本研究採用1993 年至 2012 年的美國公司作為主要分析對象，以 Lu et al. (2010) 論文中整理的資訊不確定性、資訊不對稱代理變數為解釋變數，公司營運績效表現 代理變數為被解釋變數，並加入市場競爭程度及信用評準差異作為分組條件，進行 探討。
實證結果發現，在以公司特徵做為控制變數後，資訊不確定性及資訊不對稱分 別與公司營運績效表現呈負向關係，且若再考慮市場競爭程度及信用評準差異條 件的不同是否會使資訊不確定性及資訊不對稱對公司營運績效表現有影響力上的 差異後，透過鄒檢定(Chow Test)的分析，本研究發現，在一市場競爭程度較大的公 司，其公司營運績效表現受到資訊不確定性及資訊不對稱的影響較為嚴重；有信用 評準差異的公司，其公司營運績效表現受到資訊不確定性及資訊不對稱的影響亦 較為嚴重。而進行穩健性檢查後，亦可得到與上述相同之結論。
綜合上述實證結果，可以得出公司之資本結構、資訊不確定性及資訊不對稱會 影響其在市場受到掠奪的機率，進而影響公司獲利能力，也就是公司的營運績效表 現。因此，藉由資訊不確定性及資訊不對稱之衡量，公司及投資人可以判斷公司所 揭露資訊的完整性程度，是否會影響公司受到掠奪的機率，將上述因素列入考量，
避免其對公司的獲利能力有過大的負面影響。
表 5、樣本篩選表
表 6、假說一之敘述統計量 Size 23,401 6.059694 1.923874 -1.482805 13.58957 LEV 23,301 .1993669 .2253578 0 4.481357 MB ratio 15,465 2.285508 2.431494 -2.446053 105.0901 EBITDA/TA 23,322 .0888357 .1846889 -.8222483 .4037115 EBIT/TA 23,386 .0392528 .1889573 -.9164782 .3480091
DISP
DISP 42,208 .2580915 5.281205 0 837.2144 Size 42,162 6.14733 1.893143 .3162695 13.58957 LEV 41,963 .2042658 .2307977 0 4.481357 MB ratio 29,675 2.296375 2.55063 -2.446053 105.0901 EBITDA/TA 42,009 .0853733 .1875151 -.8370982 .4153413 EBIT/TA 42,141 .0378069 .1905731 -.9241325 .3575944
AGE
AGE 78,199 13.04494 13.9763 0 87.1452 Size 77,926 5.389228 2.15747 -6.907755 13.58957 LEV 77,583 .2382815 2.909706 0 400 MB ratio 51,094 2.360101 3.814368 -12.20594 200.879 EBITDA/TA 77,509 .0375615 .2551156 -1.274563 .4084132 EBIT/TA 77,793 -.0120903 .2630769 -1.38809 .3438276
AQ
AQ 43,329 .2106951 2.320815 3.97e-08 94.41068 Size 77,272 5.380997 2.1496 -6.907755 12.83958 LEV 76,930 .2391181 2.921785 0 400 MB ratio 50,362 2.357256 3.792513 -12.20594 200.879 EBITDA/TA 76,871 .0383077 .2548384 -1.265502 .407755 EBIT/TA 77,146 -.0115054 .26303 -1.38491 .3436731
表 7、假說二之敘述統計量 Size 52,619 5.569444 2.113666 -6.907755 13.58957 LEV 52,406 .2021692 .2527117 0 12.25882 MB ratio 37,580 2.321819 3.233946 -7.035986 173.6374 EBITDA/TA 52,415 .0463132 .2370668 -1.10805 .4028217 EBIT/TA 52,565 -.0026706 .2444698 -1.225024 .3438276
With Fluidity
PIN 44,007 .1873946 .1150289 .000049 .914286 ADJPIN 44,081 .1181283 .074258 0 .721572 PSOS 44,081 .2950005 .1231908 .001251 .996813 OI 44,078 .3483769 .2660894 0 1 Size 44,042 5.668335 2.130331 -3.194183 13.58957 LEV 43,868 .2100968 .249333 0 9.829268 MB ratio 32,398 2.217122 2.92343 -7.035986 173.6374 EBITDA/TA 43,897 .0560717 .2269203 -1.10805 .4028217 EBIT/TA 44,011 .0061159 .2344687 -1.225024 .3438276
With Rating
