IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/quaeco/v49y2009i4p1460-1475.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The non-relevance of the elusive holy grail of asset pricing tests: The "true" market portfolio does not alter CAPM validity conclusions

Author

Listed:
  • Low, Cheekiat
  • Nayak, Subhankar

Abstract

Empirical evaluations of CAPM usually attach a caveat that rejection is conditional on the choice of market proxy. We explore the criticality of the proxy choice disclaimer. Using different proxies and comprehensive simulations of the unobserved "true" market in Fama-MacBeth tests of CAPM, we find that the significance (t-statistics) corresponding to betas remain consistently unaltered, even if the proxy is a small fraction of or has a low correlation with the true market. The constancy of t-statistics persists in a simulated true-CAPM world as well: if CAPM is indeed valid, the choice of proxy is unlikely to reject it erroneously. Identity of the elusive true market portfolio and the choice of representative proxy cannot overturn conclusions on validity of CAPM based on Fama-MacBeth tests. Roll's Critique, incontrovertible in theory, may be quite forgiving in practice - CAPM cannot be resurrected by a "closer" approximation of the elusive true market portfolio when it has commonly been rejected.

Suggested Citation

  • Low, Cheekiat & Nayak, Subhankar, 2009. "The non-relevance of the elusive holy grail of asset pricing tests: The "true" market portfolio does not alter CAPM validity conclusions," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 1460-1475, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:quaeco:v:49:y:2009:i:4:p:1460-1475
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1062-9769(09)00055-6
    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. 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.
    3. Stambaugh, Robert F., 1982. "On the exclusion of assets from tests of the two-parameter model : A sensitivity analysis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 237-268, November.
    4. Blume, Marshall E & Friend, Irwin, 1973. "A New Look at the Capital Asset Pricing Model," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 28(1), pages 19-33, March.
    5. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1996. "The CAPM Is Wanted, Dead or Alive," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(5), pages 1947-1958, December.
    6. Kothari, S P & Shanken, Jay & Sloan, Richard G, 1995. "Another Look at the Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(1), pages 185-224, March.
    7. Shanken, Jay, 1987. "Multivariate proxies and asset pricing relations : Living with the Roll critique," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 91-110, March.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Dimson, Elroy, 1979. "Risk measurement when shares are subject to infrequent trading," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 197-226, June.
    11. Fama, Eugene F & MacBeth, James D, 1973. "Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 607-636, May-June.
    12. Black, Fischer, 1972. "Capital Market Equilibrium with Restricted Borrowing," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(3), pages 444-455, 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. Gregory Price & Warren Whatley, 2021. "Did profitable slave trading enable the expansion of empire?: The Asiento de Negros, the South Sea Company and the financial revolution in Great Britain," Cliometrica, Journal of Historical Economics and Econometric History, Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC), vol. 15(3), pages 675-718, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gabriel Hawawini & Donald B. Keim, "undated". "The Cross Section of Common Stock Returns: A Review of the Evidence and Some New Findings," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 08-99, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    2. Fernando Rubio, 2005. "Eficiencia De Mercado, Administracion De Carteras De Fondos Y Behavioural Finance," Finance 0503028, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 Jul 2005.
    3. Turan G. Bali & Robert F. Engle & Yi Tang, 2017. "Dynamic Conditional Beta Is Alive and Well in the Cross Section of Daily Stock Returns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3760-3779, November.
    4. Amit Goyal, 2012. "Empirical cross-sectional asset pricing: a survey," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 26(1), pages 3-38, March.
    5. John Y. Campbell, 2000. "Asset Pricing at the Millennium," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1515-1567, August.
    6. Pawel Bilinski & Danielle Lyssimachou, 2014. "Risk Interpretation of the CAPM's Beta: Evidence from a New Research Method," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 50(2), pages 203-226, June.
    7. Rocciolo, Francesco & Gheno, Andrea & Brooks, Chris, 2022. "Explaining abnormal returns in stock markets: An alpha-neutral version of the CAPM," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    8. Dimson, Elroy & Mussavian, Massoud, 1999. "Three centuries of asset pricing," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(12), pages 1745-1769, December.
    9. Sonntag, Dominik, 2018. "Die Theorie der fairen geometrischen Rendite [The Theory of Fair Geometric Returns]," MPRA Paper 87082, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Grauer, Robert R. & Janmaat, Johannus A., 2009. "On the power of cross-sectional and multivariate tests of the CAPM," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 775-787, May.
    11. Shanken, Jay & Weinstein, Mark I., 2006. "Economic forces and the stock market revisited," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 129-144, March.
    12. Zura Kakushadze, 2014. "4-Factor Model for Overnight Returns," Papers 1410.5513, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2015.
    13. Attiya Yasmeen Javid, 2000. "Alternative Capital Asset Pricing Models: A Review of Theory and Evidence," PIDE Research Report 2000:3, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
    14. Zura Kakushadze & Willie Yu, 2016. "Multifactor Risk Models and Heterotic CAPM," Papers 1602.04902, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2016.
    15. Baltussen, Guido & Post, Gerrit T. & Van Vliet, Pim, 2012. "Downside risk aversion, fixed-income exposure, and the value premium puzzle," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 3382-3398.
    16. Hollstein, Fabian & Prokopczuk, Marcel, 2022. "Testing Factor Models in the Cross-Section," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    17. Martin Wallmeier, 2000. "Determinanten erwarteter Renditen am deutschen Aktienmarkt — Eine empirische Untersuchung anhand ausgewählter Kennzahlen," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 27-57, February.
    18. John Y. Campbell & Tuomo Vuolteenaho, 2004. "Bad Beta, Good Beta," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1249-1275, December.
    19. Zura Kakushadze & Jim Kyung-Soo Liew, 2015. "Custom v. Standardized Risk Models," Risks, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-27, May.
    20. Ericsson, Johan & Karlsson, Sune, 2003. "Choosing Factors in a Multifactor Asset Pricing Model: A Bayesian Approach," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 524, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 12 Feb 2004.

    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:quaeco:v:49:y:2009:i:4:p:1460-1475. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620167 .

    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.