Portfolio Inefficiency and the Cross-section of Expected Returns

The Capital Asset Pricing Model implies that (i) the market portfolio is efficient and (ii) expected returns are linearly related to betas. Many do not view these implications as separate, since either implies the other, but we demonstrate that either can hold nearly perfectly while the other fails grossly. If the index portfolio is inefficient, then the coefficients and $R^2$ from an ordinary least squares regression of expected returns on betas can equal essentially any values and bear no relation to the index portfolio's mean-variance location. That location does determine the outcome of a mean-beta regression fitted by generalized least squares.     

Cross-sectional determinants of New Zealand share market returns

We present evidence of the cross-sectional relation between security returns, beta, firm size and book-to-market ratio over the period 1971 to 1993 on the New Zealand sharemarket. Our results suggest that the NZSE-40 market index is not a mean-variance efficient market proxy—the betas calculated with respect to it being of little use for explaining expected returns cross-sectionally. Also, there is a significant positive relation between book-to-market ratio and average return.     

On the Cross-Sectional Relation between Expected Returns, Betas, and Size

In this paper, I set up scenarios where the mean-variance capital asset pricing model is true and where it is false. Then I investigate whether the coefficients from regressions of population expected excess returns on population betas, and expected excess returns on betas and size, allow us to distinguish between the scenarios. I show that the coefficients from either ordinary least squares or generalized least squares regressions do not allow us to tell whether the model is true or false.     

Tests of Asset Pricing with Time-Varying Expected Risk Premiums and Market Betas

Tests of asset-pricing models are developed that allow expected risk premiums and market betas to vary over time. These tests exploit the relation between expected excess returns and current market values. Using weekly data for 1963 through 1982 on ten common stock portfolios formed according to equity capitalization, a single-risk-premium model is not rejected if the expected premium is time varying and is not constrained to correspond to a market factor. Conditional mean-variance efficiency of a value-weighted stock index is rejected, and the rejection is insensitive to how much variability of expected risk premiums is assumed.     

Systematic Risk and Empirical Research

We show here that risky asset returns generating processes stated in terms of factors which include both accounting and non-accounting based measures of risk (e.g. book to market ratios) imply, under fairly standard regularity conditions, that the Sharpe-Lintner-Black asset pricing model beta is a 'sufficient' statistic in the sense that it captures all important attributes of the returns generating process in a single number. We then derive the parametric relationship between betas based on inefficient index portfolios and betas based on the market or tangency portfolio. We demonstrate that the relationship between risky asset expected returns and betas computed on the basis of inefficient index portfolios is both consistent with the predictions of the Capital Asset Pricing Model and the multi-factor asset pricing models of Fama and French (1992, 1993, 1995 and 1996). The 'trick' is to realise that inefficient index portfolios are composed of the market portfolio and a collection of inefficient but self financing 'kernel' or 'arbitrage' portfolios. It then follows that there is a perfect linear cross sectional relationship between risky asset expected returns, betas based on inefficient index portfolios and the arbitrage portfolios. Hence, if we happen to stumble across variables that span the same subspace as the vectors representing the arbitrage portfolios, it is easy to create the illusion that risky asset expected returns depend on variables other than 'beta'.     

Estimating Systematic Risk Using Time Varying Distributions

This article proposes a dynamic vector GARCH model for the estimation of time-varying betas. The model allows the conditional variances and the conditional covariance between individual portfolio returns and market portfolio returns to respond asymmetrically to past innovations depending on their sign. Covariances tend to be higher during market declines. There is substantial time variation in betas but the evidence on beta asymmetry is mixed. Specifically, in 50% of the cases betas are higher during market declines and for the remaining 50% the opposite is true. A time series analysis of estimated time varying betas reveals that they follow stationary mean-reverting processes. The average degree of persistence is approximately four days. It is also found that the static market model overstates non-market or, unsystematic risk by more than 10%. On the basis of an array of diagnostics it is confirmed that the vector GARCH model provides a richer framework for the analysis of the dynamics of systematic risk.     

Are the Latent Variables in Time-Varying Expected Returns Compensation for Consumption Risk?

Multibeta asset pricing models are examined using proxies for economic state variables in a framework which exploits time-varying expected returns to estimate conditional betas. Examples include multiple consumption-beta models and models where asset returns proxy for the state variables. When the state variables are not specified, the tests indicate two or three time-varying expected risk premiums in the sample of quarterly asset returns. Conditional betas relative to consumption generate less striking evidence against the model than betas relative to asset returns, but both the consumption and the market variables fail to proxy for the state variables.     

