In empirical studies of the CAPM, it is commonly assumed that, (a) the return to the value-weighted portfolio of all stocks is a reasonable proxy for the return on the market portfolio of all assets in the economy, and (b) betas of assets remain constant over time. Under these assumptions, Fama and French (1992) find that the relation between average return and beta is flat. We argue that these two auxiliary assumptions are not reasonable. We demonstrate that when these assumptions are relaxed, the empirical support for the CAPM is very strong. When human capital is also included in measuring wealth, the CAPM is able to explain 28\% of the cross sectional variation in average returns in the 100 portfolio studied by Fama and French. When, in addition, betas are allowed to vary over the business cycle, the CAPM is able to explain 57\%. More important, relative size does not explain what is left unexplained after taking sampling errors into account.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Finance with number
9402001.
Find related papers by JEL classification: G - Financial Economics
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
Ravi Jagnnathan & Ellen R. McGrattan, 1995.
"The CAPM debate,"
Quarterly Review,
Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Fall, pages 2-17.
[Downloadable!]