DOCSLIB.ORG

2. Capital Asset Pricing Model

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

2. Capital Asset pricing Model Dr. Youchang Wu WS 2007 Asset Management Youchang Wu 1 Efficient frontier in the presence of a risk-free asset Asset Management Youchang Wu 2 Capital market line When a risk-free asset exists, i. e., when a capital market is introduced, the efficient frontier is linear. This linear frontier is called capital market line The capital market line touches the efficient frontier of the risky assets only at the tangency portfolio The optimal portfolio of any investor with mean-variance preference can be constructed using the risk-free asset and the tangency portfolio, which contains only risky assets (Two-fund separation ) All investors with a mean-variance preference, independent of their risk attitudes, hold the same portfolio of risky assets. The risk attitude only affects the relative weights of the risk-free asset and the risky portfolio Asset Management Youchang Wu 3 Market price of risk The equation for the capital market line E(rT ) − rf E(rP ) = rf + σ (rp ) σ (rT ) The slope of the capital market line represents the best risk-return tdtrade-off tha t i s ava ilabl e on the mar ke t Without the risk-free asset, the marginal rate of substitution between risk and return will be different across investors After i nt rod uci ng the r is k-free asse t, it will be the same for a ll investors. Almost all investors benefit from introducing the risk-free asset (capital market) Reminiscent of the Fisher Separation Theorem? Asset Management Youchang Wu 4 Remaining questions What would be the tangency portfolio in equilibrium? CML describes the risk-return relation for all efficient portfolios, but what is the equilibrium relation between risk and return for inefficient portfolios or individual assets? What if the risk-free asset does not exist? Asset Management Youchang Wu 5 CAPM If everyb bdody h hldholds the same ri iksky portf fliolio, t hen t he r ikisky port flifolio must be the MARKET portfolio, i.e., the value-weighted portfolio of all securities (demand must equal supply in equilibrium!). It follows that the market portfolio is a frontier portfolio. According to Property III of portfolio frontier (discussed last time), we must have 2 E(rj ) = rf + β j [E(rm ) − rf ], where β j = COV(rj ,rm ) /σ (rm ) This is the famous CAPM independently derived by Treynor(1961), Sharpe (1964), Lintner(1965) and Mossin (1966) E(E(rm)-rf is ca lldlled mar ktikket risk prem ium. An asse t‘s r ikisk prem ium is given by its beta time the market risk premium. Asset Management Youchang Wu 6 Underlying assumptions Mean-variance preference Homogeneous beliefs among investors regarding the planning horizon and the distribution of security returns No market frictions: no transaction costs, no tax, no restriction on short selling, no information cost etc. Asset Management Youchang Wu 7 Intuition for CAPM Since everybody holds the market portfolio , the risk of an individual asset is characterized by its contribution to variance of the market portfolio instead of its own variance. The contribution of an individual security to the variance of market portfolio is determined by its covariance with the market portfolio nn 2 2 ∂σ (rm ) σ (rm ) = ∑ ∑ wi w jCOV (ri , rj ) => = 2COV (ri , rm ) ij==11 ∂wi The part of an asset ‘s risk that is correlated with the market portfolio, the systematic risk, cannot be diversified away; thus, investors need to be compensated for bearing it. The part of an asset ’s risk that is not correlated with the market portfolio, the unsystematic risk, can be diversified away; thus, bearing unsystematic risk need not be rewarded, and therefore, an asset’s unsystematic risk does not affect its risk premium. Asset Management Youchang Wu 8 CAPM vs Property III Property III is a mathematical property of portfolio frontier that holds for any return distribution. CAPM is an asset pricing relation derived using economic reasoniItifihikdting. It specifies how risk and return are re ltdlated in equilibrium. Asset returns under CAPM are not exogenously given. They are endogenous ly de term ine d in mar ke t equ ilibr ium. – If the CAPM does not hold, i.e., market portfolio is not mean-variance efficient, then demand does not equal supplfly for some asse ts. – The prices of such assets as well as other assets must change, therefore the whole return distribution will change – This process will continue until we converge to an return distribution that makes the market portfolio mean-variance efficient. Asset Management Youchang Wu 9 Security market line E(r) E(r) Capital market line Security market line E(rm) E(rm) rf rf σ β β=1 Asset Management Youchang Wu 10 SML vs CML Capital market line describes the efficient frontier in the presence of a risk-free asset. It specifies the equilibrium relation between return and total risk of efficient portfolio. Security market line describes the equilibrium relation between return and systematic risk for all assets or portfolios Asset Management Youchang Wu 11 