| dc.description.abstract | Decision-making on investments has represented one of the main challenges faced by investors over time. There are still many controversies about the ability of existing analyzes to obtain positive returns in financial markets. In this sense, the objective of this work focus on evaluating the financial outcome of the stock selection using two criteria, one Fundamentalist and a Technical, isolated and in combination, compared to the return of the benchmark index (Bovespa Index). To achieve this purpose, first a theoretical review was promoted to find points of similarities, conflicts and complementarities of both types of analysis, and as a result, it was concluded that the Fundamentalist Analysis shows better defined criteria for choosing what share to buy; By the other hand Technical Analysis provides tools to define more clearly the time to buy or sell a particular share. From this result, a computer simulation of three strategies with fundamentalists and technical data for the period January 2010 to December 2014 was performed: A Technical with the use of moving averages (arithmetic and exponential); Fundamentalist one, using the ratio Book-to-Market (BM) as selection criteria; and a Hybrid analysis that applied the fundamental criterion for choosing which share to buy and technical criteria to decide the time to buy or sell. In all three simulations, the shares were classified in groups from a cluster analysis, which adopts the coefficient Spearman², so that two shares of the same group could not render the portfolio at the same time. From the Maximax, the Maximin and Minimax, and applying a statistical test compared by ranking was concluded that the Fundamentalist strategy played significantly better in all simulated scenarios (at 0.05). The Hybrid and Fundamentalist analysis was better than IBOV’s performance. However it was tested only one of each approach. | en |
