An Examination of Volatility Incremental Effect on the Explanatory Power of Fama and French Three-Factor Model in Tehran’s Stock Exchange

Authors

shahid beheshti university

Abstract

Abstract Many attempts have been made so far to design a proper model to predict stock return. One of the oldest models is CAPM. Despite the relative acceptability, this model is usually criticized for low explanatory power and also due to the results of different experimental examinations. The Fama and French Three-Factor Model (1993) is one of the latest models that is introduced in this field. After introducing this model, many researchers have tried to increase its explanatory power by adding some other factors to it and the most famous of them is The Carhart Four-Factor Model that has added the momentum factor to the Three-Factor Model. Subsequent researches have concentrated on the volatility. This research is conducted on the explanatory power of the four-factor model that by adding volatility has made it the center of attention in Tehran’s Stock Exchange. The sample that is being studied on includes 95 firms in a period between the years 1381 to 1390. The results show that in contrast to the results obtained by Fama and French researches (1993), large firms compared to small ones and growth firms compared to value firms have higher returns. Moreover, firms with higher standard deviation of the return have higher return compared to those with lower standard deviation. Also, adding the volatility factor to the three-factor model results in significant increase in the explanatory power of the three-factor model. Finally, the explanatory power of the four-factor model is not influenced by industry.

Keywords

References

  1.  آقابیگی، صابر (1384)، "بررسی رابطه عامل بازار، اندازه شرکت و نسبت ارزش دفتری به ارزش بازار با بازده سهام شرکتهای پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران"، پایان­نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
  2. احمدپور، احمد و رحمانی فیروزجائی، مجید (1386)، "بررسی تاثیر اندازه شرکت و نسبت ارزش دفتری به ارزش بازار بر بازده سهام (بورس اوراق بهادار تهران)"، مجله تحقیقات اقتصادی، شماره 79، تابستان 86، صفحات 19-37.
  3. اشراق­نیای جهرمی، عبدالحمید و نشوادیان، کامیار (1387)، "آزمایش مدل سه عاملی فاما و فرنچ در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران"،مجله­ی علمی و پژوهشی شریف، شماره 45.
  4. بازرگان لاری، عبدالرضا (1385)، رگرسیون خطی کاربردی (چاپ دوم)، انتشارات دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز.
  5. پاکیزه، کامران (1390)، "تلاطم و بازده (شواهدی از بورس اوراق بهادار تهران و بورس­های بین­الملل)"، فصلنامه تحقیقات مدل سازی اقتصادی.
  6. راعی، رضا و پویان­فر، احمد (1387)، مدیریت سرمایه­گذاری پیشرفته (چاپ دوم)، انتشارات سمت، تهران.
  7. راعی، رضا و سعیدی، علی (1383)،مبانی مهندسی مالی و مدیریت ریسک‏، انتشارات سمت، تهران.
  8. طالب­نیا، قدرت اله و احمدی نظام­آبادی، فاطمه (1389)، "بررسی قدرت پیش­بینی مدل سه عاملی فاما و فرنچ (F&F) و مدل ارزش در معرض خطر (VaR) در انتخاب پرتفوی بهینه سهام شرکت­های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران"، مجله حسابداری مدیریت، شماره 6.
  9. مجتهدزاده، ویدا و طارمی، مریم (1384)، "آزمون مدل سه عاملی فاما و فرنچ در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران جهت پیش­بینی بازده سهام"، پیام مدیریت، شماره 17و18، زمستان84 و بهار85، صفحات 109-132.
  10. 10. میثاقی فاروجی، جواد (1389)، "مقایسه بین مدل­های قیمت­گذاری دارایی سرمایه­ای، سه عاملی فاما و فرنچ و شبکه عصبی مصنوعی در پیش­بینی بازار سهام ایران"، پایان­نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
  11. Bali, T and Cakici, C (2006) “Idiosyncratic Volatility and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns”, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, forthcoming.
  12. Black, F (1976) “Studies of stock price volatility changes”, Proceedings of the 1976 meetings of the American Statistical Association, Business and Economics Statistics Section (American Statistical Association, Washington, DC) 177-181.
  13. Carhart, M (1997) “On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance”, Journal of Finance,  52, 57-82.
  14. Chague, F (2007) “The CAPM and Fama-French Models in Brazil: A Comparative Study”, Fundação Getulio Vargas, Escola de Economia de São Paulo São Paulo.
  15. Christie, A (1982)  “The Stochastic Behavior of Common Stock Variances” Journal of Financial Economics, 10, 407-432.
  16. Daouk, H and Ng, D (2007) “Is Unlevered Firm Volatility Asymmetric?”, Working Paper.
  17. Duffee, G (1995) “Stock Returns and Volatility: A Firm-level Analysis”, Journal of Financial Economics, 37, 399-420.
  18. Fama, E and  French, K (1992a) "The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns", Journal of Finance , 47, 427-465.
  19. Fama, E and French, K (1993) “Common Risk Factors In The Returns On Stocks and Bonds”. Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 33, PP. 3-56.
  20. Fama, E, and French, K (1998)  “Value  Versus  Growth:  The  International Evidence”. The Journal of Finance, Vol.53, PP.1975-1998.
  21. French, K, Schwert, W and Stambaugh, R (1987) “Expected Stock Returns and Volatility”, Journal of Financial Economics, 19, 3-29.
  22. Glosten, L, Jagannathan, R and Runkle, D (1993) ”On the Relation Between Expected Value and the Volatility of the Nominal Excess Return on Stocks”, Journal of Finance, 47, 1779-1801.
  23. Han, H (2008) “The Cross-Section of Stock Return and Volatility”, [Online] (Cited 20 June 2012) Available From www.search.proquest.com >
  24. Jensen, G, Johnson, R and Mercer, J (1997) “New  Evidence on Size and Price-to-Book  Effects in Stock  Returns”, [Online] (Cited 20 June 2012) Available From
  25. Jiang,  X and Lee, B (2004) “On the Dynamic Relation Between Returns and Idiosyncratic Volatility”, Working Paper.
  26. Malkiel, B and Xu, Y(2006) “Idiosyncratic Risk and Security Returns”, Working  paper, University of Texas at Dallas.
  27. Saleh, W (2010) “Size, Book-to-Market, Volatility and Stock Returns: Evidence from Amman Stock Exchange (ASE)”, Frontiers in Finance and Economics – Vol. 7 No.2 – October 2010, 90 – 124
Financial Management Strategy
Volume 1, Issue 3
January 2014
Pages 89-110

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 02 November 2013
  • Revise Date: 29 May 2018
  • Accept Date: 14 December 2013

Share

How to cite

Statistics