Portfolio beta CAPM ho lds bo th for in div idua l asse ts an d portfolios of assets The beta of a portfolio is simply the weiggghted average beta of each individual assets in the portfolio, this is because n n COV(rp , rm ) = COV(∑wi ri , rm ) = ∑wiCOV(ri , rm ) i=1 i=1 where wi is the weight of asset i in portfolio p. Asset Management Youchang Wu 12 Zero-beta CAPM What if there is no risk-free asset? Each investor will hold a different frontier portfolio deppgending on his own risk attitude According to Property I of portfolio frontier, the aggregate of each investor‘s portfolio, i.e., the market portfolio, is also a frontier portfolio By Property III of portfolio frontier, it follows that the linear relation between expected return and beta with respect to the market portfolio must hold. This argument leads to the zero-beta CAPM (Black 1972): E(rj ) = E(rz ) + β j [E(rm ) − E(rz )] where rz is the return of a zero-beta portfolio Asset Management Youchang Wu 13 Implications for investment CAPM so lves three mos t impor tan t i ssues in inves tmen t simultaneously: – Where to invest? Invest in the market portfolio and risk -free asset! – How to value an asset? Estimated the beta of this asset and discount all the future cash flows generated by this asset using a discount rate given by CAPM! – How to evaluate investment performance? Adjust the performance by beta! Not surprisingly this is regarded as one of the greatest results in finance But how does it fit the real world? Numerous studies have tried to answer this question Asset Management Youchang Wu 14 Earlier empirical tests of CAPM Cross-sectional test – First estimate the beta by running the following time-serise regression rjt = α j + β j rmt + ε jt – Then run the following (out of sample) cross-sectional regression rj = γ 0 + γ 1β j + γ 2CHAR j + e j where CHAR is a charateristic of stock j unrelated to CAPM such firm size, idiosyncratic risk – CAPM predicts that γ0=risk free rate, γ1 =market risk premium, and γ2 =0 – Tests are usually based on portfolio returns to avoid measurementititdbtt errors in estimated betas. – Supportive results are reported by Fama and MacBeth (1974) Asset Management Youchang Wu 15 Earlier empirical tests of CAPM (2) Time series test rjt − rf = α j + β j (rmt − rf ) + ε jt Prediction of CAPM: αj is zero for every stock or portfolio Black, Jensen and Scholes (1972) reject the standard CAPM in favor of the zero-beta CAPM Asset Management Youchang Wu 16 Roll´s critique Roll (1977) argues that CAPM is inherently untestable – The only economic prediction of CAPM is that the market portfolio is mean-variance efficient – The linear return/beta relation can be found in any sample irrespective of how returns are determined in the market (All we need is to identify an index portfolio which is ex post efficient) – All existing tests only tell us whether the market proxy used by researchers are efficient or not, they say nothing about the efficiency of the market portfolio itself – A true market portflio should include all assets (human capital etc) and is unobservable, therefore CAPM is untestable Asset Management Youchang Wu 17 Roll´s critique (2) Roll (1978) further argues that using CAPM to measure performance is problematic – If performance is measure relative to an index that is ex post efficient, then from PIII of porftolio frontier, all portfoli os will be on the secur ity mar ke t line (no performance) – If performance is measured relative to an ex post inefficient index, then any ranking of portfolio ppppgerformance is possible depending on which inefficient index has been chosen Asset Management Youchang Wu 18 Findings from more recent tests The re la tion be tween be ta an d re turn is wea k a t best (Fama and French 1992) Size eff ec t: small s toc ks ou tperf orm l arge st ock s (Banz 1981,Fama and French 1992) BkBook-to-marke t eff ect : st ock s with hi gh b oo k-to- market equity ratios outperform stocks with low book-to-market ratios (Fama and French 1992) Momentum effect: Stocks outperforming in the last 3-12 months tend to outperform in the following 3-12 months (Jegadeesh and Titman 1993). Asset Management Youchang Wu 19 Possible explanations for empirical shortcomings of CAPM MtMeasurement errors – Measurement errors in beta – Measurement errors in expected return (survivorship bias) Behavioral biases of investors – Small investors are subject to many behavioral biases – Institutional investors are subject to agency issues Missing risk factors – People do not just hold bonds and stocks – Therefore they do not just care about an asset‘s covariance with a market index – They also care about its covariance with other components (such as human capital) of their „true“ portfolio – This means we have to consider other risk factors as well Asset Management Youchang Wu 20 Summary CAPM is an elegant model that gives simppyle answers to several key issues in finance The real prediction of CAPM is that the market portfolio is mean-variance efficient.
Recommended publications
  • Financial Literacy and Portfolio Diversification

    Financial Literacy and Portfolio Diversification

    WORKING PAPER NO. 212 Financial Literacy and Portfolio Diversification Luigi Guiso and Tullio Jappelli January 2009 University of Naples Federico II University of Salerno Bocconi University, Milan CSEF - Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS – UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES 80126 NAPLES - ITALY Tel. and fax +39 081 675372 – e-mail: [email protected] WORKING PAPER NO. 212 Financial Literacy and Portfolio Diversification Luigi Guiso and Tullio Jappelli Abstract In this paper we focus on poor financial literacy as one potential factor explaining lack of portfolio diversification. We use the 2007 Unicredit Customers’ Survey, which has indicators of portfolio choice, financial literacy and many demographic characteristics of investors. We first propose test-based indicators of financial literacy and document the extent of portfolio under-diversification. We find that measures of financial literacy are strongly correlated with the degree of portfolio diversification. We also compare the test-based degree of financial literacy with investors’ self-assessment of their financial knowledge, and find only a weak relation between the two measures, an issue that has gained importance after the EU Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MIFID) has required financial institutions to rate investors’ financial sophistication through questionnaires. JEL classification: E2, D8, G1 Keywords: Financial literacy, Portfolio diversification. Acknowledgements: We are grateful to the Unicredit Group, and particularly to Daniele Fano and Laura Marzorati, for letting us contribute to the design and use of the UCS survey. European University Institute and CEPR. Università di Napoli Federico II, CSEF and CEPR. Table of contents 1. Introduction 2. The portfolio diversification puzzle 3. The data 4.
  • The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) Prof

    The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) Prof

    Foundations of Finance: The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) Prof. Alex Shapiro Lecture Notes 9 The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) I. Readings and Suggested Practice Problems II. Introduction: from Assumptions to Implications III. The Market Portfolio IV. Assumptions Underlying the CAPM V. Portfolio Choice in the CAPM World VI. The Risk-Return Tradeoff for Individual Stocks VII. The CML and SML VIII. “Overpricing”/“Underpricing” and the SML IX. Uses of CAPM in Corporate Finance X. Additional Readings Buzz Words: Equilibrium Process, Supply Equals Demand, Market Price of Risk, Cross-Section of Expected Returns, Risk Adjusted Expected Returns, Net Present Value and Cost of Equity Capital. 1 Foundations of Finance: The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) I. Readings and Suggested Practice Problems BKM, Chapter 9, Sections 2-4. Suggested Problems, Chapter 9: 2, 4, 5, 13, 14, 15 Web: Visit www.morningstar.com, select a fund (e.g., Vanguard 500 Index VFINX), click on Risk Measures, and in the Modern Portfolio Theory Statistics section, view the beta. II. Introduction: from Assumptions to Implications A. Economic Equilibrium 1. Equilibrium analysis (unlike index models) Assume economic behavior of individuals. Then, draw conclusions about overall market prices, quantities, returns. 2. The CAPM is based on equilibrium analysis Problems: – There are many “dubious” assumptions. – The main implication of the CAPM concerns expected returns, which can’t be observed directly. 2 Foundations of Finance: The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) B. Implications of the CAPM: A Preview If everyone believes this theory… then (as we will see next): 1. There is a central role for the market portfolio: a.
  • Arbitrage Pricing Theory∗

