The Value Premium and the CAPM
30 Pages Posted: 16 Mar 2005
Date Written: March 2005
Abstract
We examine (i) how value premiums vary with firm size, (ii) whether the CAPM explains value premiums, and (iii) whether in general average returns compensate beta in the way predicted by the CAPM. Loughran's (1997) evidence for a weak value premium among large firms is special to 1963-1995, U.S. stocks, and the book-to-market value-growth indicator. Ang and Chen's (2003) evidence that the CAPM can explain U.S. value premiums is special to 1926-1963. The CAPM's general problem is that variation in unrelated to size and value-growth goes unrewarded throughout 1926-2004. This produces rejections of the model for 1926-1963 and 1963-2004.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Consumption, Aggregate Wealth and Expected Stock Returns
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson
-
Risks for the Long Run: A Potential Resolution of Asset Pricing Puzzles
By Ravi Bansal and Amir Yaron
-
Dividend Yields and Expected Stock Returns: Alternative Procedures for Interference and Measurement
-
Resurrecting the (C)Capm: A Cross-Sectional Test When Risk Premia are Time-Varying
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson
-
Stock Return Predictability: Is it There?
By Geert Bekaert and Andrew Ang
-
Stock Return Predictability: Is it There?
By Geert Bekaert and Andrew Ang
-
Resurrecting the (C)Capm: A Cross-Sectional Test When Risk Premia Wre Time-Varying
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson