Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Arbitrage Pricing Theory

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

  • 100 Accesses

Abstract

Focusing on asset returns governed by a factor structure, the APT is a one-period model, in which preclusion of arbitrage over static portfolios of these assets leads to a linear relation between the expected return and its covariance with the factors. The APT, however, does not preclude arbitrage over dynamic portfolios. Consequently, applying the model to evaluate managed portfolios contradicts the no-arbitrage spirit of the model. An empirical test of the APT entails a procedure to identify features of the underlying factor structure rather than merely a collection of mean-variance efficient factor portfolios that satisfies the linear relation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 6,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 8,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Antoniou, A., I. Garrett, and R. Priestley. 1998. Calculating the equity cost of capital using the APT: The impact of the ERM. Journal of International Money and Finance 14: 949–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, F., and M. Scholes. 1973. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. Journal of Political Economy 81: 637–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, F., M. Jensen, and M. Scholes. 1972. The capital-asset pricing model: Some empirical tests. In Studies in the theory of capital markets, ed. M. Jensen. New York: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bower, R., and G. Schink. 1994. Application of the Fama–French model to utility stocks. Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments 3: 74–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bower, D., R. Bower, and D. Logue. 1984. Arbitrage pricing and utility stock returns. Journal of Finance 39: 1041–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busse, J. 1999. Volatility timing in mutual funds: Evidence from daily returns. Review of Financial Studies 12: 1009–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, J., K. Chan, and T. Yamada. 1997. The performance of Japanese mutual funds. Review of Financial Studies 10: 237–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J., A. Lo, and C. MacKinley. 1997. The econometrics of financial markets. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carhart, M. 1997. On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance 52: 57–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, G. 1983. Funds, factors and diversification in arbitrage pricing models. Econometrica 51: 1305–1323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, G., and M. Rothschild. 1983. Arbitrage, factor structure, and mean variance analysis on large asset markets. Econometrica 51: 1281–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K., N. Chen, and D. Hsieh. 1985. An exploratory investigation of the firm size effect. Journal of Financial Economics 14: 451–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, L., Y. Hamao, and J. Lakonishok. 1991. Fundamentals and stock returns in Japan. Journal of Finance 46: 1739–1764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, L., H. Chen, and J. Lakonishok. 2002. On mutual fund investment styles. Review of Financial Studies 15: 1407–1437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, N. 1983. Some empirical tests of the theory of arbitrage pricing. Journal of Finance 38: 1393–1414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, N., and J. Ingersoll. 1983. Exact pricing in linear factor models with infinitely many assets: A note. Journal of Finance 38: 985–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, N., R. Roll, and S. Ross. 1986. Economic forces and the stock markets. Journal of Business 59: 383–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor, G. 1984. A unified beta pricing theory. Journal of Economic Theory 34: 13–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor, G., and R. Korajczyk. 1986. Performance measurement with the arbitrage pricing theory: A framework for analysis. Journal of Financial Economics 15: 373–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor, G., and R. Korajczyk. 1988. Risk and return in an equilibrium APT: Application of a new test methodology. Journal of Financial Economics 21: 213–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, K., and S. Titman. 1997. Evidence on the characteristics of cross sectional variation in stock returns. Journal of Finance 52: 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiValentino, L. 1994. Preface. Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments 3: 6–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dybvig, P. 1983. An explicit bound on deviations from APT pricing in a finite economy. Journal of Financial Economics 12: 483–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dybvig, P., and J. Ingersoll. 1982. Mean-variance theory in complete markets. Journal of Business 55: 233–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dybvig, P., and S. Ross. 1985. Yes, the APT is testable. Journal of Finance 40: 1173–1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elton, E., M. Gruber, and J. Mei. 1994. Cost of capital using arbitrage pricing theory: A case study of nine New York utilities. Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments 3: 46–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elton, E., M. Gruber, and C. Blake. 1996. Survivorship bias and mutual fund performance. Review of Financial Studies 9: 1097–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., and K. French. 1992. The cross-section of expected stock returns. Journal of Finance 47: 427–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., and K. French. 1993. Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics 33: 3–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., and J. MacBeth. 1973. Risk, return and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of Political Economy 71: 607–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, W., and D. Hsieh. 2001. The risks in hedge fund strategies: Theory and evidence from trend followers. Review of Financial Studies 14: 313–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glosten, L., and R. Jagannathan. 1994. A contingent claim approach to performance evaluation. Journal of Empirical Finance 1: 133–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldenberg, G., and A. Robin. 