Heteroscedasticity and interval effects in estimating beta: UK evidenceÂ

Seth Armitage and Janusz Brzeszczynski

No 1103, CFI Discussion Papers from Centre for Finance and Investment, Heriot Watt University

Abstract: The paper compares beta estimates obtained from OLS regression with estimates corrected for heteroscedasticity of the error term using ARCH models, for 145 UK shares. The differences are mainly less than 0.10, for betas calculated using daily returns, but even such small differences can matter in practice. OLS tends to overestimate the beta coefficients compared with ARCH models, and selecting an ARCH­type estimate makes most difference for large­cap shares. Regarding the measurement interval, the downward bias in betas from daily returns is associated not only with thin trading but also with the volatility of the share’s daily returns. We infer that the idiosyncratic component in daily returns, as well as lack of trading, is responsible for low daily betas.

Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://cfi.hw.ac.uk/images/documents/DP2011-02_Armitage_and_Brzeszczynski.pdf (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 500 Can't connect to cfi.hw.ac.uk:80 (No such host is known. )

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hwe:cfidps:1102

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in CFI Discussion Papers from Centre for Finance and Investment, Heriot Watt University Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Colin Miller ().