADqs/O4Dh9CFdmaM/s72-c/A+survey+of+behavioral+science.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4115696019768028668</id><published>2009-09-05T02:16:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-16T22:49:40.485-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='股利'/><title type='text'>影響公司發放股利的因素有三</title><summary type='text'>因為配發股利，投資人被課的稅比資本利得高，所以配發股利的公司似乎較不利於投資人。配發股利的原因也因此成為一個謎。

這篇文章，FF討論股利發放政策。影響公司發放股利的因素有三：（1）盈利；（2）投資機會；（3）公司大小。盈利高、投資機會少、大公司，較可能配發股利。

We use logit regressions and summary statistics to examine the characteristics of dividend payers. Both approaches suggest that three characteristics affect the decision to pay dividends: profitability, investment opportunities, and size.  Larger firms and more </summary><link rel='related' href='http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=203092' title='影響公司發放股利的因素有三'/><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4115696019768028668/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_9344.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4115696019768028668'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4115696019768028668'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_9344.html' title='影響公司發放股利的因素有三'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-5480926203527076632</id><published>2009-09-05T01:23:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-05T01:53:36.501-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='文章待讀'/><title type='text'>可讀的文章或書籍</title><summary type='text'>Fama 與 French 的線上期刊：Papers by Fama (SSRN)Papers by French (SSRN)FF 也推薦閱讀IGM所贊助的學術文章 (working papers)The Becker-Posner Blog (諾貝爾獎得主的部落格，不過內容我不太有興趣，有些與美國人比較有關，如健保制度.A Survey of Behavioral Finance</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/5480926203527076632/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_3143.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5480926203527076632'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/5480926203527076632'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_3143.html' title='可讀的文章或書籍'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-438107031299433064</id><published>2009-09-05T00:40:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-05T00:43:29.215-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>效率是價格已有效反映所有可得知與相關的訊息</title><summary type='text'>綠角的這篇大作，值得一讀。文中提到：之後Eugene Fama研究股市價格變化後，提出了效率市場假說(Efficient Market Hypothesis)。這個學說中的「效率」一詞，便是引用自Markowitz。但這裡效率不是指投入與產出間的最佳化，它指的是價格已有效反映所有可得知與相關的訊息(all relevant and available information)。「效率」一詞的意義就呼之欲出了。</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/438107031299433064/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_05.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/438107031299433064'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/438107031299433064'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_05.html' title='效率是價格已有效反映所有可得知與相關的訊息'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6290700261217005053</id><published>2009-09-04T23:55:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-05T01:07:52.798-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>效率市場不代表股價不會大幅振盪</title><summary type='text'> Jan 19, 2009  Q&amp;A: Equilibrium During a Downturn?   The Dow peaked around 14K in October 2007, one year later the Dow went to 7500. Was the market really in equilibrium last October given that it was on the verge of such a steep collapse? How can one address equilibrium given the daily volatility we are experiencing? 2007年10月道瓊達到14000點，之後逆轉跌到7500點。如此看來，我們能說在2007年10月時，市場是在一種均衡的狀態下？</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6290700261217005053/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_879.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6290700261217005053'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6290700261217005053'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_879.html' title='效率市場不代表股價不會大幅振盪'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6937096615190872871</id><published>2009-09-04T22:43:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-04T23:02:22.123-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>效率市場的效率與資訊及解讀有關：沒有比市場知道更多就別偏離市場</title><summary type='text'> Q&amp;A: Avoid Firms in Trouble? 不要買危機公司的股票？ It seems obvious now that firms facing extreme financial difficulty should be avoided.按：這個問題對我而言，不是個好問題。因為，買個股本來就會多上一層「個股風險」（擇股與擇時、個別公司治理、道德風險等）。當然，市場或多或少也會回饋一些給願意冒險的人。但冒這種險，就如下面EFF所言：「除非你（我）不喜歡這些風險。」--答對了，我就是不喜歡！這實上，買進整個大盤時已經涵蓋了所有這些公司了，不須要再加碼，在市值權重外，特別再加重這些公司的股票配置。  