IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/4756.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multifactor Models Do Not Explain Deviations from the CAPM

Author

Listed:
  • A. Craig MacKinlay

Abstract

A number of studies have presented evidence rejecting the validity of the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM). This evidence has spawned research into possible explanations. These explanations can be divided into two main categories - the risk based alternatives and the nonrisk based alternatives. The risk based category includes multifactor asset pricing models developed under the assumptions of investor rationality and perfect capital markets. The nonrisk based category includes biases introduced in the empirical methodology, the existence of market frictions, or explanations arising from the presence of irrational investors. The distinction between the two categories is important for asset pricing applications such as estimation of the cost of capital. This paper proposes to distinguish between the two categories using ex ante analysis. A framework is developed showing that ex ante one should expect that CAPM deviations due to missing risk factors will be very difficult to statistically detect. In contrast, deviations resulting from nonrisk based sources will be easy to detect. Examination of empirical results leads to the conclusion that the risk based alternatives is not the whole story for the CAPM deviations. The implication of this conclusion is that the adoption of empirically developed multifactor asset pricing models may be premature.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Craig MacKinlay, 1994. "Multifactor Models Do Not Explain Deviations from the CAPM," NBER Working Papers 4756, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:4756
    Note: AP
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w4756.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roll, Richard, 1980. "Orthogonal Portfolios," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(05), pages 1005-1023, December.
    2. Lakonishok, Josef & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1994. " Contrarian Investment, Extrapolation, and Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(5), pages 1541-1578, December.
    3. Kandel, Shmuel & Stambaugh, Robert F, 1989. "A Mean-Variance Framework for Tests of Asset Pricing Models," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 2(2), pages 125-156.
    4. Ross, Stephen A., 1976. "The arbitrage theory of capital asset pricing," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 341-360, December.
    5. Huberman, Gur & Kandel, Shmuel & Stambaugh, Robert F, 1987. " Mimicking Portfolios and Exact Arbitrage Pricing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(1), pages 1-9, March.
    6. Lo, Andrew W & MacKinlay, A Craig, 1990. "Data-Snooping Biases in Tests of Financial Asset Pricing Models," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 3(3), pages 431-467.
    7. Campbell, John Y., 1987. "Stock returns and the term structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 373-399, June.
    8. Ingersoll, Jonathan E, Jr, 1984. " Some Results in the Theory of Arbitrage Pricing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(4), pages 1021-1039, September.
    9. Kandel, Shmuel & Stambaugh, Robert F., 1991. "Asset returns and intertemporal preferences," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 39-71, February.
    10. Kandel, Shmuel & Stambaugh, Robert F., 1987. "On correlations and inferences about mean-variance efficiency," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 61-90, March.
    11. Lehmann, Bruce N. & Modest, David M., 1988. "The empirical foundations of the arbitrage pricing theory," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 213-254, September.
    12. Amihud, Yakov & Mendelson, Haim, 1986. "Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 223-249, December.
    13. Shmuel Kandel & Robert F. Stambaugh, "undated". "Portfolio Inefficiency and the Cross-Section of Mean Returns (Revised: 6-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 03-93, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    14. Luttmer, Erzo G J, 1996. "Asset Pricing in Economies with Frictions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1439-1467, November.
    15. MacKinlay, A. Craig, 1987. "On multivariate tests of the CAPM," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 341-371, June.
    16. Jobson, J. D. & Korkie, Bob, 1982. "Potential performance and tests of portfolio efficiency," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 433-466, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Gibbons, Michael R & Ross, Stephen A & Shanken, Jay, 1989. "A Test of the Efficiency of a Given Portfolio," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 1121-1152, September.
    19. Gibbons, Michael R., 1982. "Multivariate tests of financial models : A new approach," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 3-27, March.
    20. Connor, Gregory & Korajczyk, Robert A., 1988. "Risk and return in an equilibrium APT : Application of a new test methodology," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 255-289, September.
    21. MacKinlay, A Craig & Richardson, Matthew P, 1991. " Using Generalized Method of Moments to Test Mean-Variance Efficiency," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(2), pages 511-527, June.
    22. Lehmann, Bruce N, 1987. " Orthogonal Frontiers and Alternative Mean-Variance Efficiency Tests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(3), pages 601-619, July.
    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. Chen, Long & Petkova, Ralitsa & Zhang, Lu, 2008. "The expected value premium," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 269-280, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates

    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:nbr:nberwo:4756. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.