Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T00:34:54.339Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A General Equilibrium Analysis of the Capital Asset Pricing Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Richard G. Harris
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The mean-variance portfolio model of Markowitz and Tobin has been the most substantive contribution to the theory of individual asset demand under uncertainty, in terms of comparative static results and testable implications. Although subject to a number of criticisms at the axiomatic level, it still stands as the classic portfolio model. The general equilibrium extension of the Tobin-Markowitz model due to Sharpe [14], Lintner [9], and Mossin [11] has led to important propositions about the nature of risk in general equilibrium and its effect on the pricing of assets, and the model has subsequently been subjected to extensive empirical testing. It has been used for a variety of purposes in areas ranging from corporate-finance theory to the debate on the social discount rate.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 1980 , pp. 99 - 122
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1Arrow, K.J., and Hahn, F.H.. General Competitive Analysis. San Francisco: Holden-Day (1971).Google Scholar
2Bertsekas, D. “Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Existence of an Optimal Portfolio.” Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 8 (06 1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Bierwag, G.O.,, and Grove, M.A.. “Slutsky Equations for Assets.” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 76 (01/02 1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Hart, O.D. “On the Existence of Equilibrium in a Securities Model.” Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 9 (11 1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Jensen, M.C. “Capital Markets: Theory and Evidence.” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Vol. 3 (Spring 1972).Google Scholar
6Jones-Lee, M.W. “Some Portfolio Adjustment Theorems for the Case of Non Negativity Constraints on Security Holdings.” Journal of Finance, Vol. 26 (03 1971).Google Scholar
7Karlin, S.Mathematical Methods and Theory in Games, Programming and Economics, Vol. 1. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley (1951).Google Scholar
8Lang, S.Linear Algebra. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley (1966).Google Scholar
9Lintner, J. “The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 47 (02 1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10Lintner, J. “The Market Price of Risk, Size of Market, and Investor's Risk Aversion.” Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 52 (02 1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Mossin, J. “Equilibrium in a Capital Asset Market.” Econometrica, Vol. 34 (10 1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Royama, S., and Hamada, K.. “Substitution and Complementarity in the Choice of Risky Assets.” In Risk Aversion and Portfolio Choice, edited by D. Hester, and Tobin, J.. New York: Wiley (1967).Google Scholar
13Rubinstein, M. “A Comparative Statics Analysis of Risk Premiums.” Journal of Business, Vol. 46 (10 1973).Google Scholar
14Sharpe, W.F. “Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under situations of Risk.” Journal of Finance, Vol. 19 (09 1964).Google Scholar
15Tobi, .;. “Liquidity Preference as Behavior towards Risk.” Review of Econora'c Studies, Vol. 25 (02 1958).Google Scholar