    Arbitrage Pricing Theory∗

    ARBITRAGE PRICING THEORY∗ Gur Huberman Zhenyu Wang† August 15, 2005 Abstract Focusing on asset returns governed by a factor structure, the APT is a one-period model, in which preclusion of arbitrage over static portfolios of these assets leads to a linear relation between the expected return and its covariance with the factors. The APT, however, does not preclude arbitrage over dynamic portfolios. Consequently, applying the model to evaluate managed portfolios contradicts the no-arbitrage spirit of the model. An empirical test of the APT entails a procedure to identify features of the underlying factor structure rather than merely a collection of mean-variance efficient factor portfolios that satisfies the linear relation. Keywords: arbitrage; asset pricing model; factor model. ∗S. N. Durlauf and L. E. Blume, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, forthcoming, Palgrave Macmillan, reproduced with permission of Palgrave Macmillan. This article is taken from the authors’ original manuscript and has not been reviewed or edited. The definitive published version of this extract may be found in the complete The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics in print and online, forthcoming. †Huberman is at Columbia University. Wang is at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the McCombs School of Business in the University of Texas at Austin. The views stated here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Introduction The Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT) was developed primarily by Ross (1976a, 1976b). It is a one-period model in which every investor believes that the stochastic properties of returns of capital assets are consistent with a factor structure.
  • The Use of Leveraged Investments to Diversify a Concentrated Position1 by Craig Mccann, Phd, CFA and Dengpan Luo Phd

    The Use of Leveraged Investments to Diversify a Concentrated Position1 by Craig Mccann, Phd, CFA and Dengpan Luo Phd

    The Use of Leveraged Investments to Diversify a Concentrated Position1 By Craig McCann, PhD, CFA and Dengpan Luo PhD Introduction Brokerage firms recently recommended that investors holding a concentrated position in a single stock borrow and invest in a portfolio of additional stocks to reduce risk. For example, Merrill Lynch distributed the following2: Five Strategies for Diversifying a Concentrated Position … There are several strategies that may be appropriate for diversifying concentrated positions and reducing a portfolio’s risk. … 2. Borrow Against the Position and Reinvest to Diversify Another strategy is to borrow against your shares – up to 50% of their market value – and invest the loan proceeds in other securities. Borrowing generates liquidity without triggering a tax liability and may not trigger a reporting obligation to your company or the Securities and Exchange Commission. The key to success with this strategy is for the investments affected with borrowed funds to generate a higher return than the loan’s interest rate and result in a more diversified portfolio. The current low cost of borrowing may make this strategy attractive. Of course, borrowing against or margining your portfolio securities entails special risks, including the potential that the securities may be liquidated in the event of market declines. Contrary to Merrill Lynch’s claim, the strategy to borrow against the concentrated position and buy additional securities virtually always increases risk. In this note, we explain the error of this “leveraged diversification” strategy. We also report results of simulations that demonstrate the virtual impossibility of reducing the risk of a concentrated position by leveraged investments in other stocks.
  • Arbitrage Pricing Theory

