國內金控同業、異業購併績效探討

Abstract

本研究的目的為探討國內金控進行同業購併與異業購併的績效與差異。主要利用資料包絡分析法(Data Envelopment Analysis)以及財務比率分析法進行實證研究。本研究選取國內16家金控進行的購併案為樣本，樣本期間為2002年到2014年第一季。第一步驟先以資料包絡分析法及選取之財務比率評估購併一年前、購併當年、購併一年後、購併兩年後及購併三年後的績效。第二步驟則使用Mann-Whitney U test檢定金控進行同業購併與異業購併後績效的差異。 本文的實證結果有以下幾點發現，首先，金控進行同業購併或異業購併後在績效上沒有顯著差異。這暗示著購併的績效和成功與否跟購併類型無關，而是與金控本身的條件或狀況相關。而同業購併與異業購併間的無效率主要都來自無純技術效率。另外，同業購併與異業購併在績效的呈現上經常與理論有所出入。實際的購併中有許多複雜的狀況，使其績效的展現經常與理論以及期待不符合。 為了證實購併類別不影響績效表現，並補充說明同業購併與異業購併績效的結果，本研究另外評估不同主體之金控購併績效的差異。結果顯示，以銀行為主體之金控所進行的購併案，績效顯著優於其他金控。而以銀行為主體之金控進行同業購併與異業購併的比率是相當的。這也使購併的績效問題回歸到本質上。並非是購併的類別造就金控績效間的差異化，而是金控本身的條件跟特性所致。 最後，效率值為一相對概念，而財務比率則為直接成果的展現。分析的角度不同，使資料包絡分析法以及財務比率分析法所評估之績效結果不一致。擁有多樣獲利引擎之金控效率不佳，但因掌握多元獲利機會，財務指標有突出表現。反之，以單一獲利引擎為主之金控，則需透過高效率的經營彌補獲利來源的不足。

The main purpose of this thesis is to evaluate efficiencies of financial holding companies in Taiwan when they attempt to merge other companies. We use Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to evaluate performance and try to compare performance of in-market mergers with cross-market mergers. Our empirical result shows that there are not difference between in-market and cross-market mergers. The performance of mergers and acquisitions depends on companies themselves, not the types of mergers. Besides, the inefficiency of in-market and cross-market mergers are both from pure technical efficiency. Moreover, we reclassify the samples into three groups. First group is those financial holding companies whose profits come from bank business most, second group is those financial holding companies whose profits come from insurance business most. Last group is those financial holding companies whose profits come from insurance. We find the first group has better efficiency than others apparently. The ratio of in-market mergers and cross-market mergers which were undertaken by the financial holding companies in first group is almost half and half. The result proves that the performance of mergers and acquisitions doesn’t depend on the types of mergers and acquisitions. In addition, when using DEA and financial ratios to evaluate the performance, the result is not consistent. The financial holding companies which have various business do better on financial ratios but have worse performance on efficiency. Conversely, the financial holding companies which have simple business do better on efficiency, but have worse performance on financial ratio.