PIN 44,007 .1873946 .1150289 .000049 .914286 ADJPIN 44,081 .1181283 .074258 0 .721572 PSOS 44,081 .2950005 .1231908 .001251 .996813 OI 44,078 .3483769 .2660894 0 1 Size 44,042 5.668335 2.130331 -3.194183 13.58957 LEV 43,868 .2100968 .249333 0 9.829268 MB ratio 32,546 1.073637 1.278964 .0438396 97.29552 EBITDA/TA 43,897 .0560717 .2269203 -1.10805 .4028217 EBIT/TA 44,011 .0061159 .2344687 -1.225024 .3438276
表 8、假說一之邏輯迴歸變數相關系數
下表為假說一邏輯迴歸所使用各解釋變數之間的相關係數。NANAL 為分析師人數、DISP 為 分析師預測價值分散度、Age 為公司年齡與 AQ 為公司應計帳品質。SIZE 為企業總資產取自然對 數、LEV 為負債帳面價值對總資產比率、MB ratio 為企業市值淨值比。EBITDA/TA、EBIT/TA 為 公司營運績效代理變數。
表 9、假說二之邏輯迴歸變數相關系數
下表為假說一邏輯迴歸所使用各解釋變數之間的相關係數。主要解釋變數分別為PIN、ADJPIN、PSOS 與 OI。SIZE 為企業總資產取自然對數、LEV 為負債
帳面價值對總資產比率、MB ratio 為企業市值淨值比。EBITDA/TA、EBIT/TA 為公司營運績效代理變數。
Obs=37,283 PIN ADJPIN PSOS OI Size LEV MB ratio EBITDA/TA EBIT/TA PIN 1.0000
ADJPIN 0.4196 1.0000
PSOS 0.6531 0.1577 1.0000
OI 0.6158 0.1831 0.6266 1.0000
Size -0.5757 -0.4384 -0.5599 -0.5883 1.0000
LEV -0.0198 -0.0447 -0.0205 0.0374 0.1790 1.0000
MB ratio -0.0123 0.0276 -0.0206 -0.1113 -0.1530 -0.0117 1.0000
EBITDA/TA -0.2126 -0.2173 -0.1687 -0.1420 0.4363 0.0034 -0.2293 1.0000
EBIT/TA -0.2218 -0.2211 -0.1772 -0.1523 0.4401 -0.0153 -0.2212 0.9827 1.0000
表 10、資訊不確定性與公司營運績效之關聯
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為分析師人數(NANAL)、分析師預測價值分散度(DISP)、公司年齡(Firm Age)與公司應計帳品質 (Accrual Quality, AQ)，被解釋變數為以稅前息前折舊前攤銷前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, EBITDA)計算之資產報酬率。控制變數則分別如下，SIZE 為公司規 模、LEV 為財務槓桿比率、MB ratio 為企業市值淨值比。下表呈現迴歸式中各項變數的係數，括號
表 11、在市場競爭程度大下，資訊不確定性與公司營運績效之關聯
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為分析師人數(NANAL)、分析師預測價值分散度(DISP)、公司年齡(Firm Age)與公司應計帳品質 (Accrual Quality, AQ)，被解釋變數為以稅前息前折舊前攤銷前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, EBITDA)計算之資產報酬率。Fluid 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，
Fluidnanal、Fluiddisp、Fluidage、Fluidaq 分別為解釋變數與虛擬變數之交乘項。控制變數則分別如
Fluidnanal 0.0002 0.0002
(0.45) (0.57)
Fluiddisp -0.0017*** -0.0017***
(-4.65) (-5.11)
Fluidage 0.0003** 0.0003***
(2.39) (2.85)
表 12、在有信用評準差異下，資訊不確定性與公司營運績效之關聯
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為分析師人數(NANAL)、分析師預測價值分散度(DISP)、公司年齡(Firm Age)與公司應計帳品質 (Accrual Quality, AQ)，被解釋變數為以稅前息前折舊前攤銷前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, EBITDA)計算之資產報酬率。Rating 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，
Ratingnanal、Ratingdisp、Ratingage、Ratingaq 分別為解釋變數與虛擬變數之交乘項。控制變數則分
Ratingnanal 0.0022*** 0.0001
(4.18) (0.22)
Ratingdisp 0.0039 0.0050
(1.40) (1.47)
Ratingage 0.0002 0.0003
(0.74) (1.00)
Ratingaq 0.0013 0.0008
(1.10) (0.45)
表 13、資訊不對稱與公司營運績效之關聯