Constructing Asset Pricing Models With Specific Factor Loadings

We demonstrate how one can build pricing formulae in which factors other than beta may be viewed as determinants of asset returns. This is important conceptually as it demonstrates how the additional factors can compensate for a market portfolio proxy that is mis‐specified, and also shows how such a pricing model can be specified ex ante. The procedure is implemented by first selecting an ‘orthogonal’ portfolio which falls on the mean‐variance efficient frontier computed from the empirical average returns, variances and covariances on the equity securities of a large sample of firms. One then determines the inefficient index portfolio which leads to a vector of betas that when multiplied by the average return on the orthogonal portfolio, and which when subtracted from the vector of average returns for the firms comprising the sample, yields an error vector that is equal to the vector of numerical values for the variables that are to form the basis of the asset pricing formula. There will then be a perfect linear relationship between the vector of average returns for the firms comprising the sample, the vector of betas based on the inefficient index portfolio and such other factors that are deemed to be important in the asset pricing process. We illustrate computational procedures using a numerical example based on the quality of information contained in published corporate financial statements.     

Another Look at the Cross-section of Expected Stock Returns

Our examination of the cross-section of expected returns reveals economically and statistically significant compensation (about 6 to 9 percent per annum) for beta risk when betas are estimated from time-series regressions of annual portfolio returns on the annual return on the equally weighted market index. The relation between book-to-market equity and returns is weaker and less consistent than that in Fama and French (1992). We conjecture that past book-to-market results using COMPUS-TAT data are affected by a selection bias and provide indirect evidence.     

Orthogonal Frontiers and Alternative Mean-Variance Efficiency Tests

This paper catalogues properties of minimum norm orthogonal portfolios: portfolios which minimize a quadratic objective function and have returns uncorrelated with those of a candidate portfolio that is not mean-variance efficient. The analysis shows that the dollar versions of these portfolios correspond to estimators of zero beta rates based on alternative statistical criteria and grouping procedures while costless orthogonal portfolios represent candidate mean-variance efficiency tests. It also develops inference procedures for zero and unit net investment portfolios of individual securities (instead of grouped portfolios) that have zero expected betas. The resulting mean-variance efficiency tests are reasonably insensitive to the underlying statistical assumptions.     

THE EFFECT OF MARKET PROXY REBALANCING POLICIES ON DETECTING ABNORMAL PERFORMANCE

In this paper, effects on the measured abnormal performance of test portfolios are compared against market proxies having the same or different rebalancing policies. Results show that the common practice of comparing buy-and-hold test portfolios with equally weighted market proxies produces lower Jensen [ 7 ] alphas and lower alpha t-values. Comparing buy-and-hold test portfolios with value-weighted market proxies produces higher portfolio betas and alphas, but lower alpha t-values. Finally, comparing buy-and-hold test portfolios with buy-and-hold market proxies produces the most powerful tests of abnormal performance.     

Options Trading and the CAPM

This article studies equilibrium asset pricing when agents facenonnegative wealth constraints. In the presence of these constraintsit is shown that options on the market portfolio are nonredundantsecurities and the economy's pricing kernel is a function ofboth the market portfolio and the nonredundant options. Thisimplies that the options should be useful for explaining riskyasset returns. To test the theory, a model is derived in whichthe expected excess return on any risky asset is linearly related(via a collection of betas) to the expected excess return onthe market portfolio and to the expected excess returns on thenonredundant options. The empirical results indicate that thereturns on traded index options are relevant for explainingthe returns on risky asset portfolios.     

Risky asset pricing based on safety first fund management

We study a portfolio selection model based on Kataoka's safety-first criterion (KSF model in short). We assume that the market is complete but without risk-free asset, and that the returns are jointly elliptically distributed. With these assumptions, we provide an explicit analytical optimal solution for the KSF model and obtain some geometrical properties of the efficient frontier in the plane of probability risk degree z _α and target return r _α. We further prove a two-fund separation and tangency portfolio theorem in the spirit of the traditional mean-variance analysis. We also establish a risky asset pricing model based on risky funds that is similar to Black's zero-beta capital asset pricing model (CAPM, for short). Moreover, we simplify our risky asset pricing model using a derivative risky fund as a reference for market evaluation.     

