Arbitrage pricing theory: Evidence from an emerging stock market

Nguyen Dinh Tho1,
1 Foreign Trade University

Main Article Content

Abstract

Employing the data for the period before the Asian Financial Crisis 1997-1998, between Jan 1987 and Dec 1996 under the light of the methodology proposed by Fama and McBeth (1973), the research investigates the relationship between the stock returns in the Stock Exchange of Thailand and some economic fundamentals including changes in exchange rates, industrial production growth rates, unexpected changes in inflation, changes in the current account balance, differences between domestic interest rates and international interest rates, changes in domestic interest rate.


The test’s results show that, within the scope of the methodology and data employed, the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT) does hold in the very emerging stock market of Thailand, while the CAPM (Capital Asset Pricing Model) fails to do so. While changes in exchange rates consistently explain the stock returns, there is one chance the exchange rates and the industrial growth rates together systematically affect the stock returns. The negative risk premiums associated with these factors shows investors in the SET are risk averse and tend to hedge against risks of changes in fundamentals. This research is an important contribution to the study of an emerging market stock price movements, which provides a base line for comparing with stock market price behaviours after the devastating crisis in Thailand in 1997-1998.

Article Details

References

1. Brown, Stephen J. and Weinstein, Mark I. 1983. “A New Approach to Testing Asset Pricing Models: The Bilinear Paradigm.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 3, June 1983, pp. 711-743.
2. Chan, Louis K. C., Hamao Yasushi, and Lakonishok, Josef. 1991. “Fundamentals and Stock Returns in Japan.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. XLVI, No. 5, December 1991, pp. 1739-1763.
3. Chen, Nai-Fu, Roll, Richard and Ross, Stephen A. 1986. “Economic Forces and the Stock Market.” Journal of Business, Vol. 59, No. 3, 1986, pp. 383-403.
4. Chen, Nai-Fu. 1983. “Some Empirical Tests of the Theory of Arbitrage Pricing.” The Journal of Finance, vol. XXXVIII, No. 5, December 1983, pp. 1393-1414.
5. Elton, Edwin J. and Gruber, Martin J. 1995. Modern Portfolio Theory and Investment Analysis. Fifth Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
6. Elton, Edwin, Gruber, Martin and Rentzler, Joel. 1983. “The Arbitrage Pricing Model and Returns on Assets Under Uncertain Inflation.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 2, May 1983, pp. 525537.
7. Fama, Eugene F. and MacBeth James D. 1973. “Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests.” Journal of Political Economy, No. 38, 1973, pp. 607-636.
8. Fama, Eugene. 1970. “Effficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work.” Journal of Finance, XXV, No. 2, March 1970, pp. 383-417.
9. Lintner, John. 1965. “The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets.” Review of Economics and Statistics, No. 47, February 1965, pp. 1337.
10. Mossin, Jan. 1966. “Equilibrium in a Capital Asset Market.” Econometrica, No. 34, October 1966, pp. 768-783.
11. Roll, Richard and Ross, Stephen A. 1980.” An Empirical Investigation of the Arbitrage Pricing Theory.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. XXXV, No. 5, December 1980, pp. 1073-1103.
12. Ross, Stephen A. 1976. “The Arbitrage Theory of Capital Asset Pricing.” Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 13, December 1976, pp. 341-360.