1991. The arbitrage pricing theory and cost-of-capital estimation: The case of electric utilities. Journal of Financial Research 14: 181–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, E., J. Lopez, and Z. Wang. 2003. Formulating the imputed cost of equity for priced services at Federal Reserve Banks. Economic Policy Review 9: 55–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinblatt, M., and S. Titman. 1983. Factor pricing in a finite economy. Journal of Financial Economics 12: 495–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grinblatt, M., and S. Titman. 1987. The relation between mean-variance efficiency and arbitrage pricing. Journal of Business 60: 97–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L., and R. Jagannathan. 1991. Implications of security market data for models of dynamic economies. Journal of Political Economy 99: 225–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L., and R. Jagannathan. 1997. Assessing specification errors in stochastic discount factor models. Journal of Finance 52: 557–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, G. 1982. A simple approach to arbitrage pricing. Journal of Economic Theory 28: 183–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, G., and S. Kandel. 1985a. A size based stock returns model. Center for Research in Security Prices Working Paper 148, University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, G., and S. Kandel. 1985b. Likelihood ratio tests of asset pricing and mutual fund separation. Center for Research in Security Prices Working Paper 149, University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, G., S. Kandel, and R. Stambaugh. 1987. Mimicking portfolios and exact arbitrage pricing. Journal of Finance 42: 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingersoll, J. 1984. Some results in the theory of arbitrage pricing. Journal of Finance 39: 1021–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagannathan, R., and Z. Wang. 1998. An asymptotic theory for estimating beta-pricing models using cross-sectional regression. Journal of Finance 53: 1285–1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagannathan, R., and Z. Wang. 2002. Empirical evaluation of asset pricing models: A comparison of the SDF and beta methods. Journal of Finance 57: 2337–2367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagannathan, R., G. Skoulakis, and Z. Wang. 2002. Generalized method of moments: Applications in finance. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 20: 470–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. 1968. The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945–1964. Journal of Finance 23: 389–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jobson, J. 1982. A multivariate linear regression test of the arbitrage pricing theory. Journal of Finance 37: 1037–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jobson, J., and B. Korkie. 1982. Potential performance and tests of portfolio efficiency. Journal of Financial Economics 10: 433–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jobson, J., and B. Korkie. 1985. Some tests of linear asset pricing with multivariate normality. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 2: 114–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kan, R., and G. Zhou. 2001. Tests of mean-variance spanning. Working paper, Washington University in St Louis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, B., and D. Modest. 1988. The empirical foundations of the arbitrage pricing theory. Journal of Financial Economics 21: 213–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. 1973. An intertemporal capital asset pricing model. Econometrica 41: 867–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. 1981. On market timing and investment performance I: Any equilibrium theory of values for markets forecasts. Journal of Business 54: 363–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M., and T. Pulvino. 2001. Characteristics of risk and return in risk arbitrage. Journal of Finance 56: 2135–2175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pastor, L., and R. Stambaugh. 2000. Comparing asset pricing models: An investment perspective. Journal of Financial Economics 56: 335–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pastor, L., and R. Stambaugh. 2002. Mutual fund performance and seemingly unrelated assets. Journal of Financial Economics 63: 315–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peñaranda, F., and E. Sentana. 2004. Spanning tests in return and stochastic discount factor mean-variance frontiers: A unifying approach. Working paper No. 0410. Madrid: CEMFI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roll, R., and S. Ross. 1980. An empirical investigation of the arbitrage pricing theory. Journal of Finance 35: 1073–1103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, B., K. Reid, and R. Lanstein. 1984. Persuasive evidence of market inefficiency. Journal of Portfolio Management 11: 9–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. 1976a. The arbitrage theory of capital asset pricing. Journal of Economic Theory 13: 341–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. 1976b. Risk, return and arbitrage. In Risk return in finance, ed. I. Friend and J. Bicksler. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanken, J. 1982. The arbitrage pricing theory: Is it testable? Journal of Finance 37: 1129–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanken, J. 1985. A multi-beta CAPM or equilibrium APT?: A reply. Journal of Finance 40: 1189–1196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanken, J. 1992. On the estimation of beta-pricing models. Review of Financial Studies 5: 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stambaugh, R. 1983. Arbitrage pricing with information. Journal of Financial Economics 12: 357–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z. 2005. A shrinkage approach to model uncertainty and asset allocation. Review of Financial Studies 18: 673–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z., and X. Zhang. 2005. Empirical evaluation of asset pricing models: Arbitrage and pricing errors over contingent claims. Working paper. Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. http://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5

    Gur Huberman & Zhenyu Wang

Authors
  1. Gur Huberman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhenyu Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Copyright information

© 2018 Macmillan Publishers Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Huberman, G., Wang, Z. (2018). Arbitrage Pricing Theory. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_374

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation