Abstract
The stochastic discount factor is a crucial determinant of the equity premium as well as the cross-sectional distribution of stock returns. This gives rise to the idea that there is a tight link between the equity premium puzzle and cross-sectional asset pricing puzzles. This paper examines similarities between the low-beta premium, the value premium, the small-size premium and the equity premium in a special case of a static consumption-based asset pricing model with constant relative risk aversion and lognormal dividends that can be solved in closed form. The results show that cross-sectional asset pricing puzzles are quantitative puzzles just like the equity premium puzzle: The model generates a premium for stocks with a low beta, a high dividend-price ratio and a small market capitalization but the size of the premium is too small. Furthermore, the size of the premium rises together with the equity premium as the risk aversion coefficient or consumption risk is increased.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This assumption simplifies notation, but is not necessary. The number of firms can be discretized.
Elmiger (2010) documents that the cross section of total dividends follows approximately a lognormal distribution except for the tails of the distribution.
The total number of firms is normalized to one.
Results for \(\mu _{\rho } \ne 1\) can be obtained by scaling \(\mu \), \(\sigma \) and \(\sigma _{\rho }\) accordingly.
The return equals total future dividends divided by the current market capitalization since the asset supply is constant over time in our model.
Intermediate results are available on request.
A proof for a positive premium in case \(\sigma ^2>0\) can be found in “Appendix.”
The memory of our symbolic calculator does not suffice for an analytical discussion.
References
Bansal, R., Yaron, A.: Risks for the long run: a potential resolution of asset pricing puzzles. J. Finance 59(4), 1481–1509 (2004)
Banz, R.W.: The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. J. Financ. Econ. 9(1), 3–18 (1981)
Barro, R.J.: Rare disasters and asset markets in the twentieth century. Q. J. Econ. 121(3), 823–866 (2006)
Basu, S.: Investment performance of common stocks in relation to their price-earnings ratios: a test of the efficient market hypothesis. J. Finance 32(3), 663–682 (1977)
Black, F., Jensen, M.C., Scholes, M.: The capital asset pricing model: some empirical tests. In: Jensen, M.C. (ed.) Studies in the Theory of Capital Markets, pp. 79–121. Praeger Publishers Inc., New York (1972)
Breeden, D.T.: An intertemporal asset pricing model with stochastic consumption and investment opportunities. J. Financ. Econ. 7(3), 265–296 (1979)
Campbell, J.Y., Cochrane, J.H.: By force of habit: a consumption-based explanation of aggregate stock market behavior. J. Polit. Econ. 107(2), 205–251 (1999)
Campbell, J., Viceira, L.: Strategic Asset Allocation: Portfolio Choice for Long-Term Investors. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002)
Carhart, M.M.: On persistence in mutual fund performance. J. Finance 52(1), 57–82 (1997)
Chen, L.: On the reversal of return and dividend growth predictability: a tale of two periods. J. Financ. Econ. 92(1), 128–151 (2009)
Cochrane, J.H., Longstaff, F.A., Santa-Clara, P.: Two trees. Rev. Financ. Stud. 21(1), 347–385 (2008)
DeAngelo, H., DeAngelo, L., Skinner, D.J.: Are dividends disappearing? Dividend concentration and the consolidation of earnings. J. Financ. Econ. 72(3), 425–456 (2004)
Dittmar, R.F.: Nonlinear pricing kernels, kurtosis preference, and evidence from the cross section of equity returns. J. Finance 57(1), 369–403 (2002)
Elmiger, S.: Market selection in an evolutionary market with dividends generated by a percolation model. https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/mtec/chair-of-entrepreneurial-risks-dam/documents/dissertation/master (2010). Accessed 14 May 2018
Fama, E.F., French, K.R.: Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. J. Financ. Econ. 33(1), 3–56 (1993)
Fama, E.F., French, K.R.: The capital asset pricing model: theory and evidence. J. Econ. Perspect. 18(3), 25–46 (2004)
Frazzini, A., Pedersen, L.H.: Betting against beta. J. Financ. Econ. 111(1), 1–25 (2014)
Herings, P.J.J., Kübler, F.: Approximate CAPM when preferences are CRRA. Comput. Econ. 29(1), 13–31 (2007)
Kraus, A., Litzenberger, R.: On the distributional conditions for a consumption-oriented three moment CAPM. J. Finance 38(5), 1381–1391 (1983)
Lintner, J.: The valuation of risk assets and the selection of risky investments in stock portfolios and capital budgets. Rev. Econ. Stat. 47(1), 13–37 (1965)
Lucas, R.E.: Asset prices in an exchange economy. Econometrica 46(6), 1429–1445 (1978)
Martin, I.: The Lucas orchard. Econometrica 81(1), 55–111 (2013)
Mehra, R., Prescott, E.C.: The equity premium: a puzzle. J. Monet. Econ. 15(2), 145–161 (1985)
Mossin, J.: Equilibrium in a capital asset market. Econometrica 34(4), 768–783 (1966)
Rubinstein, M.: The valuation of uncertain income streams and the pricing of options. Bell J. Econ. 7(2), 407–425 (1976)
Sharpe, W.F.: Capital asset prices: a theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. J. Finance 19(3), 425–442 (1964)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Additional information
I would like to thank Thorsten Hens, Felix Kübler and Bjørn Sandvik for helpful comments and discussions. I am grateful to the Hausdorff Institute for Mathematics in Bonn, where I completed a large part of this work.
