The Changing Nature of Market Risk
52 Pages Posted: 4 Oct 2006 Last revised: 23 Nov 2008
Date Written: November 13, 2008
Abstract
In the first three decades of CRSP data, value stocks have higher betas than growth stocks. Later on, the ranking is reversed and the gap in beta widens. What makes growth strategies nowadays bear more market risk than value strategies? What are the causes of the reversal in the ranking of betas? The paper argues that the negative link between beta and BM is due to growth options. The shift of listed firms towards more growth-oriented businesses has progressively changed the nature of market risk. The ultimate determinant of this evolution is conjectured to be financial market development, which has lowered the cost of capital. For this reason, the facts described in this paper resonate with other long-run phenomena, such as the rise in idiosyncratic risk and the R&D boom.
Keywords: CAPM, beta, systematic risk, valuation, value stocks, value premium, growth options, volatility
JEL Classification: G12
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Consumption, Aggregate Wealth and Expected Stock Returns
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson
-
Risks for the Long Run: A Potential Resolution of Asset Pricing Puzzles
By Ravi Bansal and Amir Yaron
-
Dividend Yields and Expected Stock Returns: Alternative Procedures for Interference and Measurement
-
Resurrecting the (C)Capm: A Cross-Sectional Test When Risk Premia are Time-Varying
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson
-
Stock Return Predictability: Is it There?
By Geert Bekaert and Andrew Ang
-
Stock Return Predictability: Is it There?
By Geert Bekaert and Andrew Ang
-
Resurrecting the (C)Capm: A Cross-Sectional Test When Risk Premia Wre Time-Varying
By Martin Lettau and Sydney C. Ludvigson