Trends in the explanatory power of factor-based asset pricing models in determining the cost of capital

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published 11-02-2022
Ana B. Alonso-Conde
Javier Rojo-Suárez

Abstract

The recent research on asset pricing shows that the higher liquidity that results from the globalization of financial markets has significantly reduced the returns tied to many market anomaly-based strategies. However, in general, that research does not evaluate the effects that the mitigation of market anomalies may imply on the performance of the classic asset pricing models. On this basis, in this paper we study to what extent the lower returns provided by market anomaly-based strategies imply better performance of those models. Hence, the main purpose of our study is to compare the performance over time of some of the most prominent asset pricing models, namely, the CAPM and the Fama and French three- and five-factor models, on the European and US equity markets, using return series that cover more than 30 years. Our results show that, although the CAPM is the model with the worst performance in explaining excess returns in all periods both in Europe and US, the model has increased its explanatory power in the recent years principally due to the attenuation of classic market anomalies, such as the size effect or the value effect. Furthermore, our results show that the CAPM correctly prices the three classic Fama and French factors for the years 2006-2021, which explains the best performance of the model for that time interval. Our results have important implications for investment analysis, as well as for determining the cost of capital.

How to Cite

Alonso-Conde, A. B., & Rojo-Suárez, J. (2022). Trends in the explanatory power of factor-based asset pricing models in determining the cost of capital. Cuadernos De Gestión, 22(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.5295/cdg.211521aa
Abstract 177 | PDF Downloads 106

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Cost of capital, Betas, Market anomalies, CAPM, Multifactor models