    Arbitrage Pricing Theory

    Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports Arbitrage Pricing Theory Gur Huberman Zhenyu Wang Staff Report no. 216 August 2005 This paper presents preliminary findings and is being distributed to economists and other interested readers solely to stimulate discussion and elicit comments. The views expressed in the paper are those of the authors and are not necessarily reflective of views at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors. Arbitrage Pricing Theory Gur Huberman and Zhenyu Wang Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports, no. 216 August 2005 JEL classification: G12 Abstract Focusing on capital asset returns governed by a factor structure, the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT) is a one-period model, in which preclusion of arbitrage over static portfolios of these assets leads to a linear relation between the expected return and its covariance with the factors. The APT, however, does not preclude arbitrage over dynamic portfolios. Consequently, applying the model to evaluate managed portfolios is contradictory to the no-arbitrage spirit of the model. An empirical test of the APT entails a procedure to identify features of the underlying factor structure rather than merely a collection of mean-variance efficient factor portfolios that satisfies the linear relation. Key words: arbitrage, asset pricing model, factor model Huberman: Columbia University Graduate School of Business (e-mail: [email protected]). Wang: Federal Reserve Bank of New York and University of Texas at Austin McCombs School of Business (e-mail: [email protected]). This review of the arbitrage pricing theory was written for the forthcoming second edition of The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, edited by Lawrence Blume and Steven Durlauf (London: Palgrave Macmillan).
  • Asset Securitization (The Case of Australia)

    Asset Securitization (The Case of Australia)

    Wealth effects from asset securitization (the case of Australia) Authors: Nicha Lapanan Stefan Anchev Supervisor: Anders Isaksson Student Umeå School of Business Autumn semester 2011 Master thesis, two year, 30 hp Acknowledgement First of all, we want to express our gratitude to our parents and friends. Without their full support and encouragement, we would never be able to complete this Master program. Furthermore, we would like to thank our supervisor, Anders Isaksson, who was guiding us through the writing process and who showed deep understanding for our situation. We would also like to thank Mr. Matias Lampe. The phone conversation with Mr. Lampe made us realize that this study could not be conducted with data from Sweden. He saved us a lot of time and helped us focus our attention someplace else. ………………………... …………………...…… Nicha Lapanan Stefan Anchev Umeå, September 2011 I About the authors: Nicha Lapanan Nicha has Bachelor degree in Business administration, major in accounting from Thammasat University, Thailand. After graduation, Nicha was working for 1 year at “KPMG”, as an assistant auditor. Currently, she is pursuing Master degree in Finance at Umeå School of Business and Economics, Umeå University. Additionally, she is enrolled in the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) and Financial Risk Management (FRM) program. Contact info: [email protected] Stefan Anchev Stefan graduated from the Faculty of Business administration at the South East European University, Republic of Macedonia. His major was finance and accounting. After finishing his studies, Stefan was working as an assistant auditor at “Dimitrov Revizija DOO”. Since 2009, Stefan is enrolled in the Master in Finance program at Umeå School of Business and Economics, Umeå University.
  • The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) of William Sharpe (1964)

    The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) of William Sharpe (1964)

    Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 18, Number 3—Summer 2004—Pages 25–46 The Capital Asset Pricing Model: Theory and Evidence Eugene F. Fama and Kenneth R. French he capital asset pricing model (CAPM) of William Sharpe (1964) and John Lintner (1965) marks the birth of asset pricing theory (resulting in a T Nobel Prize for Sharpe in 1990). Four decades later, the CAPM is still widely used in applications, such as estimating the cost of capital for firms and evaluating the performance of managed portfolios. It is the centerpiece of MBA investment courses. Indeed, it is often the only asset pricing model taught in these courses.1 The attraction of the CAPM is that it offers powerful and intuitively pleasing predictions about how to measure risk and the relation between expected return and risk. Unfortunately, the empirical record of the model is poor—poor enough to invalidate the way it is used in applications. The CAPM’s empirical problems may reflect theoretical failings, the result of many simplifying assumptions. But they may also be caused by difficulties in implementing valid tests of the model. For example, the CAPM says that the risk of a stock should be measured relative to a compre- hensive “market portfolio” that in principle can include not just traded financial assets, but also consumer durables, real estate and human capital. Even if we take a narrow view of the model and limit its purview to traded financial assets, is it 1 Although every asset pricing model is a capital asset pricing model, the finance profession reserves the acronym CAPM for the specific model of Sharpe (1964), Lintner (1965) and Black (1972) discussed here.
  • The Capital Asset Pricing Model (Capm)