The Conditional Beta and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

We examine the cross-sectional relation between conditional betas and expected stock returns for a sample period of July 1963 to December 2004. Our portfolio-level analyses and the firm-level cross-sectional regressions indicate a positive, significant relation between conditional betas and the cross-section of expected returns. The average return difference between high- and low-beta portfolios ranges between 0.89% and 1.01% per month, depending on the time-varying specification of conditional beta. After controlling for size, book-to-market, liquidity, and momentum, the positive relation between market beta and expected returns remains economically and statistically significant.     

Sentiment-scaled CAPM and market mispricing

This study explores the conditional version of the capital asset pricing model on sentiment to provide a behavioural intuition behind the value premium and market mispricing. We find betas (β) and the market risk premium to vary over time across different sentiment indices and portfolios. More importantly, the state β derived from this sentiment-scaled model provides a behavioural explanation of the value premium and a set of anomalies driven by mispricing. Different from the static β–return relation that gives a flat security market line, we document upward security market lines when plotting portfolio returns against their state βs and portfolios with higher state βs earn higher returns.     

An Unconditional Asset-Pricing Test and the Role of Firm Size as an Instrumental Variable for Risk

In an intertemporal economy where both risk (stock beta) and expected return are time varying, the authors derive a linear relation between the unconditional beta and the unconditional return under certain stationarity assumptions about the stochastic process of size-portfolio betas. The model suggests the use of long time periods to estimate the unconditional portfolio betas. The authors find that, after controlling for the betas thus estimated, a firm-size proxy, such as the logarithm of the firm size, does not have explanatory power for the averaged returns across the size-ranked portfolios.     

Mean-variance optimization using forward-looking return estimates

Despite its theoretical appeal, Markowitz mean-variance portfolio optimization is plagued by practical issues. It is especially difficult to obtain reliable estimates of a stock’s expected return. Recent research has therefore focused on minimum volatility portfolio optimization, which implicitly assumes that expected returns for all assets are equal. We argue that investors are better off using the implied cost of capital based on analysts’ earnings forecasts as a forward-looking return estimate. Correcting for predictable analyst forecast errors, we demonstrate that mean-variance optimized portfolios based on these estimates outperform on both an absolute and a risk-adjusted basis the minimum volatility portfolio as well as naive benchmarks, such as the value-weighted and equally-weighted market portfolio. The results continue to hold when extending the sample to international markets, using different methods for estimating the forward-looking return, including transaction costs, and using different optimization constraints.

     

Linear beta pricing with efficient/inefficient benchmarks and short-selling restrictions

We provide two security pricing models that can be used when short sales of risky securities are not permitted. The first model uses a benchmark located on the expected return-standard deviation efficient frontier without short sales and presents security expected returns as a weighted linear function of two betas, one induced by the benchmark and the other adjusting for the short-sale constraints. The second model uses a benchmark that is inefficient relative to the efficient frontier, does not allow short sales, and expresses security returns as a weighted linear function of three betas:one induced by the inefficient benchmark, and the other two adjusting simultaneously for the short-sales restrictions and the benchmark's inefficiency.These results complement the linear pricing models that link expected returns and betas by allowing, for efficient or inefficient expected return-standard deviation, benchmarks with restricted short sales.     

Sources of risk and expected returns in global equity markets

This paper empirically examines multifactor asset pricing models for the returns and expected returns on eighteen national equity markets. The factors are chosen to measure global economic risks. Although previous studies do not reject the unconditional mean variance efficiency of a world market portfolio, our evidence indicates that the tests are low in power, and the world market betas do not provide a good explanation of cross-sectional differences in average returns. Multiple beta models provide an improved explanation of the equity returns.     

On the power of cross-sectional and multivariate tests of the CAPM

This paper examines the power of the cross-sectional and multivariate tests of the CAPM under ideal conditions. When the CAPM is true the positively weighted market portfolio is MV-efficient and securities plot on the security market line. When the CAPM is false an alternative asset pricing model determines prices. An examination of the population intercepts, slopes and R² from cross-sectional regressions of expected returns on betas indicates that all three are unreliable indicators of whether the CAPM holds. Simulation analysis of the power of the cross-sectional tests expands on and reinforces the analysis based on the population values. The Gibbons et al. (1989) multivariate test fares much better.