Search results

This paper aims to investigate the explanatory power of the Fama-French five-factor model and compares it to the other asset pricing models. In addition, the paper examines the contributions of two additional factors: profitability and investment factor. The authors test the alternative four-factor models.

The authors use stock returns data of BSE-500 listed firms for the Indian market, an emerging market, from 1999 to 2020, thus covering the post-Asian crisis and pre- and post-financial crisis (2007–2008) periods. The authors employ 75 and 96 portfolios based on different factors. To check the performance of asset pricing models, the authors also used the GRS F-statistics and factor spanning tests.

The authors find that the five-factor model and alternative four-factor model outperform the three-factor model. Contrary to the findings for the US, but similar to the Chinese stock market, the value factor is significant for the Indian stock market. Simultaneously, the authors also find that the investment factor has no explanatory power in the presence of the profitability factor in their sample.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the most comprehensive study using data more than two decades. These results are based on 75 (25 × 3) portfolios based on size, value, profitability and investment. The authors also tested these results based on 96 (32 × 3) portfolios to check robustness, and these results still hold. Furthermore, the authors find that factors based on 2 × 3 sorting have higher explanatory power than those based on 2 × 2 and 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 sorting.

This chapter re-examines the Fama–French (FF) five-factor asset pricing model proposed by Fama and French (2015), since this model has a failure to capture the lower average returns on small stocks and its performance could not fully satisfy the original definitions of those considered factors. From the viewpoint of the econometrics analysis, we consider the inferior performance could be potentially caused by the spurious effect in the five-factor model, which could mislead the statistical inference and yield biased empirical results. We thus employ the CO-AR estimation by Wang and Hafner (2018) to prove the usefulness of the FF five-factor model. Empirical results demonstrate with the CO-AR estimation, the five-factor model indeed properly captures the lower average returns on small stocks and illustrate the sustainability of efficiency of the market, which is in contrast to the findings of Fama and French (2015). However, we propose a new perspective on the seminal five-factor model.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the best conditional asset pricing model for the Tokyo Stock Exchange sample by utilizing long‐run daily data. It aims to investigate whether there are any other firm‐specific variables that can explain abnormal returns of the estimated asset pricing model.

The individual firm sample was used to conduct various cross‐sectional tests of conditional asset pricing models, at the same time as using test portfolios in order to confirm the mean variance efficiency of basic unconditional models.

The paper's multifactor models in unconditional forms are rejected, with the exception of the five‐factor model. Further, the five‐factor model is better overall than the Fama and French model and other alternative models, according to both the Gibbons, Ross, and Shanken test and the Hansen and Jagannathan distance measure test. Next, using the final conditional five‐factor model as the de facto model, it was determined that the turnover ratio and the size can consistently predict Jensen's alphas. The book‐to‐market ratio (BM) and the past one‐year returns can also significantly predict the alpha, albeit to a lesser extent.

In the literature related to Japanese data, there has never been a comprehensive test of conditional asset pricing models using the long‐run data of individual firms. The conditional asset pricing model derived for this study has led to new findings about the predictability of past one‐year returns and the turnover ratio.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the return performance of a portfolio of US “vice stocks,” firms that manufacture and sell products such as alcohol, tobacco, gaming services, national defense and firearms, adult entertainment, and payday lenders.

Using daily return data from a portfolio of vice stocks over the period 1987-2016, the author computes the Jensen’s α (capital asset pricing model (CAPM)), Fama-French Three-Factor, Carhart Four-Factor, and Fama-French Five-Factor results for the complete portfolio, and each vice industry individually.

The results from the CAPM, Fama-French Three-Factor Model, and the Carhart Four-Factor Model show a positive and significant α for the vice portfolio throughout the sample period. However, the α’s significance disappears with the addition of the explanatory variables from the Fama-French Five-Factor Model.

The author provides academics and practitioners with results from a new model. As of this writing, the author is unaware of any articles published in peer-reviewed academic journals that investigate vice stocks within the framework of the Fama-French Five-Factor Model (2015). First, the existing literature does not shed light on the relationship between “profitability” and “aggressiveness” (the fourth and fifth factors of the Fama-French Model) and vice stock returns. Second, within the framework of the Fama-French Five-Factor Model, the author shows results not only from a portfolio of vice stocks, but from various vice industries as well.

This study aims to investigate whether the zero-investment portfolio strategy generates higher excess returns for all listed companies in the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) or ESG100 stocks. The study period is from January 2016 to December 2020, a total of 60 months. The dividend yield is employed for categorizing the stock into value and growth stocks. The strategy of buying value stocks and short-selling growth stocks is then applied. The results show that investing using the zero-investment portfolio strategy can generate higher returns in an investment portfolio that consists of ESG100 stocks than in an investment portfolio that consists of all stocks in the SET. The optimal holding periods for investing in portfolios that consist of stocks in the SET are 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months, and the optimal holding periods for a portfolio that consists of ESG100 stocks is 6 months. To explain excess returns of stocks in the SET, the Fama and French (2015) five-factor model is employed. There is no relation between risk factors and excess returns for the holding period of 6 months and 12 months. However, excess return is found to have a negative relation with the market risk premium factor for a 9-month holding period. The excess returns of ESG100 stocks are also inversely correlated with investment factors for a holding period of 6 months.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on one of the major emerging Asian economies – India – to examine the role of human capital in asset prices.

