IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/pennfi/15-93.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multifactor Models Do Not Explain Deviations From the CAPM (Revised: 21-94)

Author

Listed:
  • Craig A. MacKinlay

Abstract

Evidence of deviations from the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) has accumulated over the past decades. The source of these deviations is often assumed to be missing risk factors, leading researchers to look to multifactor asset pricing models as alternatives. The analysis in this paper suggests that consideration of different alternatives may be fruitful, since existing evidence against the CAPM is also evidence against multifactor alternatives being the whole story. Data-snooping biases, market failure, or market inefficiencies are more likely explanations for the deviations. The framework creates for the analysis provides additional insights. These insights relate to the role of residual risk in explaining the cross-section of expected asset returns and to the formation of prior distributions for Bayesian analysis of portfolio efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Craig A. MacKinlay, "undated". "Multifactor Models Do Not Explain Deviations From the CAPM (Revised: 21-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 15-93, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:fth:pennfi:15-93
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Campbell, John Y, 1996. "Understanding Risk and Return," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(2), pages 298-345, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:fth:pennfi:15-93. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rwupaus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.