论我国基本养老保险基金进入资本市场的方式选择

随着资本市场的完善,养老基金进入资本市场已经提上议事日程.但养老基金入市选择的方式,根据我国实际情况,能进入资本市场运作的只有个人帐户基金,投资受益人应是职工本人.如果由国家劳动和社会保障部作投资主体,不管是直接入市还是间接入市,都有许多弊端.如果职工作投资主体采用信托的方式入市,则可以克服这些弊端.     

社保基金入市投资运营中相关问题的探讨

社保基金所选取的筹资模式的种类与特点制约和影响社保基金的投资模式,社保基金进入资本市场是其重要的投资渠道。为保证社保基金入市投资在规避风险的同时取得稳定的收益,文章从社保基金入市的途径、社保基金入市的最低收益保证及风险防范、政府对社保基金的投资管制模式三方面做了探讨。文章最后在对我国全国社保基金入市的实践进行分析后,提出了相关建议。     

政府对养老基金投资管制的国际比较与借鉴

我国养老金制度改革后,个人账户基金虽然已经建立,但由于现阶段资本市场的诸多不利因素对养老基金投资的安全性构成了巨大的威胁。因此,一直以来,政府对养老基金投资实行极为严格的管制政策,致使我国养老基金资本通过投资实现自我保值、增值的改革目标难以实现。借鉴OECD国家政府的养老金投资管制模式,我国政府必须适度放宽投资管制,这样对于推动养老基金尽快进入资本化运作,实现资本自我增值具有现实意义。     

浅谈养老保险基金如何有效地投资于资本市场

发达国家的实践表明,资本市场是养老基金实现保值增值的重要载体和途径。笔者认为我国的养老基金、资本市场发展和完善的必然趋势,在于提高养老基金的投资效率。创建良好的市场环境,完善养老基金监管体系和监管机制,保证养老基金的投资最终实现低风险下的收益最大化。     

试论通胀形势下我国养老基金投资运营模式的改进

长期以来,我国的养老基金投资方式以银行存款为主,投资报酬率很低,在通胀肆掠的年代,养老基金缩水严重。与此同时,欧美一些国家的养老基金投资却取得了骄人的业绩。他们的养老基金投资运营方式值得我们借鉴。我相信,只要加强法制建设,规范资本市场,引入竞争机制,及时抓住一些投资亮点,我国养老基金的增值保值完全有保障。     

社保基金如何投资资本市场问题研究

随着社保基金规模的不断扩大、资本市场的不断完善以及经济发展的需要，对于社保基金入市，充分发挥其大资金的优势，将会是十分有利的一件事情。该文通过对于社保基金与资本市场关系以及社保资金进入资本市场条件的分析，总结出社保基金投资资本市场的模式，对于各个不同国家的模式选择具有一定的借鉴意义。     

资本市场与社会保障基金管理运作关系

社会保障基金是国家为保障社会劳动者未来的一种有效的资金储备和保障制度。保障基金的建立与运用与资本市场有着密切的联系。在市场经济国家,社会保障基金积累了大量的资产,是资本市场上重要的机构投资者。近年,发展中国家纷纷改革养老计划制度,建立基金制的养老体系,这使养老金的资产规模迅速膨胀。由于养老基金的投资绩效直接影响居民退休后的收入,许多国家强调养老基金利用资本市场进行多样化投资,极大地促进了本国资本市场的发育成熟。     

论养老保险基金与资本市场

养老基金作为机构投资者在一个国家资本市场的发展中起着重要的作用。而养老基金与资本市场之间的作用是相互的:一方面,养老基金对于资本市场的效率、结构、稳定性、金融创新、公司治理以及金融监管等产生了很重要的影响;另一方面,资本市场又让养老基金承担了它所具有的风险,并由此而迫使养老基金对自己的负债管理模式做出若干适应性的改变,并引出了投资管理的问题。     

浅析养老保险基金与资本市场

养老基金作为机构投资者在一个国家资本市场的发展中起着重要的作用。而养老基金与资本市场之间的作用是相互的:一方面,养老基金对于资本市场的效率、结构、稳定性、金融创新、公司治理,以及金融监管等产生了很重要的影响;另一方面,资本市场又让养老基金承担了它所具有的风险,并由此而迫使养老基金对白己的负债管理模式做出若干适应性的改变,并引出了投资管理的问题。     

略论养老保险基金进入资本市场的必要性

我国从1984年始实行养老保险基金社会统筹.截至1997年底,养老基金历年滚存结余682.8亿元,且规模将越来越大.但按我国现行政策规定,养老保险基金只能购买国债和存入银行,而不准进入资本市场.无论是从国际经验上看,还是从我国对养老基金管制的实践看,养老基金拒斥于资本市场之外,是弊多利小.因此,放松政府管制,允许养老基金进入资本市场应是必然的选择.     

