根據Mitton and Vorkink (2007)提出的偏態偏好理論，投資人追求彩票型收益、偏好投資正偏態資產，往往會導致預期報酬降低，過往許多文獻也表明資產偏態和價格呈顯著的負向關係。Jiang et al. (2019)在商品期貨的研究中更發現基差偏態可以幫助改善報酬的可預測性。因此本研究以基差偏態對期貨的價格預測能力進行探討。本文以臺灣期貨交易所推出之電子期貨及金融期貨為研究樣本，分析基差偏態對兩種不同期貨標的的價格預測能力。此外，以正負基差將市場區分為正、逆向市場，以探討市場性質不同時，是否仍對期貨價格具預測能力。同時，進一步採用較長樣本區間作為穩健性檢定觀察基差偏態對期貨價格的影響。
實證結果顯示，基差偏態對電子期貨及金融期貨之報酬率皆有顯著之負向關係，此結果與Jiang et al. (2019)的論點具一致性。其中，基差偏態在逆向市場時的預測能力較正向市場時更顯著，在拉長樣本區間後，會失去對期貨價格的預測能力。基差及成交量則在任何情況下皆對期貨價格呈顯著相關性，證明其對期貨報酬具高度影響力。

According to the skewed preference theory proposed by Mitton and Vorkink (2007), investors' pursuit of lottery returns and preference for investing positively skewed assets will often lead to a reduction in expected returns. Many previous literatures have also shown that asset skewness and price have a significant negative relationship. In the study of commodity futures, Jiang et al. (2019) also found that basis bias can help improve the predictability of returns. Therefore, this paper discusses the price prediction ability of futures based on the bias of basis difference . This paper takes the electronic futures and financial futures of Taiwan futures exchange as the research samples to analyze the price prediction ability of the basis bias for the two different futures. In addition, the positive and negative basis difference is used to divide the market into positive and negative markets, so as to explore whether the futures prices can still be predicted when the market nature is different. At the same time, a longer sample interval is used as a robust test to observe the effect of basis skewness on futures prices.
  The empirical results show that the basis bias has a significant negative relationship with the return rate of both electronic futures and financial futures, which is consistent with the argument of Jiang et al. (2019). Among them, the prediction ability of basis skewness in the reverse market is more significant than that in the forward market. After the sample interval is extended, the prediction ability of the futures price will be lost. On the other hand, the basis and trading volume have a significant correlation with the futures price in any case, which proves that they have a high influence on the futures return.

目錄
第一章 緒論 	1
第一節	 研究背景與動機	1
第二節	 研究目的	3
第三節	 研究架構	4
第四節	 研究流程	5
第二章	文獻探討	6
第一節 基差之相關文獻	6
第二節	 偏態之相關文獻	8
第三節	 價格預測之相關文獻	10
第三章	研究方法	12
第一節 樣本資料篩選	12
第二節	 理論與實證分析	17
第三節	 迴歸模型設定	23
第四章	實證結果分析	27
第一節 敘述統計	27
第二節	 迴歸分析	30
第三節	 穩健性檢定	33
第五章	結論與建議	35
參考文獻	37
附錄	40
表目錄
【表3-1】2016年至2020年各項商品年成交量統計表	13
【表3-2】電子期貨及金融期貨每日各契約成交量平均比重	15
【表4-1】電子期貨ADF單根檢定結果	27
【表4-2】金融期貨ADF單根檢定結果	28
【表4-3】電子期貨敘述統計表	29
【表4-4】金融期貨敘述統計表	29
【表4-5】不同市場下基差偏態對電子期貨價格預測之影響	31
【表4-6】不同市場下基差偏態對金融期貨價格預測之影響	31
【表4-7】不同市場下基差偏態對電子期貨價格預測之迴歸結果(1800秒) 	33
【表4-8】不同市場下基差偏態對金融期貨價格預測之迴歸結果(1800秒) 	34
圖目錄
【圖1-1】研究流程圖	5
【圖3-1】時間序列之檢定分析流程	17

1.	許溪南、王健聰.(2000)股價指數期貨定價理論與實證文獻之回顧. 中華管理評論,1,27-41
2.	張焯然.(2001).台股指數期貨動態避險效果之探討.台灣管理學刊,1, 151-164.
3.	陈蓉、郑振龙.(2007).期货价格能否预测未来的现货价格?.国际金融研究,9,70-74.
4.	黃健銘、張惠雅.(2009).股市基差訊息對現貨報酬之影響: 厚尾模型的應用. 台灣金融財務季刊, 10(1), 81-106.
5.	Bailey, W., & Chan, K. C. (1993). Macroeconomic influences and the variability of the commodity futures basis. The Journal of Finance, 48(2), 555-573.
6.	Chen, W. P., Chung, H., & Lien, D. (2016). Price discovery in the S&P 500 index derivatives markets. International Review of Economics & Finance, 45, 438-452.
7.	Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American statistical association, 74(366a), 427-431
8.	Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society, 251-276.
9.	Fama, E. F., French, K. R. “Commodity futures prices: some evidence on forecast power, premiums, and the theory of storage”, Journal of Business, 60, 1987, pp. 55-73.
10.	Fleming, J., Ostdiek, B., & Whaley, R. E. (1996). Trading costs and the relative rates of price discovery in stock, futures, and option markets. The Journal of Futures Markets (1986-1998), 16(4), 353.
11.	Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2016). Commodity futures prices: Some evidence on forecast power, premiums, and the theory of storage. In The World Scientific Handbook of Futures Markets (pp. 79-102).
12.	Fernandez‐Perez, A., Frijns, B., Gafiatullina, I., & Tourani‐Rad, A. (2018). Determinants of intraday price discovery in VIX exchange traded notes. Journal of Futures Markets, 38(5), 535-548.
13.	Figlewski, S. (1984). Explaining the early discounts on stock index futures: The case for disequilibrium. Financial Analysts Journal, 40(4), 43-47.
14.	Granger, C. W., Newbold, P., & Econom, J. (1974). Spurious regressions in econometrics. Baltagi, Badi H. A Companion of Theoretical Econometrics, 557-61.
15.	Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of economic dynamics and control, 12(2-3), 231-254.
16.	Johansen, S., & Juselius, K. (1990). Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration—with appucations to the demand for money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics, 52(2), 169-210.
17.	Jiang, X., Han, L., & Yin, L. (2019). Can skewness of the futures‐spot basis predict currency spot returns?. Journal of Futures Markets, 39(11), 1435-1449.
18.	Kim, D. (2015). Predicting Commodity‐futures Basis Factor Return by Basis Spread. Asia‐Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 44(4), 587-615.
19.	Lin, W. T., Tsai, S. C., & Chiu, P. (2016). Do foreign institutions outperform in the Taiwan options market?. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 35, 101-115.
20.	Mitton, T., & Vorkink, K. (2007). Equilibrium underdiversification and the preference for skewness. The Review of Financial Studies, 20(4), 1255-1288.
21.	Perron, P. (1988). Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series: Further evidence from a new approach. Journal of economic dynamics and control, 12(2-3), 297-332.
22.	Said, S. E., & Dickey, D. A. (1984). Testing for unit roots in autoregressive-moving average models of unknown order. Biometrika, 71(3), 599-607.
23.	Yang, F. (2013). Investment shocks and the commodity basis spread. Journal of Financial Economics, 110(1), 164-184.