本研究以台灣經濟新報資料庫，蒐集2000年至2009年，以台灣上市公司為主併公司之併購案件，研究樣本包含205個併購案。以「財務指標法」評估上市公司完成併購後之績效，是否與併購前有顯著差異。本研究採用EVAOE指標為績效評估指標，利用多元迴歸及差異分析，探討企業併購前後財務績效之差異與影響因子。
過去文獻多以股東權益報酬率、總資產報酬率、每股盈餘、經濟附加價值等財務指標，衡量與企業股票報酬及市場價值之關係。然而，相較於經濟附加價值，使用EVAOE可以比較不同規模之企業的財務績效，且能提供衡量企業股票報酬及市場價值之額外訊息。
實證結果發現，企業併購後之短期財務績效與併購前沒有顯著之差異，但企業從事併購後三年平均EVAOE，與併購前三年平均EVAOE之差異、併購後第三年之EVAOE，與併購前一年之EVAOE之差異、及併購後三年平均EVAOE，與併購前一年EVAOE之差異皆為顯著負向關係。透過EVA重塑模型，以六項財務因子分析對於EVAOE差異之影響，發現企業於完成併購活動後，淨利率減少、財務槓桿程度增加、及加權平均資金成本增加，為主要造成併購後EVAOE下降的主因。因此，企業於完成合併之後，必須有效提升企業淨利率，並降低企業之財務槓桿程度及資金成本，才能避免長期績效不佳之情形。

This study uses TEJ database to collect M&A cases between 2000 and 2009, which the acquiring companies are the listed companies in Taiwan. The sample consists 205 M&A cases. Using 「Financial Index Method」, this study evaluates if the financial performance would be significantly different after the listed companies completing the M&A process. In the same time, this study adopts EVAOE as the performance index, using difference analysis and multiple regression analysis, to discuss the difference between the pre- and post-M&A financial performances and the influential factors.
The past researches used ROE, ROA, EPS, and Economic Value Added to measure the stock return and firm value of the corporations. However, comparing to EVA, EVAOE could be adopted to compare the financial performance between different scales. In addition, EVAOE would provide incremental information in measuring the stock return and firm value.
The empirical results show that the short-term financial performance would not be significantly different after M&A. But the difference between the average 3-year EVAOE after M&A and the average 3-year EVAOE before M&A, the difference between the third year’s EVAOE after M&A and EVAOE of the year before M&A, and the difference between the average 3-year EVAOE after M&A and EVAOE of the year before M&A all are significantly negative. Revising EVA model, this study uses six financial factors to analyze which factor influences the difference of EVAOE. When the corporations completed the M&A process, the reduction of profit margin, the increase of the use of financial leverage, and the increase of WACC would be the main influential factors of the decrease of EVAOE. Therefore, after M&A, the corporations must increase the profit margin and reduce the use of financial leverage and WACC, to avoid the long-term financial performance being worse.

中文文獻
1.王泰昌、劉嘉雯，(2000)，〈經濟附加價值 (EVA) 的意義與價值〉，《中華管理評論》，第3卷第4期，頁15-31。
2.吳安妮，(1992)，〈台灣企業併購動機之實證研究〉，《管理評論》，11，頁1-27。
3.吳啟銘，(2010)，《企業評價─個案實證分析〉，再版，智勝文化事業有限公司。
4.李亞静、朱宏泉、黄登仕、周英峰，(2004)，〈EVA與傳统會計指標的比較─中國證券市場的實證分析〉，《管理科學學報》，7(3)，頁31-37。
5.林江亮、管玉儷，(2007)，〈經濟附加價值(EVA)和剩餘所得(RI)與公司價值之關聯性研究〉，《風險管理學報》，第9卷第1期，頁27- 44。
6.林嬋娟、吳安妮，(1992)，〈台灣企業併購綜效及績效之實證研究〉，《會計評論》，26期，頁1~23。
7.倪鈺茹，(2007)，《企業併購與經營績效之研究─以EVA與FCF為衡量指標》，碩士論文，中原大學會計學系。
8.徐嘉妤，(2008)，《我國上市 (櫃) 公司併購後長期績效之實證研究》，碩士論文，臺灣大學會計學研究所。
9.張逸綸，(2012)，《短期與中長期下併購行為與營運績效之關係探討》，碩士論文，臺灣大學財務金融學研究所。
10.張博聞，(2011)，《以經濟附加價值評估台灣生技醫療產業之財務績效》，碩士論文，銘傳大學企管系在職專班。
11.黃柏儒，(2011)，《跨國併購績效實證研究─以台灣上市公司為例》，碩士論文，臺灣大學國際企業學研究所。
12.陳千鶴，(2013)，《跨國併購的績效實證研究: 以開發中國家公司為例》，碩士論文，臺灣大學財務金融學研究所。
13.盧敬植，(2007)，《台灣股票市場及各別產業風險貼水之初步研究》，證券櫃買中心報告。
14.謝劍平，(2009)，《財務管理：新觀念與本土化》，五版， 智勝文化事業有限公司。
15.謝劍平，(2010)，《現代投資銀行》，三版，智勝文化事業有限公司。
16.謝劍平，(2013)，《SVCC之理論與應用分析》，研究中文章。

