A two‐pass model study of the CAPM: evidence from the UK stock market

Tienyu Hwang, Simon Gao and Heather Owen

Studies in Economics and Finance, 2012, vol. 29, issue 2, 89-104

Abstract: Purpose - There has been considerable debate on the linear relationship between systematic risk and return. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether security return can be explained by systematic risk. Design/methodology/approach - This study employs the market model to test the effect of excess return on portfolio returns. The paper divides total risk into systematic and idiosyncratic risk to examine whether the degree of inefficient portfolio diversification impairs the applicability of the capital asset pricing model (CAPM). In the two‐pass cross‐sectional regressions, the paper assesses whether excess return on a security is directly proportional to the security's beta. The paper also incorporates the total variance of securities and the squared value of beta to capture idiosyncratic risk and the nonlinear risk‐return relationship. Findings - The CAPM is rejected due to positive intercepts in most portfolios and there are large proportions of idiosyncratic risk in these portfolios. Two‐pass regressions show that the security market line theory is valid when additional variables are included in the equation. However, survivorship bias appears to be present in the selected sample. Practical implications - Since large excess returns are present in the models, the traditional CAPM is rejected and incomplete portfolio diversification can be explained by high levels of idiosyncratic risk. Originality/value - The authors find that inefficient portfolio diversification is due to the level of idiosyncratic risk in a portfolio. Evidence of the nonlinear beta‐return relationship suggests that the traditional CAPM is misspecified.

Keywords: Capital asset pricing model; Excess return; Idiosyncratic risk; Market model; Portfolio diversification; Risk‐return relationship; Two‐pass regression; UK stock market; United Kingdom (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

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:eme:sefpps:v:29:y:2012:i:2:p:89-104

DOI: 10.1108/10867371211229118

Access Statistics for this article

Studies in Economics and Finance is currently edited by Prof Niklas Wagner

More articles in Studies in Economics and Finance from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().