EFF: This is a market efficiency question. If firms facing extreme financial difficulty </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6937096615190872871/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_2607.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6937096615190872871'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6937096615190872871'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_2607.html' title='效率市場的效率與資訊及解讀有關：沒有比市場知道更多就別偏離市場'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4925431531518909352</id><published>2009-09-04T19:55:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-04T19:56:53.158-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>評索羅斯說「金融市場總是扭曲價格且對未來的觀點有所偏誤」</title><summary type='text'>  評索羅斯說「金融市場總是扭曲價格且對未來的觀點有所偏誤」 所有的證據都顯示市場預測都基於既有資訊的不偏估計 避險基金則極力否認這一點  因為會危害他們的生存。  人們常會將某某經理人亮麗的高平均基金報酬錯誤的歸因於他們有能力辨識股票的定價錯誤 FF認為這在常態（或碎形）分配下都只是機率造成的。亦可見下文：  ~ "Luck versus Skill in the Cross Section of Mutual Fund Î± Estimates."     沒有指明可用來衡量期望價值的資訊時，就無法討論偏誤是否存在 例如某藥廠的股價可能是基於其公開資訊的不偏估計值，但其中某個剛發現治療癌症新藥的員工則明瞭公司的價格被低估   效率市場假設只是一個模型，就如其他模型一樣，未必恆真。 縱使只考慮公開資訊的狀況下，因為人們使用金融價格來幫助決定如何配置資源，價格可能是錯的，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4925431531518909352/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_3440.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4925431531518909352'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4925431531518909352'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_3440.html' title='評索羅斯說「金融市場總是扭曲價格且對未來的觀點有所偏誤」'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SqHTG2qUgUI/AAAAAAAADpc/7v1jhF7dh-0/s72-c/%E8%A9%95%E7%B4%A2%E7%BE%85%E6%96%AF%E8%AA%AA%E3%80%8C%E9%87%91%E8%9E%8D%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E7%B8%BD%E6%98%AF%E6%89%AD%E6%9B%B2+%E5%83%B9%E6%A0%BC%E3%80%8D%EF%BC%8C%E5%B0%8D%E6%9C%AA%E4%BE%86%E7%9A%84%E8%A7%80%E9%BB%9E%E6%9C%89%E6%89%80%E5%81%8F%E8%AA%A4.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4881901618834865950</id><published>2009-09-04T07:27:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-04T19:58:57.011-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>效率市場與定價 (Fama&amp;French)</title><summary type='text'>  效率市場與定價 有人質疑效率市場者認為NASDAQ不論在5000點或在1400點都是有效率的說法。請評論  股價兩因素皆隨時變動甚大 期望利潤  持有股票的期望報酬  市場在不同時間經歷不同的階段，這些都未與市場效率牴觸。事實上對市場效率而言，這些階段都是必要的。   市場效率要求股價依未來金流與貼現率的新資訊而調整。  關鍵問題是，現金流與貼現率的理性期待是否能支撐2000年時科技股的高價？ 答案看似明顯。 但你若活在其中，很難當局者清，事情往往會變得更複雜。  例如：有些投資人當時相信1999與2000年的科技股太貴了，但另有些人則同樣確定額外的成長機會將會把股價推到更高   行為財務學告訴我們，投資人傾向於過度自信他們有能力辨認市場的錯誤  虛假的後見之明，是一種行為偏誤，困擾著我們許多人  因著這種過度自信，以及1999與2000年時投資人對科技股評的分歧，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4881901618834865950/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_8463.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4881901618834865950'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4881901618834865950'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_8463.html' title='效率市場與定價 (Fama&amp;French)'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SqEj4yVGY-I/AAAAAAAADo8/VWfIZUDtRR0/s72-c/FamaFrench+%E8%AB%96%E5%A3%87_%E8%A9%95%E8%AB%96%E6%95%88%E7%8E%87%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E8%88%87%E5%AE%9A%E5%83%B9%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3675568940201659432</id><published>2009-09-04T06:38:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-04T06:39:03.587-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>Winning the losers' game 讀後心得（7）</title><summary type='text'>  財務的終極規劃 規劃你的遊戲 不要只因年齡改變，而改變投資方式 100減年齡為股票比例之說，實為謬傳  投資的 time horzion需考慮到自己的下一代或慈善機構，而加大。   這一章作者對通膨的殺傷力，以非常非常真實的方式呈現給讀者 P124說明從1900到1995年近一世紀間，100元的投資會變成73萬元。其中不好的消息有二： 其中90%以上的增值（64萬美金）來自末了的20年，歸因於股市的榮景。  在考慮通膨後，實質獲利只有名目上的6%，即4萬美金。   P125圖顯示在看google finance的大盤長期線圖時，應該將通膨因素考慮進去。結果會讓人震驚難過。 1993的道瓊經通膨調整後只與1928年的相同。  1977到1982年道瓊經通膨調整後實質虧損了63%（如果不看通膨調整，則會誤以為就是持平而已） 這五年大概就是投資不動產等能抗通膨者為佳。  TIPS</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3675568940201659432/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_04.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3675568940201659432'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3675568940201659432'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_04.html' title='Winning the losers&apos; game 讀後心得（7）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SqEYVTaBCZI/AAAAAAAADow/RaYdeq7F6eg/s72-c/%E8%B2%A1%E5%8B%99%E7%9A%84%E7%B5%82%E6%A5%B5%E8%A6%8F%E5%8A%83.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6995492708390566552</id><published>2009-09-03T07:39:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2010-01-07T22:14:04.622-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>Winning the losers' game 讀後心得（6）</title><summary type='text'> 

