IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/finana/v44y2016icp78-85.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some extensions of the CAPM for individual assets

Author

Listed:
  • Vendrame, Vasco
  • Tucker, Jon
  • Guermat, Cherif

Abstract

There is ample evidence that stock returns exhibit non-normal distributions with high skewness and excess kurtosis. Experimental evidence has shown that investors like positive skewness, dislike extreme losses and show high levels of prudence. This has motivated the introduction of the four-moment capital asset pricing model (CAPM). This extension, however, has not been able to successfully explain average returns. Our paper argues that a number of pitfalls may have contributed to the weak and conflicting empirical results found in the literature. We investigate whether conditional models, whether models that use individual stocks rather than portfolios and whether models that extend both the moment and factor dimension can improve on more traditional static, portfolio-based, mean–variance models. More importantly, we find that the use of a scaled coskewness measure in cross-section regression is likely to be spurious because of the possibility for the market skewness to be close to zero, at least for some periods. We provide a simple solution to this problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Vendrame, Vasco & Tucker, Jon & Guermat, Cherif, 2016. "Some extensions of the CAPM for individual assets," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 78-85.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:finana:v:44:y:2016:i:c:p:78-85
    DOI: 10.1016/j.irfa.2016.01.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521916000119
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1992. " The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 427-465, June.
    2. Kostakis, Alexandros & Muhammad, Kashif & Siganos, Antonios, 2012. "Higher co-moments and asset pricing on London Stock Exchange," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 913-922.
    3. Chang, Bo Young & Christoffersen, Peter & Jacobs, Kris, 2010. "Market Skewness Risk and the Cross-Section of Stock Returns," Working Papers 11-18, University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, Weiss Center.
    4. Hwang, Soosung & Satchell, Stephen E, 1999. "Modelling Emerging Market Risk Premia Using Higher Moments," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 4(4), pages 271-296, October.
    5. Donggyu Sul & Peter C. B. Phillips & Chi-Young Choi, 2005. "Prewhitening Bias in HAC Estimation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 67(4), pages 517-546, August.
    6. Jagannathan, Ravi & Wang, Zhenyu, 1996. " The Conditional CAPM and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(1), pages 3-53, March.
    7. Lewellen, Jonathan & Nagel, Stefan, 2006. "The conditional CAPM does not explain asset-pricing anomalies," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 289-314, November.
    8. Y. Peter Chung & Michael J. Schill, 2006. "Asset Pricing When Returns Are Nonnormal: Fama-French Factors versus Higher-Order Systematic Comoments," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(2), pages 923-940, March.
    9. Tan, Kai-Jiaw, 1991. "Risk return and the three-moment capital asset pricing model: another look," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 449-460, April.
    10. Fred D. Arditti, 1967. "Risk And The Required Return On Equity," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 22(1), pages 19-36, March.
    11. Rubinstein, Mark E., 1973. "The Fundamental Theorem of Parameter-Preference Security Valuation," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(01), pages 61-69, January.
    12. Kim, Dongcheol, 1995. " The Errors in the Variables Problem in the Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1605-1634, December.
    13. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    14. Martin Lettau & Sydney Ludvigson, 2001. "Resurrecting the (C)CAPM: A Cross-Sectional Test When Risk Premia Are Time-Varying," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(6), pages 1238-1287, December.
    15. Fang, Hsing & Lai, Tsong-Yue, 1997. "Co-Kurtosis and Capital Asset Pricing," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 32(2), pages 293-307, May.
    16. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
    17. Lim, Kian-Guan, 1989. "A New Test of the Three-Moment Capital Asset Pricing Model," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(02), pages 205-216, June.
    18. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    19. Moreno, David & Rodríguez, Rosa, 2009. "The value of coskewness in mutual fund performance evaluation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1664-1676, September.
    20. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. " On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
    21. Basu, S, 1977. "Investment Performance of Common Stocks in Relation to Their Price-Earnings Ratios: A Test of the Efficient Market Hypothesis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 32(3), pages 663-682, June.
    22. Scott, Robert C & Horvath, Philip A, 1980. " On the Direction of Preference for Moments of Higher Order Than the Variance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(4), pages 915-919, September.
    23. Bhandari, Laxmi Chand, 1988. " Debt/Equity Ratio and Expected Common Stock Returns: Empirical Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 43(2), pages 507-528, June.
    24. Campbell R. Harvey & Akhtar Siddique, 2000. "Conditional Skewness in Asset Pricing Tests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(3), pages 1263-1295, June.
    25. Kraus, Alan & Litzenberger, Robert H, 1976. "Skewness Preference and the Valuation of Risk Assets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1085-1100, September.
    26. Doan, Phuong & Lin, Chien-Ting & Zurbruegg, Ralf, 2010. "Pricing assets with higher moments: Evidence from the Australian and us stock markets," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 51-67, February.
    27. Friend, Irwin & Westerfield, Randolph, 1980. " Co-Skewness and Capital Asset Pricing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(4), pages 897-913, September.
    28. Banz, Rolf W., 1981. "The relationship between return and market value of common stocks," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 3-18, March.
    29. Robert F. Dittmar, 2002. "Nonlinear Pricing Kernels, Kurtosis Preference, and Evidence from the Cross Section of Equity Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(1), pages 369-403, February.
    30. Arditti, Fred D. & Levy, Haim, 1972. "Distribution Moments and Equilibrium: A Comment," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(01), pages 1429-1433, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:rfa:afajnl:v:3:y:2017:i:2:p:20-26 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:eee:finana:v:56:y:2018:i:c:p:1-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Batten, Jonathan A. & Lucey, Brian M. & Peat, Maurice, 2016. "Gold and silver manipulation: What can be empirically verified?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 168-176.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:finana:v:44:y:2016:i:c:p:78-85. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620166 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.