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為PIN、ADJPIN、PSOS 與 OI，被解釋變數為以稅前息前折舊前攤銷前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, EBITDA)計算之資產報酬率。控制變數則分別如下，SIZE 為公 司規模、LEV 為財務槓桿比率、MB ratio 為企業市值淨值比。下表呈現迴歸式中各項變數的係數，
表 14、在市場競爭程度大下，資訊不對稱與公司營運績效之關聯
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為PIN、ADJPIN、PSOS 與 OI，被解釋變數為以稅前息前折舊前攤銷前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, EBITDA)計算之資產報酬率。Fluid 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，
Ratingpin、Ratingadjpin、Ratingpsos、Ratingoi 分別為解釋變數與虛擬變數之交乘項。控制變數則分
Fluidpin -0.0417** -0.0209
(-2.11) (-1.06)
Fluidadjpin -0.0521** -0.0336
(-2.00) (-1.27)
Fluidpsos -0.0425** -0.0298*
(-2.40) (-1.68)
表 15、在有信用評準差異下，資訊不對稱與公司營運績效之關聯
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為PIN、ADJPIN、PSOS 與 OI，被解釋變數為以稅前息前折舊前攤銷前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, EBITDA)計算之資產報酬率。Rating 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，
Ratingpin、Ratingadjpin、Ratingpsos、Ratingoi 分別為解釋變數與虛擬變數之交乘項。控制變數則分
Ratingpin -0.0160 -0.1267***
(-0.85) (-4.76)
Ratingadjpin 0.0092 -0.0722**
(0.39) (-2.22)
Ratingpsos -0.0468*** -0.0809***
(-2.83) (-4.02)
Ratingoi -0.0210* -0.0737***
(-1.91) (-4.22)
表 16、資訊不確定性與公司營運績效之關聯(穩健性檢查)
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為分析師人數(NANAL)、分析師預測價值分散度(DISP)、公司年齡(Firm Age)與公司應計帳品質 (Accrual Quality, AQ)，被解釋變數為以稅前息前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, EBIT)計算之資 產報酬率。控制變數則分別如下，SIZE 為公司規模、LEV 為財務槓桿比率、MB ratio 為企業市值
表 17、在市場競爭程度大下，資訊不確定性與公司營運績效之關聯(穩健性檢查)
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為分析師人數(NANAL)、分析師預測價值分散度(DISP)、公司年齡(Firm Age)與公司應計帳品質 (Accrual Quality, AQ)，被解釋變數為以稅前息前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, EBIT)計算之資 產報酬率。Fluid 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，Fluidnanal、Fluiddisp、Fluidage、Fluidaq 分別為解釋變 數與虛擬變數之交乘項。控制變數則分別如下，SIZE 為公司規模、LEV 為財務槓桿比率、MB ratio
為企業市值淨值比。下表呈現迴歸式中各項變數的係數，括號中為其t 統計量，並經過 White (1980)
Fluidnanal 0.0002 0.0002
(0.51) (0.50)
Fluiddisp -0.0018*** -0.0019***
(-3.87) (-4.43)
Fluidage 0.0003** 0.0003***
(2.03) (2.72)
表 18、在有信用評準差異下，資訊不確定性與公司營運績效之關聯(穩健性檢查)
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為分析師人數(NANAL)、分析師預測價值分散度(DISP)、公司年齡(Firm Age)與公司應計帳品質 (Accrual Quality, AQ)，被解釋變數為以稅前息前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, EBIT)計算之資 產報酬率。Rating 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，Ratingnanal、Ratingdisp、Ratingage、Ratingaq 分別為
Ratingnanal 0.0025*** 0.0001
(4.34) (0.15)
Ratingdisp 0.0043 0.0053