英文文獻
1.Bacidore, J. M., Boquist, J. A., Milbourn, T. T., & Thakor, A. V. (1997). “The search for the best financial performance measure”. Financial Analysts Journal, 11-20.
2.Bacidore, J. M., Boquist, J. A., Milbourn, T. T., & Thakor, A. V. (1999). “Search for the Best Financial Performance Measure: Yes, Basics Are Better: If You Understand Them”. Financial Analysts Journal, 14-16.
3.Bernard, V. L., & Thomas, J. K. (1989). “Post-earnings-announcement drift: delayed price response or risk premium?”. Journal of Accounting Research, 27, 1-36.
4.Bhagat, S., Dong, M., Hirshleifer, D., & Noah, R. (2005). “Do tender offers create value? New methods and evidence”. Journal of Financial Economics, 76(1), 3-60.
5.Biddle, G. C., Bowen, R. M., & Wallace, J. S. (1997). “Does EVA beat earnings? Evidence on associations with stock returns and firm values”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24(3), 301-336.
6.Biddle, G. C., Bowen, R. M., & Wallace, J. S. (1999). “Evidence on EVA”. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 12(2), 69-79.
7.Brealey, R. A., Myers, S. C., & Allen, F. (2006), “Corporate Finance”, 8th edition, McGraw Hill, International Edition.
8.Capron, L. (1999). “The long-term performance of horizontal acquisitions”. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 987–1018.
9.Chen, S., & Dodd, J. L. (1997). “Economic value added (EVA™): An empirical examination of a new corporate performance measure”. Journal of Managerial Issues, 318-333.
10.de Wet, J. H. (2005). “EVA versus traditional accounting measures of performance as drivers of shareholder value–A comparative analysis”. Meditari Accountancy Research, 13(2), 1-16.
11.Du Toit, E., & De Wet, J. (2007). “Return on equity: A popular, but flawed measure of corporate financial performance”. South African Journal of Busines Management, 38(1), 59-69.
12.Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1997). “Industry costs of equity”. Journal of Financial Economics, 43(2), 153-193.
13.Fuller, K., Netter, J., & Stegemoller, M. (2002). “What do returns to acquiring firms tell us? Evidence from firms that make many acquisitions”. The Journal of Finance, 57(4), 1763-1793.
14.Garvey, G. T., & Milbourn, T. T. (2000). “EVA versus earnings: does it matter which is more highly correlated with stock returns?”. Journal of Accounting Research, 209-245.
15.Ghosh, A. (2001), “Does operating performance really improve following corporate acquisitions?”. Journal of Corporate Finance, 7(2), 151-178.
16.Harford, J. (2005). “What drives merger waves?”. Journal of Financial Economics, 77(3), 529-560.
17.Healy, P. M., Palepu, K. G., & Ruback, R. S. (1992). “Does corporate performance improve after mergers?”. Journal of Financial Economics, 31(2), 135-175.
18.Irala, D. (2005). “EVA: The Right Measure of Managerial Performance?”. Indian Journal of Accounting & Finance, 119(02).
19.Jensen, M. C. (1968). “The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945–1964”. The Journal of finance, 23(2), 389-416.
20.Lehn, K., & Makhija, A. K. (1997). “EVA, accounting profits, and CEO turnover: an empirical examination, 1985–1994”. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 10(2), 90-97.
21.Maditinos, D., Loukas, A., Željko Šević, S. J. D., & Theriou, N. G. (2007). “Economic Value Added (EVA). Is it really the best performance measure? A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature. The case of Athens Stock Exchange (ASE)”. Review of Economic Sciences.
22.O'Byrne, S. F. (1996). “EVA and market value”. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 9(1), 116-126.
23.Raghavendra Rau, P., & Vermaelen, T. (1998). “Glamour, value and the post-acquisition performance of acquiring firms”. Journal of Financial Economics, 49(2), 223-253.
24.Ramaswamy, K. P., & Waegelein, J. F. (2003). “Firm financial performance following mergers”. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 20(2), 115-126.
25.Rani, N., Yadav, S. S., & Jain, P. K. (2013). “Post-M&A Operating Performance of Indian Acquiring Firms: A Du Pont Analysis”. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 5(8), 65-73.
26.Rogerson, W. P. (1997). “Intertemporal cost allocation and managerial investment incentives: A theory explaining the use of economic value added as a performance measure”. Journal of Political Economy, 105(4), 770-795.
27.Savor, P. G., & Lu, Q. (2009). “Do stock mergers create value for acquirers?”. The Journal of Finance, 64(3), 1061-1097.
28.Seth, A. (1990). “Value creation in acquisitions: A re‐examination of performance issues”. Strategic Management Journal, 11(2), 99-115.
29.Sharma, A. K., & Kumar, S. (2010). “Economic value added (EVA)-literature review and relevant issues”. International Journal of Economics and Finance,2(2), 200-220.
30.Sharma, A., & Kumar, S. (2012). “EVA versus conventional performance measures–empirical evidence from India”. InASBBS Annual Conference, Las Vegas, CO.
31.Shil, N. C. (2009). “Performance measures: An application of economic value added”. International Journal of business and Management, 4(3), 169-177.