散戶投資 
投資十誡 

不要投機，不要和專業機構法人玩，就算心癢難耐。不要追逐歷史的高績效而改變資產配置  
不要聽信媒體與小道消息  
不要為稅務而投資  
不要將自家房子當成投資  
不要投資商品  
不要受券商或保險業務的迷惑  
不要投資新概念或熱門的投資 

也不要相信其他投資人所釋放的訊息  



不要買債券 

因為波動不亞於股票？  
因為通膨  



不要太愛錢，冷靜下來，才不會昏了頭  
不要相信你的情緒 

生於憂患  
死於安樂  






投資十項要做的事 

閱讀像柏格這類有啟示之作家的書，得到專業的建議  
寫下長期目標、投資方案、遺產計畫。每隔十年至少檢修一次。  
如果長期投資政策出師不利（如股市崩跌一半），你的第一個假定應是，他會上漲回來。因為你知道這些政策是經過相當仔細周詳與時間而敲定的。  
不要太過相信近幾年的數據，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6995492708390566552/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_5455.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6995492708390566552'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6995492708390566552'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_5455.html' title='Winning the losers&apos; game 讀後心得（6）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Sp_VGUqb92I/AAAAAAAADoI/0Gx6XWAnoK0/s72-c/%E6%95%A3%E6%88%B6%E6%8A%95%E8%B3%87.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4250853567673337827</id><published>2009-09-03T07:36:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-03T07:37:06.307-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>Winning the losers' game 讀後心得（5）</title><summary type='text'>  虧損之道P105 輸少一點 輸者的遊戲，就像高爾夫或網球那樣  從別人的錯誤學習，絕不要重蹈覆轍  學習賺錢很難，但學習不要賠錢則相對容易多了 他們是如何的過度汲營  他們是如何減少成功的機會且增加失敗的風險  我們該如何避免錯誤    輸只有是贏的手段時才有意義  常犯的錯誤 汲汲營營於無法重複可靠長期取得的成果  雄心太過的代價是昂貴的 Odean的研究發現10萬次股票交易中，買進的股票都跌，賣出的都漲  周轉率通常是失敗的指標   太過保守謹慎的代價也很昂貴 1980-1998之間持有太多現金部位的都一直所得   企圖市場擇時 通常市場擇時猜對的機率不到一半。而猜錯的代價則可能是將之前猜對的都一併吐回去  你如何能與專業法人機構在市場擇時上競爭？  獲利了結招來稅務成本   容讓短期的關切凌駕長期的承諾  沒有寫下你的儲蓄與消費計畫  沒有寫下你的投資目標與投資政策或方案  </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4250853567673337827/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_1535.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4250853567673337827'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4250853567673337827'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_1535.html' title='Winning the losers&apos; game 讀後心得（5）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Sp_UcBkHSzI/AAAAAAAADoA/QA48qQLjkrE/s72-c/%E8%99%A7%E6%90%8D%E4%B9%8B%E9%81%93P105.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-2818324035892764823</id><published>2009-09-03T07:31:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-03T07:32:33.431-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>Winning the losers' game 讀後心得（4）</title><summary type='text'>  目標明確最高品質 政策的意圖 建立有用的指引 目標 投資的內在因素 不該將這個部分都委託基金經理人處理，會造成衝突 基金經理人的time horzion通常太短，短於投資人的，因此會急切的短線進出。這時投資人應當堅持。  管好經理人 經理人應該忠於投資人的政策，堅守政策  評估經理人的績效時，應該評估他與大盤的關係。否則就混淆了政策與操作的分際。這是不公平且誤導的作法 與正確的標竿比較   不堅守投資政策的經理人，就算表現優於政策組合，仍該換掉。      投資與市場 投資的外在因素 政策是投資內外在因素的明言連結，所有的操作都該據於政策 投資人要澄清投資目標並把它寫下來     好的政策要長期「正確」，又能短期內禁得起考驗。 有理解與知識為其基礎   陳述政策時要明確清晰且嚴謹，才能有真實的用處 可以借助MPT，現代投資組合理論 決定 涉入市場風險的程度  </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/2818324035892764823/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_4318.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2818324035892764823'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2818324035892764823'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_4318.html' title='Winning the losers&apos; game 讀後心得（4）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Sp_TYv5SHcI/AAAAAAAADn4/ArhH8G_yjmE/s72-c/%E7%9B%AE%E6%A8%99%E6%98%8E%E7%A2%BA%E6%9C%80%E9%AB%98%E5%93%81%E8%B3%AA.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7422156551343554718</id><published>2009-09-03T07:25:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-03T07:26:43.567-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>Winning the losers' game 讀後心得（3）</title><summary type='text'>  投資政策的重要性 投資政策是痛苦不安（人性）的最佳解毒劑 寫下長期的投資政策，好能保護健全的長期政策組合不被篡改  幫自己在短期市況不好時能堅守受到打擊的政策到底而不動搖   按：反思我的政策 不要輸 維持30%的債券部位  做好再平衡，持別是市況極端時。  指數化投資  追求低成本與高稅務效率  持有市場風險，避免個股與類股風險  資產配置的比例見GNOTE 但尚未估計市況極端時的虧損風險    如果買股票像買襪子一樣，我們會好多了 理性分析能夠幫助投資人明瞭股市大跌其實才是對他們長期利益有幫助的 特別在聚財期的我，巴不得股市天天大跌  When the market dropsputting stocks "on sale"we stop buying (in fact, we'll even sell in a panic). 股票打折大家不買，熾手可熱直漲價，大家卻又拚命買，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7422156551343554718/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_03.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7422156551343554718'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7422156551343554718'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_03.html' title='Winning the losers&apos; game 讀後心得（3）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Sp_R2sL5iJI/AAAAAAAADnw/jYq9oMJgs1o/s72-c/%E6%8A%95%E8%B3%87%E6%94%BF%E7%AD%96%E7%9A%84%E9%87%8D%E8%A6%81%E6%80%A7.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7592783650583132072</id><published>2009-09-02T07:40:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2010-01-07T22:15:17.421-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>Winning the losers' game 讀後心得（2）</title><summary type='text'> 

