基于VaR的新三板企业股权质押率分析—以枫盛阳(430431)为例
Analysis of Loan-to-Value Raito for NEEQ Companies Based on VaR—A Case Study of Fengshengyang (430431)

作者: 曾玉华 , 金 辉 :杭州电子科技大学经济学院,浙江 杭州;

关键词: 新三板企业股权质押贷款质押率VaR击穿频率NEEQ Companies Stock Loan Loan-to-Value Ratio VaR Breakdown Frequency

摘要:
股权质押贷款是新三板企业主要的债务融资方式,质押率的大小直接反映了股权质押贷款中的风险暴露程度。以新三板挂牌企业枫盛阳(430431)为例,采用VaR方法计算其质押率并通过模拟贷款分析击穿频率,判断质押率上限(30%)设定的合理性;在此基础上,以三板做市(899002)代表整个市场,对比枫盛阳(430431)与三板做市(899002)的击穿频率,分析个体企业和市场总体的差异。研究发现,模拟贷款期限越短VaR值越小,使得质押率越高,击穿频率越高;反之亦然。确定股权质押率时不仅要考虑市场的情况,还需要对所属行业企业资质进行针对性分析考虑。

Abstract: Stock loan is a main financial access of debt type for SMEs in the NEEQ market, and the loan-to- value ratio reflects the risk exposure of stock loan. Using Fengshengyang (430431) as the case of NEEQ companies for analysis, this paper calculates loan-to-value ratio based on VaR, and gets the breakdown frequency by simulating loans, which in turn tests the rationality of the maximum ratio of 30% of stock loan. Considering NEEQ component index (899002) as the representative of the whole NEEQ market, the breakdown frequency of Fengshengyang (430431) and NEEQ component index (899002) are compared to find the difference between a specific company and the whole market. The results show that the shorter the term of simulating loans, the smaller the VaR value is, which makes both the loan-to-value ratio and the breakdown frequency higher; and versa oth-erwise. To determine the loan-to-value ratio, not only the market situation, but also specific factors of industry and enterprise are needed to be considered.

文章引用: 曾玉华 , 金 辉 (2016) 基于VaR的新三板企业股权质押率分析—以枫盛阳(430431)为例。 商业全球化, 4, 97-103. doi: 10.12677/BGlo.2016.44013

参考文献

[1] Stulz, R. and Johnson, H. (1985) An Analysis of Secured Debt. Journal of Financial Economics, 14, 501-521.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(85)90024-8

[2] Merton, R. (1974) On the Pricing of Corporate Debt: The Risk Structure of Interest Rate. Journal of Finance, 29, 449-470.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1974.tb03058.x

[3] Cossin, D., Huang, Z. and Aunonerin, D. (2003) A Framework for Collateral risk Control Determination. European Central Bank Working Paper Series, No. 1, 1-47.

[4] Jarrow, R. and Turnbull, S. (1995) Pricing Derivative Securities on Financial Securities Subject to Credit Risk. Journal of Finance, 50, 53-86.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1995.tb05167.x

[5] Duffie, D. and Singleton, K. (1999) Modeling Term Structures of Defaultable Bonds. Review of Financial Studies, 12, 687-720.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rfs/12.4.687

[6] Prager, D. and Zhang, Q. (2010) Stock Loan Valuation under a Re-gime-Switching Model with Mean-Reverting and Finite Maturity. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 23, 572-583.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11424-010-0146-7

[7] Yang, C., Xing, T. and Anderson, B. (2012) Stock Pledge Loans in Jump Diffusion. The Frontiers in Economic & Management Research, 1, 88-113.

[8] 王志诚. 用期权定价原理分析抵押贷款的信用风险[J]. 金融研究, 2004(4): 95-105.

[9] 齐二石, 马珊珊, 韩铁. 组合仓单质押贷款质押率研究[J]. 西安电子科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2008, 18(6): 50- 53.

[10] 李毅学, 徐渝, 冯耕中, 王非. 重随机泊松违约概率下库存商品融资业务贷款价值比率研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2007, 15(1): 21-26.

[11] 王志诚. 股票质押贷款质押率评定的VaR方法[J]. 金融研究, 2003(12): 64-71.

[12] 黄莉. 国内信托公司股权质押融资业务风险管理研究[D]. 上海: 上海交通大学, 2013.

[13] 张旭. 新三板挂牌企业利用股权质押融资的风险管理[D]. 北京: 北京交通大学, 2015.

分享
Top