References
Asness, C.S., Moskowitz, T.J. and Pedersen, L.H., 2013. Value and Momentum Everywhere. The Journal of Finance, 68 (3), 929-985. DOI: 10.1111/jofi.12021
Amihud, Y., 2002. Illiquidity and stock returns: cross-section and time-series effects. Journal of Financial Markets, 5 (1), 31-56. DOI: 10.1016/S1386-4181(01)00024-6
Baetge, J., Kirsch, H.J., Koelen, P. and Schulz, R., 2010. On the Myth of Size Premiums in Corporate Valuation: Some Empirical Evidence from the German Stock Market. Journal of Applied Research in Accounting and Finance, 5 (1), 2-15.
Banz, R.W., 1981. The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of Financial Economics, 9 (1), 3-18. DOI: 10.1016/0304-405X(81)90018-0
Basu, S., 1977. Investment Performance of Common Stocks in Relation to Their Price-Earnings Ratios: A Test of the Efficient Market Hypothesis. The Journal of Finance, 32 (3), 663-682. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1540-6261.1977.tb01979.x
Black, F., 1972. Capital Market Equilibrium with Restricted Borrowing. The Journal of Business, 45 (3), 444-455.
Blume, M.E. and Friend, I., 1973. A New Look at the Capital Asset Pricing Model. The Journal of Finance, 28 (1), 19-33. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1540-6261.1973.tb01342.x
Bornholt, G., 2013. The failure of the capital asset pricing model (CAPM): An update and discussion. Abacus, 49, 36-43. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6281.2012.00382.x
Chan, L.K.C., Hamao, Y. and Lakonishok, J., 1991. Fundamentals and Stock Returns in Japan. The Journal of Finance, 46 (5), 1739-1764. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb04642.x
Cheol, S.E., 1994. The Benchmark beta, CAPM, and Pricing Anomalies. Oxford Economic Papers, 46 (2), 330-343. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a042132
Chordia, T., Subrahmanyam, A. and Tong, Q., 2014. Have capital market anomalies attenuated in the recent era of high liquidity and trading activity?. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 58, 41-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.06.001
DeBondt, W. and Thaler, R., 1985. Does the stock market overreact?. The Journal of Finance, 40, 793-805. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1985. tb05004.x
Elmiger, S., 2019. CAPM-anomalies: quantitative puzzles. Economic Theory, 68, 643-647. DOI: 10.1007/s00199-018-1137-5
Esteban, M.V., Ferreira, E. and Orbe-Mandaluniz, S., 2015. Nonparametric methods for estimating and testing for constant betas in asset pricing models. Applied Economics, 47 (25), 2577-2607, DOI:10.1080/00036846.2015.1005812
Fama, E.F. and French, K.R., 1993. Common Risk Factors in the Returns On Stocks And Bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 33, 3-56.
Fama, E.F. and French, K.R., 1996. Multifactor Explanations of Asset Pricing Anomalies. The Journal of Finance, 51 (1), 55-84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1996.tb05202.x
Fama, E.F. and French, K.R., 1998. Value versus Growth: The International Evidence. The Journal of Finance, 53 (6), 1975-1999.
Fama, E.F. and French, K.R., 2012. Size, Value, and momentum in international stock returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 116, 1-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2012.05.011
Fama, E.F. and French, K.R., 2015. A five-factor asset pricing model. Journal of Financial Economics, 116 (1), 1-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.10.010
Fama, E.F., and French, K.R., 2017. International tests of a five-factor asset pricing model. Journal of Financial Economics, 123 (3), 441-463. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2016.11.004
Ferreira, E. and Orbe, S., 2018. Why are there time-varying comovements in the European stock market?. The European Journal of Finance, 24 (10), 828-848, DOI: 10.1080/1351847X.2017.1339622
French, K.R., 2021. Current research returns [Base de datos]. Recuperado el 2 de junio de 2021 de https://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/ faculty/ken.french/data_library.html
Gibbons, M.R., Ross, S. and Shanken, J., 1989. A Test of the Efficiency of a Given Portfolio. Econometrica, 57 (5), 1121-1152. DOI:10.2307/1913625
Griffin, J., 2002. Are the Fama and French factor global or country specific?. Review of Financial Studies, 15 (3), 783-803. DOI: 10.1093/ rfs/15.3.783
Green, J., Hand, J.R.M. and Soliman, M.T., 2011. Going, going, gone? The apparent demise of the accruals anomaly. Management Science, 57, 797-816. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1501020
Hagtvedt, R., 2009. Stock return dynamics and the CAPM anomalies. Applied Economics Letters, 16 (16), 1593-1596. DOI: 10.1080/13504850701582159
Hansen, L.P. and Richard, S.F., 1987. The Role of Conditioning Information in Deducing Testable Restrictions Implied by Dynamic Asset Pricing Models. Econometrica, 55(3), 587-613. DOI: 10.2307/1913601
Hwang, S., Rubesam, A. and Salmon, M., 2021. Beta herding through overconfidence: A behavioral explanation of the low-beta anomaly. Journal of International Money and Finance, 111, article: 102318. DOI: 10.1016/j.jimonfin.2020.102318
Horowitz, J.L., Loughran, T. and Savin, N.E., 2000. The disappearing size effect. Research in Economics, 54 (1), 83-100. DOI: 10.1006/ reec.1999.0207
Hou, K., Karolyi, G. and Kho, B., 2011. What factors drive global stock returns?. Review of Financial Studies, 24 (8), 2527-2574. DOI: 10.1093/rfs/hhr013
Hou, K., Xue, C. and Zhang, L., 2020. Replicating Anomalies. The Review of Financial Studies, 33 (5), 2019-2133, DOI: 10.1093/rfs/ hhy131
Jegadeesh, N. and Titman, S., 1993. Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency. The Journal of Finance, 48 (1), 65-91. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1993. tb04702.x
Lewellen, J., Nagel, S. and Shanken, J., 2010. A skeptical appraisal of asset pricing tests. Journal of Financial Economics, 96 (2), 175-194. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2009.09.001
Lintner, J., 1965. The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 47 (1), 13-37. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-780850-5.50018-6
Loughran, T. and Ritter, J.R., 1995. The New Issues Puzzle. The Journal of Finance, 50 (1), 23–51. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1995.tb05166.x
Mashruwala, C., Rajgopal, S. and Shevlin, T., 2006. Why is the accrual anomaly not arbitraged away? The role of idiosyncratic risk and transaction costs. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42(1), 3-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacceco.2006.04.004
McLean, R. D. and Pontiff, J., 2016. Does academic research destroy stock return predictability? Journal of Finance, 71(1), 5-32. DOI: 10.1111/jofi.12365
Mitchell, M.L. and Stafford, E., 2000. Managerial Decisions and Long‐ Term Stock Price Performance. The Journal of Business, 73(3), 287-329. DOI: 10.1086/209645
Rojo-Suárez, J., Alonso-Conde, A.B. and Ferrero-Pozo, R., 2020. Liquidity, time-varying betas and anomalies: Is the high trading activity enhancing the validity of the CAPM in the UK equity market?. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 1-16. DOI: 10.1002/ ijfe.2136
Shanken, J., 1992. On the Estimation of Beta-Pricing Models. The Review of Financial Studies, 5 (1), 1-33. DOI: 10.1093/rfs/5.1.1
Sharpe, W.F., 1964. Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk. The Journal of Finance, 19 (3), 425-442. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1964.tb02865.x
Section
Articles