Winning the losers' game 
矛盾 
基金應該是為長期目標而存在，卻被用來投機而盼望在短期獲利  
擊敗市場是「不」重要卻極度困難的任務 
少有有經理人能夠長期年化高過市場0.5%  
而調整資產配置卻能輕鬆辦到  


問題不在市場而在我們自身 
基金的total return vs investor return 投資人報酬遜於基金總報酬  
解決之道 
理解自身的真實需要  
定義能夠達到自身需求的投資目標  
建立資產配置的適當比例  
發展能夠指導達成真實長期目標的合理且有意義的投資政策  


投資人應該建立並堅守適當的投資政策，好能在市場的長期主要力量中獲利  
少有投資人發展出這樣的投資政策，所以多數投資經理人只好短線操作，這是投資人的錯。  


投資人的責任 
是投資政策指導資產配置的操作，反之則不然 
可以放棄卻無法轉移  


</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7592783650583132072/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/winning-losers-game-2.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7592783650583132072'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7592783650583132072'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/winning-losers-game-2.html' title='Winning the losers&apos; game 讀後心得（2）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Sp6D1XShlpI/AAAAAAAADmw/nG-EOawoTwA/s72-c/1111.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-1160831602742387102</id><published>2009-09-02T07:35:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-04T06:41:02.779-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>Winning the losers' game 讀後心得（1）</title><summary type='text'> Winning the losers' game專業投資人無法擊敗市場費用commissionspreadannual fee他們就是市場美國九成的交易都是由法人機構在執行的如果大戶法人都如此，可知散戶的下場更慘市場無法擊敗市場，市場就是平均1960年股市是winer's game；現在則是loser's game；輸家決定羸家的報酬啟示不要失分，等待對手失誤買進並持有 is eternal股市不應是賭博，賭博是零和遊戲擊敗市場的無效策略擇時進出歷史顯示無人能夠長期一致的判斷市場動向而獲利只要有人在擇時進出上犯錯就會被市場痛宰連法人機構也無法從擇時中長期穩定的獲利這個策略很理想，但在現實上根本無法執行為什麼那麼多人迷信timing因為有看似誘人的成效他們未考慮各種驚人的成本與費用他們過度自信，認為自己有能力擇時離開市場時，市場有所作為"The market does just as </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/1160831602742387102/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/winning-losers-game-1.html#comment-form' title='1 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1160831602742387102'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1160831602742387102'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/winning-losers-game-1.html' title='Winning the losers&apos; game 讀後心得（1）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Sp6Ctv7lltI/AAAAAAAADmo/fNRX82xWMrM/s72-c/11.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>1</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7861959636140686059</id><published>2009-09-02T07:18:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-09-04T19:59:40.132-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='效率市場假說模型'/><title type='text'>效率市場</title><summary type='text'> 市場是有效率的（參考資料：Winning the losers' game,  作者Ellis，好像是第三章）所有的訊息都會迅速被市場解讀吸收反應 看起來像隨機漫步  套利空間迅速消失   不等於 市場是理性的  市場不會過度樂觀或悲觀  定價正確   上善若水，市場就是水 水有波瀾壯闊的時候 理性或悲觀；高點或低點   但終歸平靜 均數復歸現象    </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7861959636140686059/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_02.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7861959636140686059'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7861959636140686059'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/09/blog-post_02.html' title='效率市場'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Sp5-m-Q09SI/AAAAAAAADmg/yHVGN1fANHs/s72-c/%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E6%98%AF%E6%9C%89%E6%95%88%E7%8E%87%EF%BC%88%E6%95%88%E7%8E%87%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4++Ellis%29.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6333624519180395926</id><published>2009-08-31T22:18:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2010-01-07T22:21:54.392-08:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='債券'/><title type='text'>長短期債屬性大不同（長期債的雙面刃）</title><summary type='text'>Q&amp;A: Hedging Inflation with Bonds
Is cash (that is, short-term riskless bonds) a safe investment if we think about future consumption and not about nominal dollars?如果我們考量未來的購買力，短期債是安全的投資嗎？