我国养老基金的投资模式

人口老龄化对养老保险制度提出了严峻的挑战 ,“统账结合”的基金缺口将通过国有股减持来弥补。而出于保值增值的需要 ,具有积累或部分积累性质的养老基金有必要进入资本市场 ,并具备了一定的进入条件。相应地 ,养老基金的投资模式也要进行多样化的投资选择 ,以达到保值增值的目的。     

Banking is essential,banks are not. The future of financial intermediation in the age of the Internet

This paper examines the question how the future of financial intermediaries and banks as special financial intermediaries may look like in the age of the Internet. The reduction of transaction costs caused by the Internet will reduce the barriers to enter the market for financial products, because there may be no longer a need to run a large system of cost-intensive branches. But as closer examination of the functions of financial intermediaries shows, not everybody can sell and distribute financial products. This is true because of asymmetric information problems in financial business which require an intermediary with a good reputation and because of the need to keep large funds of capital to transform the risk of assets. Both requirements represent an important barrier to enter the market for financial intermediation. Not every financial product will be exposed to more competition due to the rise of the Internet but only products which are standardized and have a low risk. Moreover, large firms with high amounts of capital and a good reputation can be considered as new competitors for banks.     

Advertising and R&D investments in the wealth-maximizing firm

Advertising and R&D outlays are more similar to than different from capital outlays in modern corporations. All three can properly be thought of as investments, and can be ranked and evaluated using the tools of modern capital budgeting. One problem with bringing advertising and R&D outlays into the same planning framework as capital outlays is the constraints implicitly imposed by suppliers of external capital on the use of funds they advance. These constraints basically restrict the use of external funds to capital projects. A simple model is constructed of the cash flow-maximizing firm faced with both market and internal funds constraints. This model shows that marginal productivity rules evolve for these outlays and that a multiplier process is present in the movement of advertising and R&D from one equilibrium to another. Implications of this view of advertising and R&D for financial managers are discussed.     

Publicly traded venture capital funds: implications for institutional “fund of funds” investors

Institutional investors supply the bulk of the funds which are used by venture capital investment firms in financing emerging growth companies. These investors typically place their funds in a number of venture capital firms, thus achieving diversification across a range of investment philosophy, geography, management, industry, investment life cycle stage and type of security. Essentially, each institutional investor manages a “fund of funds,” attempting through the principles of portfolio theory to reduce the risk of participating in the venture capital business while retaining the up-side potential which was the original source of attraction to the business. Because most venture capital investment firms are privately held limited partnerships, it is very difficult to measure risk adjusted rates of return on these funds on a continuous basis.In this paper, we use the set of twelve publicly traded venture capital firms as a proxy to develop insight regarding the risk reduction effect of investment in a portfolio of venture capital funds, i.e., a fund of funds. Measurements of weekly total returns for the shares of these funds are compared with similar returns on a set of comparably sized “maximum capital gain” mutual funds and the daily return of the S&P 500 Index. A comparison of returns on an individual fund basis, as well as a correlation of daily returns of these individual funds, were made. In order to adjust for any systematic bias resulting from the “thin market” characteristic of the securities of the firms being observed, the Scholes-Williams beta estimation technique was used to reduce the effects of nonsynchronous trading.The results indicate that superior returns are realized on such portfolios when compared with portfolios of growth-oriented mutual funds and with the S&P 500 Index. This is the case whether the portfolios are equally weighted (i.e., “naive”) or constructed to be mean-variant efficient, ex ante, according to the capital asset pricing model. When compared individually, more of the venture funds dominated the S&P Market Index than did the mutual funds and by much larger margins. When combined in portfolios, the venture capital funds demonstrated very low beta coefficients and very low covariance of returns among portfolio components when compared with portfolios of mutual funds. To aid in interpreting these results, we analyzed the discounts and premia from net asset value on the funds involved and compared them to Thompson's findings regarding the contribution of such differences to abnormal returns. We found that observed excess returns greatly exceed the level which would be explained by these differences.The implications of these results for the practitioner are significant. They essentially tell us that, while investment in individual venture capital deals is considered to have high risk relative to potential return, combinations of deals (i.e., venture capital portfolios) were shown to produce superior risk adjusted returns in the market place. Further, these results show that further combining these portfolios into larger portfolios (i.e., “funds of funds”) provides even greater excess returns over the market index, thus plausibly explaining the “fund of funds” approach to venture capital investment taken by many institutional investors.While the funds studied are relatively small and are either small business investment companies or business development companies, they serve as a useful proxy for the organized venture capital industry, despite the fact that the bulk of the funds in the industry are institutionally funded, private, closely held limited partnerships which do not trade continuously in an open market. These results demonstrate to investors the magnitude of the differences in risk adjusted total return between publicly traded venture capital funds and growth oriented mutual funds on an individual fund basis. They also demonstrate to investors the power of the “fund of funds” approach to institutional involvement in the venture capital business. Because such an approach produces better risk adjusted investment results for the institutional investor, it seems to justify a greater flow of capital into the business from more risk averse institutional investment sources. This may mean greater access to institutional funds for those seeking to form new venture capital funds. For entrepreneurs seeking venture capital funds for their young companies, it may also mean a lower potential cost of capital for the financing of business venturing. From the viewpoint of public policy makers interested in facilitating the funding of business venturing, it may provide insight regarding regulatory issues surrounding taxation and the barriers and incentives which affect venture capital investment.     

