LOG IN⠴ݱâ

  • ȸ¿ø´ÔÀÇ ¾ÆÀ̵ð¿Í Æнº¿öµå¸¦ ÀÔ·ÂÇØ ÁÖ¼¼¿ä.
  • ȸ¿øÀÌ ¾Æ´Ï½Ã¸é ¾Æ·¡ [ȸ¿ø°¡ÀÔ]À» ´­·¯ ȸ¿ø°¡ÀÔÀ» ÇØÁֽñ⠹ٶø´Ï´Ù.

¾ÆÀ̵ð ÀúÀå

   

¾ÆÀ̵ð Áߺ¹°Ë»ç⠴ݱâ

HONGGIDONG ˼
»ç¿ë °¡´ÉÇÑ È¸¿ø ¾ÆÀ̵ð ÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

E-mail Áߺ¹È®ÀÎ⠴ݱâ

honggildong@naver.com ˼
»ç¿ë °¡´ÉÇÑ E-mail ÁÖ¼Ò ÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¿ìÆí¹øÈ£ °Ë»ö⠴ݱâ

°Ë»ö

SEARCH⠴ݱâ

ºñ¹Ð¹øÈ£ ã±â

¾ÆÀ̵ð

¼º¸í

E-mail

ÇмúÀÚ·á °Ë»ö

Testing the Conditional CAPM Using Short-Window Regressions : A Critique

  • Jaewon Choi University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and Yonsei University
Using short-window regressions, prior studies have shown that the conditional CAPM performs as poorly as the unconditional CAPM and that unconditional alphas are too large to be explained by the covariance between conditional betas and market risk premium. I examine the extent to which these results are driven by estimation biases in short-window regressions. Even when the true time-varying beta has highly transient components, beta estimates from these short-window regressions can be estimated to highly persistent because of yearly portfolio reformulations that are commonly employed in empirical studies. I show that, under these circumstances, large non-zero alpha estimates from short-window regressions are consistent with the conditional CAPM and the covariance estimates between conditional betas and market risk premium are biased downward and can have large estimation errors.

  • Jaewon Choi
Using short-window regressions, prior studies have shown that the conditional CAPM performs as poorly as the unconditional CAPM and that unconditional alphas are too large to be explained by the covariance between conditional betas and market risk premium. I examine the extent to which these results are driven by estimation biases in short-window regressions. Even when the true time-varying beta has highly transient components, beta estimates from these short-window regressions can be estimated to highly persistent because of yearly portfolio reformulations that are commonly employed in empirical studies. I show that, under these circumstances, large non-zero alpha estimates from short-window regressions are consistent with the conditional CAPM and the covariance estimates between conditional betas and market risk premium are biased downward and can have large estimation errors.
Conditional CAPM,Anomalies,Short-Window Regressions,Book-to- market effect,Size effect