EFF/KRF: Short-term high grade bonds are a good hedge against inflation. If hedging inflation is your overriding goal, short-term high grade bonds are the route for you. (Gene has been saying this for about 40 </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6333624519180395926/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_2753.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6333624519180395926'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6333624519180395926'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_2753.html' title='長短期債屬性大不同（長期債的雙面刃）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3260569507935930285</id><published>2009-08-31T21:28:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-31T22:02:14.895-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>不確定性的風險：伴隨高報酬</title><summary type='text'>Q&amp;A: Capitalism Under Obama                                             Some political commentators argue that Obama's economic policies are our path to ruin. Is capitalism really threatened by our recent political decisions? 有些政治評論家說歐巴馬的經濟政策會自取毀滅?!  EFF/KRF: Even in good times, economic systems are often changed dramatically by political decisions. (Think about South America over the last 30 </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3260569507935930285/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_4783.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3260569507935930285'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3260569507935930285'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_4783.html' title='不確定性的風險：伴隨高報酬'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-8166681542710563114</id><published>2009-08-31T20:54:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-31T21:18:24.555-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>高期望報酬是以風險為代價</title><summary type='text'>Q&amp;A: Expected Return in a Bad Economy                                             What can we say about expected returns in the market if we think the economy is going through a rough period?在2009年3月如此嚴峻的經濟環境中，我們要如何看待期望報酬率？  EFF/KRF: The market has declined sharply in response to rough times and forecasts of future rough times. The decline in market prices combines two effects: (i) lower current </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/8166681542710563114/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_1600.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8166681542710563114'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8166681542710563114'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_1600.html' title='高期望報酬是以風險為代價'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-309237089780799384</id><published>2009-08-31T19:22:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-31T22:05:04.261-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>市場高波動時，資產分散配置更顯重要</title><summary type='text'> Q&amp;A: Diversification's Role Today   Is diversification working today, when we need it most? 今日資產分散配置還有作用嗎？何時最需要做好資產分散配置？  EFF/KRF: When overall market volatility increases, idiosyncratic (security-specific) volatility also tends to increase. For example, market volatility is currently quite high, and the dispersion of the cross section of stock returns (which is idiosyncratic volatility) is also</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/309237089780799384/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_31.