    The Capital Asset Pricing Model (Capm)

    THE CAPITAL ASSET PRICING MODEL (CAPM) Investment and Valuation of Firms Juan Jose Garcia Machado WS 2012/2013 November 12, 2012 Fanck Leonard Basiliki Loli Blaž Kralj Vasileios Vlachos Contents 1. CAPM............................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Risk and return trade off ............................................................................................................... 4 Risk ................................................................................................................................................... 4 Correlation....................................................................................................................................... 5 Assumptions Underlying the CAPM ............................................................................................. 5 3. Market portfolio .............................................................................................................................. 5 Portfolio Choice in the CAPM World ........................................................................................... 7 4. CAPITAL MARKET LINE ........................................................................................................... 7 Sharpe ratio & Alpha ................................................................................................................... 10 5. SECURITY MARKET LINE ...................................................................................................
  • Multi-Factor Models and the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT)

    Multi-Factor Models and the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT)

    Multi-Factor Models and the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT) Econ 471/571, F19 - Bollerslev APT 1 Introduction The empirical failures of the CAPM is not really that surprising ,! We had to make a number of strong and pretty unrealistic assumptions to arrive at the CAPM ,! All investors are rational, only care about mean and variance, have the same expectations, ... ,! Also, identifying and measuring the return on the market portfolio of all risky assets is difficult, if not impossible (Roll Critique) In this lecture series we will study an alternative approach to asset pricing called the Arbitrage Pricing Theory, or APT ,! The APT was originally developed in 1976 by Stephen A. Ross ,! The APT starts out by specifying a number of “systematic” risk factors ,! The only risk factor in the CAPM is the “market” Econ 471/571, F19 - Bollerslev APT 2 Introduction: Multiple Risk Factors Stocks in the same industry tend to move more closely together than stocks in different industries ,! European Banks (some old data): Source: BARRA Econ 471/571, F19 - Bollerslev APT 3 Introduction: Multiple Risk Factors Other common factors might also affect stocks within the same industry ,! The size effect at work within the banking industry (some old data): Source: BARRA ,! How does this compare to the CAPM tests that we just talked about? Econ 471/571, F19 - Bollerslev APT 4 Multiple Factors and the CAPM Suppose that there are only two fundamental sources of systematic risks, “technology” and “interest rate” risks Suppose that the return on asset i follows the
  • Economic Aspects of Securitization of Risk

    Economic Aspects of Securitization of Risk

    ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF SECURITIZATION OF RISK BY SAMUEL H. COX, JOSEPH R. FAIRCHILD AND HAL W. PEDERSEN ABSTRACT This paper explains securitization of insurance risk by describing its essential components and its economic rationale. We use examples and describe recent securitization transactions. We explore the key ideas without abstract mathematics. Insurance-based securitizations improve opportunities for all investors. Relative to traditional reinsurance, securitizations provide larger amounts of coverage and more innovative contract terms. KEYWORDS Securitization, catastrophe risk bonds, reinsurance, retention, incomplete markets. 1. INTRODUCTION This paper explains securitization of risk with an emphasis on risks that are usually considered insurable risks. We discuss the economic rationale for securitization of assets and liabilities and we provide examples of each type of securitization. We also provide economic axguments for continued future insurance-risk securitization activity. An appendix indicates some of the issues involved in pricing insurance risk securitizations. We do not develop specific pricing results. Pricing techniques are complicated by the fact that, in general, insurance-risk based securities do not have unique prices based on axbitrage-free pricing considerations alone. The technical reason for this is that the most interesting insurance risk securitizations reside in incomplete markets. A market is said to be complete if every pattern of cash flows can be replicated by some portfolio of securities that are traded in the market. The payoffs from insurance-based securities, whose cash flows may depend on Please address all correspondence to Hal Pedersen. ASTIN BULLETIN. Vol. 30. No L 2000, pp 157-193 158 SAMUEL H. COX, JOSEPH R. FAIRCHILD AND HAL W.
  • Chapter 10: Arbitrage Pricing Theory and Multifactor Models of Risk and Return