Appendix
Appendix
1.1 Derivation of the Expectation
In the proofs, we often encounter expectations of the form \(\mathbf {E}\left[ e^{a\Delta y+b\left( \Delta y\right) ^2}\right] \) with different coefficients a and b and \(\Delta y \sim \mathcal {N} (\mu -y_0,\sigma ^2)\). Here, we show the common derivation of this expectation using the completion of the square method.
We can rewrite this expression as
so that the integrand becomes proportional to a normal probability density function with mean \(\frac{a\sigma ^2+(\mu -y_0)}{1-2b\sigma ^2}\) and standard deviation \(\sqrt{\frac{\sigma ^2}{1-2b\sigma ^2}}\). Therefore, the expectation is equal to
\(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 1
The price–dividend ratio of an asset of type \(\rho \) is
To shorten notation, let us define \(\Delta y\equiv y_1-y_0\) and \(\Delta y \sim \mathcal {N}\left( \mu -y_0,\sigma ^2\right) \). The price–dividend ratio then is
Using the formula for the expectation (1), we obtain
\(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 2
The expected return of an asset of type \(\rho \) is
The price–dividend ratio of the market portfolio is
Using the formula for the expectation (1), we obtain
This step assumes that \(\sigma ^2/\left( 1-\left( 1-\gamma \right) \sigma _{\rho }^2\sigma ^2\right) \) is the variance of a normally distributed random variable, which requires \(\sigma _{\rho }^2\sigma ^2<1\) in case \(\gamma =1\).
Therefore, the expected return on the market portfolio is
Here, we use again the formula for the expectation given in (1) assuming that \(\sigma ^2/(1-\sigma ^2 \sigma _{\rho }^2)\) is the variance of a normal distribution, which requires \(\sigma _{\rho }^2\sigma ^2<1\).
The riskless rate is
Using the formula for the expectation (1), we obtain
\(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 3
The CAPM beta \(\beta ^{\rho }\) is
Using the formula for the expectations (1) and multiplying the numerator and denominator by \(e^{\frac{1}{2\sigma ^2}(\mu -y_0)^2}\), we obtain
The assumption \(\sigma _{\rho }^2 \sigma ^2<1/2\) allows us to interpret \(\sigma ^2/(1-\sigma _{\rho }^2\sigma ^2)\) as well as \(\sigma ^2/(1-2\sigma _{\rho }^2 \sigma ^2)\) as variances of a normal distribution and to apply (1).
Using the formulas for the price–dividend ratio (2) and (3), we obtain
\(\square \)
1.2 Positivity of the equity premium
In order to show that the equity premium is positive, we show that the ratio of the expected market return and the riskless rate is greater than one. Dividing the expression of the expected market return by the expression of the riskless rate as given in Proposition 2, we obtain
First, we note that \(\sqrt{1+(\gamma -1)\sigma _\rho ^2\sigma ^2}\ge \sqrt{(1+\gamma \sigma _{\rho }^2\sigma ^2)(1-\sigma _{\rho }^2\sigma ^2)}\). Second, we calculate the derivative of the exponent with respect to \(\sigma ^2\):
which is positive because all squared terms are positive and \(2\gamma (\gamma -1)\sigma _{\rho }^2\sigma ^2\) and \(2\gamma -1\) are nonnegative for \(\gamma \ge 1\). Thus, the exponent of the exponential function is increasing in \(\sigma \) and minimal for \(\sigma \rightarrow 0\), where it takes the value zero as can be calculated using L’Hopital’s rule. The exponential function therefore takes only values greater than one unless \(\sigma =0\). \(\square \)
Proof of Proposition 4
The CCAPM beta \(\beta _\mathrm{con} ^{\rho }\) is
where \(\eta \) is defined as \(\eta \equiv 1+\sigma _{\rho }^2y_0\). Using the formula for the expectations (1) and multiplying the numerator and denominator by \(e^{\frac{1}{2\sigma ^2}(\mu -y_0)^2}\), we obtain
Using the formulas for the price–dividend ratio (2) and (3), we obtain
\(\square \)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Elmiger, S. CAPM-anomalies: quantitative puzzles. Econ Theory 68, 643–667 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-018-1137-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-018-1137-5