(1.38) (1.46)
Ratingage 0.0001 0.0003
(0.29) (0.93)
Ratingaq 0.0013 0.0008
(1.07) (0.47)
表 19、資訊不對稱與公司營運績效之關聯(穩健性檢查)
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為PIN、ADJPIN、PSOS 與 OI，被解釋變數為以稅前息前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, EBIT) 計算之資產報酬率。控制變數則分別如下，SIZE 為公司規模、LEV 為財務槓桿比率、MB ratio 為
表 20、在市場競爭程度大下，資訊不對稱與公司營運績效之關聯(穩健性檢查)
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為PIN、ADJPIN、PSOS 與 OI，被解釋變數為以稅前息前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, EBIT) 計算之資產報酬率。Fluid 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，Ratingpin、Ratingadjpin、Ratingpsos、Ratingoi
Fluidpin -0.0366* -0.0155
(-1.72) (-0.74)
Fluidadjpin -0.0510* -0.0278
(-1.83) (-1.00)
Fluidpsos -0.0388** -0.0259
(-2.04) (-1.37)
表 21、在有信用評準差異下，資訊不對稱與公司營運績效之關聯(穩健性檢查)
下表為本研究所使用橫斷面追蹤資料回歸解釋公司營運績效表現之結果。主要解釋變數分別 為PIN、ADJPIN、PSOS 與 OI，被解釋變數為以稅前息前利潤(Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, EBIT) 計算之資產報酬率。Rating 為市場競爭程度虛擬變數，Ratingpin、Ratingadjpin、Ratingpsos、Ratingoi
Ratingpin -0.0229 -0.1539***
(-1.18) (-5.51)
Ratingadjpin 0.0143 -0.0864**
(0.57) (-2.49)
Ratingpsos -0.0503*** -0.0963***
(-2.95) (-4.57)
Ratingoi -0.0252** -0.0875***
(-2.25) (-4.78)
參考文獻
Anderson, Ronald C. and David M. Reeb., 2003. Founding-Family Ownership and Firm Performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. The Journal of Finance. Vol. Lviii, No.3.
Balakrishnan, K., Cohen, D., 2014. Product market competition and financial accounting misreporting. London Business School and University of Texas at Dallas Unpublished working paper.
Baumol, W., Panzar, J., Willig, R., 1982. Contestable markets and the theory of industry structure. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., San Diego, CA.
Brander, James A. and Lewis, Tracy R., 1986. Oligopoly and financial structure, American Economic Review, 76, 956-70.
Billett, M.T., Yu, M., 2016. Asymmetric information, financial reporting, and open market share repurchases. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 51, 1165–1192.
Bolton, Patrick and Scharfstein, David S., 1988. Agency problems, financial contracting, and predation, Sloan Working Paper 1988-86, MIT.
Bolton, P., Scharfstein, D., 1990. A theory of predation based on agency problems in financial contracting. American Economic Review 80, 93–106.
Bustamante, M.C., Donangelo, A., 2015. Industry concentration and markup:
implications for asset pricing. University of Maryland and University of Texas at Austin Unpublished working paper.