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/309237089780799384'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/309237089780799384'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_31.html' title='市場高波動時，資產分散配置更顯重要'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-790525260647181857</id><published>2009-08-28T09:39:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-31T15:49:47.753-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>Fama/French 200904</title><summary type='text'> Fama/French 200904股票對債券的溢酬之迷這個迷來自簡化的經濟模型，認為股票市場對國庫券的報酬平均差距太高。FF認為如果說股票對債券的合理年化溢酬在1%以內，這意味著要得到比較可靠的正溢酬要1600年左右，那有誰肯買股票呢？換句話說，FF認為股票對債券的歷史溢酬並沒有太過超過。令外FF也指出一篇文章，是從行為財務學的角度，諸如「風險嫌惡」，來說明溢酬的存在。也相當有理。河清難俟這個經濟模型哪裡出錯了呢？WIKI百科~ equity premium puzzle 按：投資金律作者Bernstein曾提到大約每隔10年左右，人們已淡忘前次泡沫的慘痛教訓後，泡沫又會再起。評暢銷書「黑天鵝」對MPT的誤解黑天鵝書的想法Taleb認為股價波動是碎形分配，而MPT則是奠基在常態分配上鐘形曲線不能反應實況該書作者也批判學術界輕忽這個實體問題碎形理論的發展與衰微EFF回應，早在1964</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/790525260647181857/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/famafrench-200904.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/790525260647181857'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/790525260647181857'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/famafrench-200904.html' title='Fama/French 200904'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SpgINLwvWCI/AAAAAAAADj0/vqZXru0gKEE/s72-c/%E8%82%A1%E7%A5%A8%E5%B0%8D%E5%82%B5%E5%88%B8%E7%9A%84%E6%BA%A2%E9%85%AC%E4%B9%8B%E8%BF%B7.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-4489204190786937381</id><published>2009-08-27T20:50:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-27T20:51:18.164-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>主動投資是負和遊戲</title><summary type='text'> 主動投資是負和遊戲~ dimensional.com &gt; Famafrench &gt; 2009 &gt; 06 &gt; Why-active-investing-is-a-negative-sum-gain William F. Sharpe has a great article in the January/February 1991 issue of The Financial Analysts Journal (Vol. 47, No.1, pages 7-9). The title is "The Arithmetic of Active Management."市場=被動投資組合+主動投資組合被動投資組合就是市場組合而主動投資的總合還是市場組合因此，被動投資有費用優勢，就必定勝過整體主動投資者。就算主動投資者有價格優勢，也是墊在其他主動投資者的犧牲之上。上述說法無關乎：</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/4489204190786937381/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_27.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4489204190786937381'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/4489204190786937381'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_27.html' title='主動投資是負和遊戲'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SpdUHIiHtjI/AAAAAAAADjU/AXke-G9bPBs/s72-c/%E4%B8%BB%E5%8B%95%E6%8A%95%E8%B3%87%E6%98%AF%E8%B2%A0%E5%92%8C%E9%81%8A%E6%88%B2.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-2446702008997295081</id><published>2009-08-27T20:11:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-27T20:12:23.517-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='觀念釐清'/><title type='text'>Fama/French 論壇 （2009/08）</title><summary type='text'> Fama/French 論壇 （2009/08）評債券取代股票之說參考~ dimensional.com &gt; Famafrench &gt; 2009 &gt; 08 &gt; Qa-bonds-for-the-long-run 有人問到2009年3月截止，債券比股票40年來年化報酬高0.12%，是否可以說「bonds for the long run」（暗示 Siegel的書）長期言股票會比債券好？股票實際溢酬=期望溢酬+預料之外的溢酬「預料之外」一詞顯示股票的風險特質預料外的溢酬常期平均應該很接近0。但不論持有時間多久，也不保證預料外的溢酬都是正的若能夠保證，就存有套利空間例如前39年股票輸給債券，而我們知道每40年股票必定會勝過債券，那麼第40年就要看空債券，並且盡力融資買入股票。按：我想這個解釋能夠套用在任何資產中，差別只是程度問題而已。有必要因股票大跌而賣出投資組合中的股票嗎？~ 2008-</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/2446702008997295081/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/famafrench-200908-qa-bonds-for-long-run.html#comment-form' title='2 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2446702008997295081'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/2446702008997295081'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/famafrench-200908-qa-bonds-for-long-run.html' title='Fama/French 論壇 （2009/08）'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/SpdK2DTaCJI/AAAAAAAADjM/ZaKxNgBBrxI/s72-c/FamaFrench+%E8%AB%96%E5%A3%87200908.