Abstract
The regulatory process for setting public utilities’ allowed rate of return on common equity has generally used the Gordon DCF, CAPM and Risk Premium specifications to estimate the cost of common equity. Despite the widely known problems with these models, there has been little movement to adopt more recently developed asset pricing models to provide additional evidence for estimating the cost of capital. This paper presents, validates empirically and applies a general yet simple consumption-based asset pricing specification to model the risk-return relationship for stocks and estimate the cost of common equity for public utilities. The model is not necessarily superior to other models in its practical results, yet these results do indicate that it should be used to provide additional estimates of the cost of common equity. Additionally, the model raises doubts as to whether assets such as utility stocks are a consumption (business cycle) hedge.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brigham E.F., Shome D.K., Vinson S.R. (1985) The risk premium approach to measuring a utility’s cost of capital. Financial Management 14: 33–45
Campbell J. Y. (1987) Stock returns and the term structure. Journal of Financial Economics 18: 373–399
Campbell J. Y. (1993) Intertemporal asset pricing without consumption data. American Economic Review 83: 487–512
Campbell J. Y., Cochrane J. H. (1999) By force of habit: A consumption-based explanation of aggregate stock market behavior. Journal of Political Economy 107: 205–251
Cochrane J. H. (2004) Asset pricing, Revised Edition, Princeton. Princeton University Press, NJ
Cochrane, J. H. (2006). Financial markets and the real economy. NBER Working Paper.
Cochrane, J. H. (2007). Portfolio theory. Manuscript. University of Chicago.
Engle R. F., Lilein D., Robins R. (1987) Estimation of time varying risk premia in the term structure: The ARCH-M model. Econometrica 55: 391–407
EViews©. (2007). Version 6.0. Quantitative Micro Software, LLC.
Fama E., French K. (2004) The capital asset pricing model: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives 18: 25–46
Glosten L. R., Jaganathan R., Runkle D. E. (1993) Relationship between the expected value and the volatility of the nominal excess returns on stocks. Journal of Finance 48: 1779–1801
Gordon M. (1974) The cost of capital to a public utility. MSU Public Utility Studies, East Lansing, MI
Harris, R. S., Marston, F. C., Mishra, D. R., & O’Brien, T. J. (2003). Ex ante cost of equity estimate of S&P 500 firms: The choice between global and domestic CAPM. Financial Management, 32, 51–66.
Harvey C. R. (2001) The specification of conditional expectations. Journal of Empirical Finance 8: 573–637
Kolbe A. L., Tye W. B. (1990) The Duquense opinion: How much “Hope” is there for investors in regulated firms. Yale Journal on Regulation 8: 113–157
Lanne, M., & Luoto, J. (2007). Robustness of risk-return relationship in the U.S. stock market. Helsinki Center of Economic Research, Discussion Paper No. 168.
Lanne M., Saikkonen P. (2006) Why is it so difficult to uncover the risk-return tradeoff in stock returns?. Economic Letters 92: 118–125
Merton R. C. (1973) An intertemporal capital asset pricing model. Econometrica 41: 867–887
Michelfelder, R. A., & Pilotte, E. A. (2011). Treasury bond risk and return, the implications for the hedging of consumption and lessons for asset pricing. Journal of Economics and Business (forthcoming).
Pilotte E., Sterbenz F. (2006) Sharpe and treynor ratios on treasury bonds. Journal of Business 79: 149–180
Whitelaw R. W. (1994) Time-variation and covariations in the expectation and volatility of stock market returns. Journal of Finance 49: 515–541
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ahern, P.M., Hanley, F.J. & Michelfelder, R.A. New approach to estimating the cost of common equity capital for public utilities. J Regul Econ 40, 261–278 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-011-9160-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-011-9160-5