    Chapter 10: Arbitrage Pricing Theory and Multifactor Models of Risk and Return

    CHAPTER 10: ARBITRAGE PRICING THEORY AND MULTIFACTOR MODELS OF RISK AND RETURN CHAPTER 10: ARBITRAGE PRICING THEORY AND MULTIFACTOR MODELS OF RISK AND RETURN PROBLEM SETS 1. The revised estimate of the expected rate of return on the stock would be the old estimate plus the sum of the products of the unexpected change in each factor times the respective sensitivity coefficient: revised estimate = 12% + [(1 × 2%) + (0.5 × 3%)] = 15.5% 2. The APT factors must correlate with major sources of uncertainty, i.e., sources of uncertainty that are of concern to many investors. Researchers should investigate factors that correlate with uncertainty in consumption and investment opportunities. GDP, the inflation rate, and interest rates are among the factors that can be expected to determine risk premiums. In particular, industrial production (IP) is a good indicator of changes in the business cycle. Thus, IP is a candidate for a factor that is highly correlated with uncertainties that have to do with investment and consumption opportunities in the economy. 3. Any pattern of returns can be “explained” if we are free to choose an indefinitely large number of explanatory factors. If a theory of asset pricing is to have value, it must explain returns using a reasonably limited number of explanatory variables (i.e., systematic factors). 4. Equation 10.9 applies here: E(rp ) = rf + βP1 [E(r1 ) rf ] + βP2 [E(r2 ) – rf ] We need to find the risk premium (RP) for each of the two factors: RP1 = [E(r1 ) rf ] and RP2 = [E(r2 ) rf ] In order to do so, we solve the following system of two equations with two unknowns: .31 = .06 + (1.5 × RP1 ) + (2.0 × RP2 ) .27 = .06 + (2.2 × RP1 ) + [(–0.2) × RP2 ] The solution to this set of equations is: RP1 = 10% and RP2 = 5% Thus, the expected return-beta relationship is: E(rP ) = 6% + (βP1 × 10%) + (βP2 × 5%) 5.
  • Empirical Study on CAPM Model on China Stock Market

    Empirical Study on CAPM Model on China Stock Market

    Empirical study on CAPM model on China stock market MASTER THESIS WITHIN: Business administration in finance NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15 ECTS TUTOR: Andreas Stephan PROGRAMME OF STUDY: international financial analysis AUTHOR: Taoyuan Zhou, Huarong Liu JÖNKÖPING 05/2018 Master Thesis in Business Administration Title: Empirical study on CAPM model of China stock market Authors: Taoyuan Zhou and Huarong Liu Tutor: Andreas Stephan Date: 05/2018 Key terms: CAPM model, β coefficient, empirical test Abstract Background: The capital asset pricing model (CAPM) describes the interrelationship between the expected return of risk assets and risk in the equilibrium of investment market and gives the equilibrium price of risky assets (Banz, 1981). CAPM plays a very important role in the process of establishing a portfolio (Bodie, 2009). As Chinese stock market continues to grow and expand, the scope and degree of attention of CAPM models in China will also increase day by day. Therefore, in China, such an emerging market, it is greatly necessary to test the applicability and validity of the CAPM model in the capital market. Purpose: Through the monthly data of 100 stocks from January 1, 2007 to February 1, 2018, the time series and cross-sectional data of the capital asset pricing model on Chinese stock market are tested. The main objectives are: (1) Empirical study of the relationship between risk and return using the data of Chinese stock market in recent years to test whether the CAPM model established in the developed western market is suitable for the Chinese market. (2) Through the empirical analysis of the results to analyse the characteristics and existing problems of Chinese capital market.