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>2</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6105077290197668984</id><published>2009-08-27T09:38:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-27T09:40:25.621-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='TIPS'/><title type='text'>2008年9月TIPS狂跌的理由</title><summary type='text'> 2008年9月TIPS狂跌的理由2008年中以前，真實利率一路下滑至1%因為投資人在尋找安全的資金避風港但這個解釋與利率下滑，債市應該上揚不一致(TIPS反而下跌）雷曼破產在9月15日，暗示美國財政地位岌岌可危證以BND也同時下滑這是流動性事件，通膨信用交換市場中賣者多買者少，證實了此事雷曼持有不少TIPS當成其他交易的抵押，因為破產只好出清TIPS商品價格也在這時狂落，而有些商品期貨ETF也持有TIPS2008年以前TIPS的通膨利差穩定breakeven rate 意指名目利率與TIPS的利差，意涵未來10來的通膨預期09年9月利差縮小（反應在TIPS下跌，因而殖利率接近BND）顯示人們預期0通膨。TIPS近兩年的波動性加大波動的主因是真實利率的波動加大次因是TIPS的存續期間增長，但影響有限。通膨利差的波動加大顯示人們對到底是通膨還是通縮觀點的反覆TIPS</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6105077290197668984/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/20089tips.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6105077290197668984'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6105077290197668984'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/20089tips.html' title='2008年9月TIPS狂跌的理由'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Spa2gqGrJ4I/AAAAAAAADhU/f_WWj_QXaQI/s72-c/2008%E5%B9%B49%E6%9C%88TIPS%E7%8B%82%E8%B7%8C%E7%9A%84%E7%90%86%E7%94%B1.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-1011152224813390653</id><published>2009-08-27T09:29:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-27T09:30:29.298-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='定期定額'/><title type='text'>論定期定額DCA</title><summary type='text'> 定期定額DCA支持者的觀點認為DCA能夠避免單筆買進卻買在高點的風險聲稱在股價低時買到較多的股份，而昂貴時則買進較少的股份作法簡單、強迫儲蓄的意涵、省掉時時再平衡的交易費用反對者的觀點因為DCA僵硬，所以先天上就不如「再平衡配置」DCA與另外兩種系統化的投資策略相比更遜再平衡買進持有研究方法圖形化數值仿擬股市歷史資料回測結論不論投資人的風險嫌惡程度有多高，DCA都無法有較佳的結果。沒有任何人能從DCA獲益。數學公式、仿擬、回測都不支持DCA的作法。本來我也想用VG作定期定額，看來要重新思考。參考資料來源： Http://www2.stetson.edu/fsr/abstracts2/v2-1a4.pdf</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/1011152224813390653/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/dca.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1011152224813390653'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/1011152224813390653'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/dca.html' title='論定期定額DCA'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/Spa0dZzsfCI/AAAAAAAADhM/Yba_zkuhwWg/s72-c/%E5%AE%9A%E6%9C%9F%E5%AE%9A%E9%A1%8DDCA.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-7549197889331196217</id><published>2009-08-22T04:41:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-22T23:07:54.656-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='ETF常識'/><title type='text'>商品期貨ETFs行不通</title><summary type='text'>資料來源：On Stuff by  William Bernstein 主軸：吾安知其今不異於古所云耶昔~ 根據Facts and Fantasies about Commodity Futures從1959到2004年，一籃子商品現貨的年化報酬為3.47%，而同一時期通膨為4.13%。這很符合常識，通膨是由商品價格來定義的。藉由再平衡，可以多得到3.19%的利潤。同一時期商品「期貨契約」的年化報酬又比所構成的商品高出4.52%，達到11.18%，還比同時間S＆P的報酬10.48%更高一些。理由這叫做 Keynesian normal  backwardation1960年代農夫為了避免農產品跌價（通縮），所以願意以較低價賣出，亦即尋求跌價的保險。有些投機者願意承擔價格風險。有人賣就有人買，而在早期的這類例子中，對買方（投機者）有利。在早期更好的是：近似股票的報酬，更低的波動，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/7549197889331196217/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_22.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7549197889331196217'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/7549197889331196217'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_22.html' title='商品期貨ETFs行不通'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/So_ZXOzh-zI/AAAAAAAADgo/E4YvufQ_FPY/s72-c/GSG%E8%A1%8C%E4%B8%8D%E9%80%9A+William+Bernstein.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-6212116319367853132</id><published>2009-08-21T02:45:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-22T04:02:41.049-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='ETF常識'/><title type='text'>投資商品期貨ETFs的爭議</title><summary type='text'>商品期貨ETFs是否有投資價值的問題，似乎大家的見解差異相當大。