The analysis uses various statistical techniques (e.g. multifactor regression model, 3D graphs, GRS test and residual graphs) to test the role of human capital in asset prices.

A six-factor model designed for capturing the size, value, profitability, investment and human capital patterns in average portfolio returns performs better than both Fama–French’s (1993) three- and Fama–French’s (2015) five-factor model. The main problem of six-factor model is its failure in capturing the average returns on “microcap with low-value stocks that are highly profitable invests aggressively for asset growth but invests much lesser for human growth” and “microcap with unprofitable stocks whose returns behave like those of low-value firms with conservative investment”. The study finds the investment factor (CMA) of Fama–French’s (2015) five-factor model as the redundant factor for describing the portfolio average returns in the study sample.

The paper argues that human capital also plays a role in predicting returns. This has significant public policy content.

The present study is novel for several reasons: first, it includes six-factor model descriptions; second, no comprehensive asset pricing study is done with human capital in Asian emerging markets, especially in India. Perhaps, this is the first study to examine whether portfolio returns are affected by the human capital in the Indian context. Third, the study period and methodology used are completely different from the previous studies.

Asset pricing revolves around the core aspects of risk and expected return. The main objective of the study is to test different asset pricing models for the Indian securities market. This paper aims to analyse whether leverage and liquidity augmented five-factor model performs better than Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), Fama and French three-factor model, leverage augmented four-factor model and liquidity augmented four-factor model.

The data for the current study comprises records on prices of securities that are part of the Nifty 500 index for a time frame of 14 years, that is, from October 2004 to September 2017 consisting of 183 companies using time series regression.

The results indicate that the five-factor model performs better than CAPM and the three-factor model. The model outperforms leverage augmented and liquidity augmented four-factor models. The empirical evidence shows that the five-factor model has the highest explanatory power among the entire asset pricing models considered.

The present study bears certain useful implications for various stakeholders including fund managers, investors and academicians.

This study presents a five-factor model containing two additional factors, that is, leverage and liquidity risk along with the Fama-French three-factor model. These factors are expected to give more value to the model in comparison to the Fama-French three-factor model.

The current study proposes an integrative framework for examination of determinants of stock returns in US market based on the five-factor Fama and French (FF) model, macroeconomic variables and investor sentimental factors. The study is based on both value weighted and equally weighted monthly portfolio returns of all CRSP firms which are incorporated in the United States and listed on the NYSE, AMEX or NASDAQ.

The study applies PLS-SEM methodology to examine the major determinants of portfolio return.

The study suggests that investor sentiments are the major driving forces which positively influence the portfolio stock returns. The macroeconomic factors, the FF Factors and Momentum factor have negative influences on portfolio stock returns.

The study is the first of its kind which aim to determine the determinants of portfolio returns using the PLS-SEM methodology.

This paper aims to study the cross section of expected returns on Shari’ah-compliant stocks in Pakistan by using single- and multi-factor asset pricing models.

To estimate cross section of expected returns of Shari’ah-compliant stocks, the study uses capital asset pricing model (CAPM), Fama-French three-factor model and Fama-French five-factor model. Data for the period 2001-2015 on 217 companies are used. For the market portfolio, PSX-100 and Dow Jones Islamic Index for Pakistan are used.

The study could not find empirical support for CAPM using Lintner (1965), Black et al. (1972) and Fama and Macbeth (1973) approach. Nonetheless, the relation between beta and returns is positive in up-market and negative in down-market. The results of Fama-French three-factor and five-factor models suggest that size premium is positive and significant for explaining the cross section of stock returns of small size stocks, whereas value premium is positive and significant for explaining the cross section of returns of high value stocks.

The results suggest that fund managers can use Shari’ah-compliant stocks for portfolio diversification and for offering specialized investments given the positive market excess returns and the existence of size and value premium on Shari’ah-compliant stocks.

This is the first study on Fama-French (2015) five-factor model for Islamic capital markets in Pakistan.

Since the introduction of VIX to measure the spot volatility in the stock market, VIX and its futures have been widely considered to be the standard of underlying investor sentiment. This study aims to examine how the magnitude of contango or backwardation (MCB volatility risk factor) derived from VIX and VIX3M may affect the pricing of assets.

This paper focuses on the statistical inference of three defined MCB risk factors when cross-examined with Fama–French’s five factors: the market factor R_m–R_f, the size factor SMB (small minus big), the value factor HML (high minus low B/M), the profitability factor RMW (robust minus weak) and the investing factor CMA (conservative minus aggressive). Robustness checks are performed with the revised HML-Dev factor, as well as with daily data sets.

The inclusions of the MCB volatility risk factor, either defined as a spread of monthly VIX3M/VIX and its monthly MA(20), or as a monthly net return of VIX3M/VIX, generally enhance the explanatory power of all factors in the Fama and French’s model, in particular the market factor R_m–R_f and the value factor HML, and the investing factor CMA also displays a significant and positive correlation with the MCB risk factor. When the more in-time adjusted HML-Dev factor, suggested by Asness (2014), replaces the original HML factor, results are generally better and more intuitive, with a higher R² for the market factor and more explanatory power with HML-Dev.

This paper introduces the term structure of VIX to Fama–French’s asset pricing model. The MCB risk factor identifies underlying configurations of investor sentiment. The sensitivities to this timing indicator will significantly relate to returns across individual stocks or portfolios.