The CAPM is alive and well: A review and synthesis

Haim Levy*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

43 Scopus citations

Abstract

Mean-Variance (M-V) analysis and the CAPM are derived in the expected utility framework. Behavioural Economists and Psychologists (BE&P) advocate that expected utility is invalid, suggesting Prospect Theory as a substitute paradigm. Moreover, they show that the M-V rule, which is the foundation of the CAPM, is not always consistent with peoples' choices. Thus, BE&P cast doubt on the validity of expected utility paradigm and of the M-V rule, hence the CAPM is theoretically questionable. In addition, there is very little empirical support to the CAPM. We show in this study that the CAPM is theoretically valid even when one accepts the BE&P framework and even when expected utility is invalid. Moreover, within the BE&P framework there is a strong experimental support for the CAPM.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)43-71
Number of pages29
JournalEuropean Financial Management
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2010

Keywords

  • CAPM
  • Expected utility
  • M-V
  • Prospect Theory

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The CAPM is alive and well: A review and synthesis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this