我也還在思考這些問題。曾為此在綠角財經筆記中，有過以下的討論，雖然沒有很清楚的結論，但是對個人觀念的釐清幫助頗大，為了記錄學習與思考的過程，茲列整理如下：Swedroe 與Ferri 對商品期貨的投資價值有截然不同的看法：首先，在The only guide to alternative investments you'll ever need  一書（可預覽），作者Larry E. Swedroe, Jared Kizer第三章都在談商品投資，包括介紹可用的工具。書中認為商品期貨指數是良好的減低風險的工具，而且長期（1973-2007年）投資報酬略優於1-30年雷曼兄弟公債指數（table 3.1)。但＜資產配置投資策略：建構最佳化投資組合之鑰＞（ Richard A. Ferri 的All about asset </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/6212116319367853132/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/swedroe-ferri-only-guide-to-alternative.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6212116319367853132'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/6212116319367853132'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/swedroe-ferri-only-guide-to-alternative.html' title='投資商品期貨ETFs的爭議'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-3317628984320190179</id><published>2009-08-21T01:12:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-22T23:06:25.220-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='ETF常識'/><title type='text'>商品期貨基金</title><summary type='text'>商品期貨基金到底有沒有長期投資價值，晨星Fund Spy專欄有一篇 Can Commodities Still Pound Away at the Old Enemy? 整理如下圖右半。結論是有價值長期投資，但比重不要配太高（也許10％以下），還有，做好再平衡也很重要。另外一篇則來自晨星 An Ugly Side to Some Commodity ETFs ，旨在說明商品期貨的兩種運作方式，及投資人被套利與期貨溢價 contango可能遭受的損失。整理如下圖左半。 資料來源~ 晨星 Fund Spy: Can Commodities Still Pound Away at the Old Enemy?背景2008年中GSG等上到高峰，然後狂跌至今200908，最深跌掉65％買的理由資產分散性2008年以來，人們懷疑這種想法是錯的印證了風險是會改變的，見綠角risk metrics</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/3317628984320190179/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_21.html#comment-form' title='0 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3317628984320190179'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/3317628984320190179'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post_21.html' title='商品期貨基金'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/So6qYLg33DI/AAAAAAAADfk/aOOQcJz5SsY/s72-c/%E5%95%86%E5%93%81%E6%9C%9F%E8%B2%A8ETF%E5%88%A9%E5%BC%8A%E5%BE%97%E5%A4%B1.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6986760611470202609.post-8708566906221251379</id><published>2009-08-20T21:00:00.000-07:00</published><updated>2009-08-22T23:01:41.747-07:00</updated><category scheme='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#' term='ETF常識'/><title type='text'>市值加權 VS 基本面加權指數</title><summary type='text'>有關基本面加權的優缺點，晨星有篇文章在Fund Spy專欄：Is Fundamental Indexing All that It's Made Out to Be? 寫得很精采，我把它用Freemind整理成心智圖。結論就是別想太多，傳統市值加權指數基金就夠好用了。事實上，考慮到費用、波動性、週轉率等因素後，哪一個勝出是相當明顯的。 All +All -市值加權 VS 基本面加權指數市值加權優點+ -市值加權指數會隨各成份股的市價而自動再平衡，所以便宜好維護。市值大的股票，流動性也高，交易費用較便宜基本面加權優點倡導者+ -Robert Arnott and Jeremy Siegel目的為了瀰補市值加權指數的無效率用基本面特徵來決定權重盈餘現金流股利論點股價常有雜訊，</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/feeds/8708566906221251379/comments/default' title='張貼意見'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post.html#comment-form' title='1 個意見'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8708566906221251379'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/6986760611470202609/posts/default/8708566906221251379'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://davidfinancenote.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post.html' title='市值加權 VS 基本面加權指數'/><author><name>David</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media='http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/' url='http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_peGiVGkMrM8/So4b3UzGITI/AAAAAAAADdk/Ze1QIZ5Ktb4/s72-c/Is_Fundamental_Indexing_All_that_It_s_Made_Out_to_Be.jpg' height='72' width='72'/><thr:total>1</thr:total></entry></feed>