Chordia, T., Roll, R., Subrahmanyam, A., 2002. Order imbalance, liquidity and market returns. Journal of Financial Economics 65, 111–130.
Campello, M., 2003. Capital structure and product markets interactions: evidence from business cycles. Journal of Financial Economics 68, 353–378.
Campello, M., 2006. Debt financing: does it boost or hurt firm performance in product markets? Journal of Financial Economics 82, 135–172.
Chen, T., Harford, J., Li, K., 2007. Monitoring: which institutions matter? Journal of Financial Economics 86, 279–305.
Chen, T., Harford, J., Lin, C., 2015. Do analysts matter for governance? Evidence from natural experiments. Journal of Financial Economics 115, 383–410.
Institute of Technology and Wake Forest University Unpub- lished working paper.
Dechow, P., Dichev, I., 2002. The quality of accruals and earnings: the role accruals estimation errors. The Accounting Review 77, 35–59.
Duarte, J., Young, L., 2009. Why is PIN priced? Journal of Financial Economics 91, 119–
138.
Derrien, F., Kecskés, A., 2013. The real effects of financial shocks: evidence from exogenous changes in analyst coverage. The Journal of Finance 68, 1407–1440.
Easley, D., Kiefer, N.M., O’Hara, M., Paperman, J.B., 1996. Liquidity, information and infrequently traded stocks. Journal of Finance 51, 1405–1436.
Easley, D., O’Hara, M., 2004. Information and the cost of capital. Journal of Finance 59, 1553–1583.
Fudenberg, Drew and Tirole, Jean, 1986. A 'Signal- Jamming' theory of predation. Rand Journal of Economics, Autumn, 17, 366-76.
Fama, E., French, K., 2008. Dissecting anomalies. The Journal of Finance 63, 1653–1678.
Fong, K., Hong, H., Kacperczyk, M., Kubik, J., 2014. Do security analysts discipline credit rating agencies?. University of New South Wales, Columbia University, Imperial College London, and Syracuse University Unpublished working paper.
Francis, J., LaFond, R., Olsson, P., Schipper, K., 2005. The market pricing of accruals quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics 39, 295–327.
Fresard, L., 2010. Financial strength and product market behavior: the real effects of corporate cash holding. The Journal of Finance 65, 1097–1122.
He, J., Tian, X., 2013. The dark side of analyst coverage: the case of innovation. Journal of Financial Economics 109, 856–878.
Hoberg, G., Phillips, G., Prabhala, N., 2014. Product market threats, payouts, and financial flexibility. The Journal of Finance 69, 293–324.
Hong, H., Kacperczyk, M., 2010. Competition and bias. Quarterly Journal of Economics 125, 1683–1725.
Hubbard, R.G., 1998. Capital-market imperfections and investment. Journal of Economic Literature 36, 193–225.
Irani, R., Oesch, D., 2013. Monitoring and corporate disclosure: evidence from a natural
experiment. Journal of Financial Economics 109, 398–418.
Kelly, B., Ljungqvist, A., 2012. Testing asymmetric-information asset pricing models.
Review of Financial Studies 25, 1366–1413.
Lee, C., Ready, M., 1991. Inferring trade direction from intraday data. Journal of Finance 46, 733–746.
Lee, G., Masulis, R., 2009. Seasoned equity offerings: quality of accounting information and expected flotation costs. Journal of Financial Economics 92, 443–469.
Li, X., Lin, C., Zhan, X., 2015. Does change in information environment affect the choice between bank debt and public debt?. The University of Hong Kong and Erasmus University Rotterdam Unpublished working paper.
Lin, C., Officer, M., Zhan, X., 2014. Does competition affect earnings management?
Evidence from a natural experiment. The University of Hong Kong, Loyola Marymount University, and Erasmus University Rotterdam Unpublished working paper.
Lu, C. W., Chen T. K. and Liao H. H., 2010. Information uncertainty, information
Lu, C. W., Chen T. K. and Liao H. H., 2010. Information uncertainty, information