Borsa İstanbul’da Klasik Varlık Fiyatlama Modeli (CAPM) Analizi

Year 2016, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 45 - 56, 01.06.2016

Bahadır Karakoc

Abstract

Klasik varlık fiyatlama modeli (CAPM), risk ile getiri arasında doğrusal bir ilişki olduğunu önermektedir. Beta katsayısı bu ilişkide varlıkların maruz kaldıkları sistematik risk seviyesini ölçer. Dolayısıyla riskin yüksek olması durumu varlığın getirisinin yüksek olmasını gerektirmektedir. Fakat bu model üzerine yapılan çalışmalar bu konuda farklı sonuçlara ulaşarak, CAPM’nin geçerliliğinin kullanılan veriye ve kullanılan metoda göre değiştiğini göstermiştir. Bu ve benzeri sonuçlar bizi beta katsayısının riski ölçme kabiliyetini sorgulamaya yöneltmiştir. Özellikle gelişen piyasalarda sistematik risk daha yüksek olduğu için beta katsayısının rolü daha büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu çalışmada CAPM zaman serileri yöntemi kullanılarak test edilmiş ve sonuçlar modelin getiri oranlarındaki değişmeyi istatistiksel olarak açıklayabildiğini göstermiştir. Ancak beta katsayısı ile getiri arasındaki ilişkinin beklenenin aksine pozitif olmadığını da göstermiştir.

Keywords

Varlık Fiyatlama Modeli, Borsa İstanbul, Beta Katsayısı, Sistematik Risk

A Validity Analysis of Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) in Istanbul Stock Exchange

Abstract

Capital asset pricing model (CAPM) suggests that there exists a linear relationship between stock beta and profit. Beta, in this relationship, measures the level of systematic risk to which an asset is exposed. Accordingly, the higher the beta of an asset is, the higher the return must be. However, studies investigating this relationship have produced mixed results and indicated that the validity of CAPM changes according to the data and the methodology which is used. These and similar tests have led us to question the beta coefficient’s ability to measure the risk. As systematic risk is higher, especially in developing markets, the role of the beta coefficient becomes more significant. In this study, CAPM time series method has been used and the result has shown that the model can statistically explain the changes in the rate of the profits. However, against long odds, it also has shown that the relationship between beta coefficient and profit isn’t positive.

Keywords

Capital Asset Pricing Model, Istanbul Stock Exchange, Beta Coefficient, Systematic Risk

References

• Abdymomunova, A., & Morley, J. (2011). Time variation of CAPM betas across market volatility regimes. Applied Financial Economics, 21(19), 1463–1478.
• Acheampong, P., & Agalega, E. (2013). Does the capital assets pricing model (CAPM) predicts stock market returns in Ghana? Evidence from selected stocks on the Ghana Stock Exchange. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 4(9), 27-35.
• Aggarwal, R., Inclan, C., & Leal R. (1999). Volatility in emerging stock markets. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 34(1), 33-55.
• Bilgin, R., & Basti, E. (2011). A Test of the Validity of Capital Asset Pricing Model in Istanbul Stock Exchange. EuroEconomica, 30(4), 98-108.
• Black, F. (1972). Capital market equilibrium with restricted borrowing. The Journal of Business, 45(3), 444-455.
• Choudhary, K., & Choudhary, S. (2010). Testing capital asset pricing model: empirical evidences from Indian equity market. Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics, 3(6), 127-138.
• Demircioglu, E. (2015). Testing of Capital Assets Pricing Model (CAPM) in Cement Sector & Power Generation and Distribution Sector in Turkey. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Review, 3(4), 1-25.
• Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2003). The capital asset pricing model: Theory and evidence. CRSP Working Paper No. 550; Tuck Business School Working Paper No. 03-26. doi:10.2139/ssrn.440920
• Gürsoy, C. T., & Rejepova, G. (2007). Test of capital asset pricing model in Turkey. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 8(1), 47-58.
• Harvey, C. (1995). Predictable risk and return in emerging markets. Review of Financial Studies, 8(3) 773-816.
• Lintner, J. (1965). The valuation of risky assets and the selection of risky investments in stock portfolios and capital budgets. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47(1), 13-37.
• Mankiw, G., & Shapiro, M. (1984). Risk and Return: Consumption versus market beta. Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(3), 452-459.
• Michailidis, G., Tsopoglou, S., Papanastasiou, D., & Mariola, E. (2006). Testing the capital asset pricing model (CAPM): The case of the emerging Greek securities market. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 4(2006), 78-91.
• Minović, J., & Živković, B. (2015). CAPM augmented with liquidity and size premium in the Croatian stock market. Economic Research, 27(1), 191-206.
• Perković, A. (2011). Research of beta as adequate risk measure?. Croatian Operational Research Review, 2(1), 102–111.
• Roll, R. (1997). A critique of the asset pricing theory's tests' part I: On past and potential testability of the theory. Journal of Financial Economics, 4(2), 129-176.
• Ross, S. A. (1976). Arbitrage theory of capital asset pricing. Journal of Economic Theory, 13(3), 341-360.
• Serra, P. (2000). Country and industry factors in returns: Evidence from emerging markets’ stocks. Emerging Markets Review, 1(2000), 127-151.
• Setyowati, A. (2011). Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM): The Theory and Evidence in Indonesia Stock Exchange. Journal Business & Management, 11(1), 1-12.
• Sharpe, W. (1964). Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under condition of risk. Journal of Finance, 19(3), 425-442.
• Trifan, A. (2009). Testing capital asset pricing model for Romanian capital market. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 11(1), 426-434.
• Weinraub H., & Kuhlman, B. (1994). The effect of common stock beta variability on the variability of the portfolio beta. Journal of Financial and Strategic Decisions, 7(2), 79-85.