发展我国期货投资基金研究

国际期货市场发展的历程表明,以机构投资者为主体的投资者结构是期货市场走向成熟的一个重要标志。而期货投资基金正是机构投资者中非常重要的一种组织形式。发展期货投资基金不但有利于解决我国期货市场规模小、流动性差的问题,同时对我国资本市场的持续、健康、稳定发展也将起到巨大的推动作用。发展期货投资基金已经成为整个期货业和资本市场梦寐以求的目标。     

Leaders and followers: emerging market fund behavior during tranquil and turbulent times

Recent episodes of capital market volatility and contagion have brought up many questions about the behavior of international investors. We address some of these questions, exploring the behavior of different types of emerging market equity funds with monthly data on individual country holdings. Consistent with the notion that fund behavior can largely be traced to redemptions by individual investors, we find that open-end funds withdraw more from vulnerable countries around crises than their closed-end counterparts. We show that open-end funds’ flows Granger-cause closed-end funds investments, possibly because the closed-end funds are forced to follow their more fickle open-end counterparts. Single-country fund flows precede those of global funds, suggesting an informational advantage of the former. The evidence does not support the notion that small funds are at a disadvantage in gathering country information.     

Mode of entry mode into a foreign market: the case of U.S. mutual funds in Canada

U.S. mutual fund companies offer funds in Canada through two channels: foreign direct investment or trade in advisement services. The total value of U.S.-controlled funds amounts to 18% of the Canadian equity fund market. This paper investigates how the fund-level and firm-level characteristics affect the channel used to enter the Canadian market. Empirical results indicate that the funds offered through FDI are not especially successful in the U.S. market but are associated with dominant companies, whereas the funds offered through trade in advisement services are highly successful in the U.S. market and are from companies with relatively few successful funds.     

我国设立开放式基金对证券二级市场的影响分析

2001年是我国证券市场改革的关键一年,因为在加入WTO以后,国外资金将大量涌入我国的证券市场,这必将对我国幼稚的证券市场产生巨大的冲击。鉴于我国目前的投资者近90％都是个人投资者,证券市场监管部门在2000年就多次明确提出要积极培育机构投资者,并将超常规培育机构投资者列入议事日程,基金（开放式投资基金）是我国目前主要的机构投资者。然而,开放式基金的面市必将对二级市场产生重大的影响,这种影响关键在于开放式基金参与各方行为的理性程度,即基金管理人专家理财的理性投资策略、市场上投资者的投资与投机行为、监管部门的监管。     

美、日风险投资运作机制及其借鉴

美、日风险投资运作机制不同,导致两国风险投资发展效果迥异。美国风险投资公司以有限合伙制为其主流组织形式,有发达的私人权宜资本市场和二板市场作为风险资本进入和退出的渠道,并且也形成了适宜于风险投资发展的人才和文化环境。而日本风险投资公司的组织形式、二板市场状况和文化环境等条件都难与风险投资发展的内在要求相适应。我国目前风险投资发展中存在许多问题,对美、日风险投资运作机制的分析能为我国发展风险投资提供重要的借鉴作用。     

An empirical analysis of the market for formal venture capital: Evidence from the U.S.

The objective of this paper is to conduct an empirical analysis of the risk-return relationships in the formal venture capital market and compare such relationships with the trade-offs available through comparable investment vehicles. Based on ten years of market data, the performance of the venture capital companies (VCCs) is compared with that of the mutual funds as well as the broad market index. Test results from our study show that on average the VCCs well outperformed the comparable mutual funds as well as the market benchmark. The VCCs had the same level of risk as the high-growth mutual funds but yielded 9.5% more return on an annual basis. When ranked according to their performances, the VCCs occupied the top of the list.