Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM)
Overview
CAPM (Sharpe, 1964; Lintner, 1965) establishes a linear relationship between systematic risk and expected return. The model states that the expected return on any asset equals the risk-free rate plus a premium for bearing market risk, scaled by the asset's beta.
When to Use
- Estimating required rate of return for equity valuation
- Calculating cost of equity in WACC
- Comparing asset risk via beta
- Evaluating portfolio performance against the Security Market Line (SML)
When NOT to Use
- When the asset has significant exposure to size, value, or other factors beyond market risk
- For illiquid or non-traded assets where beta estimation is unreliable
- When market portfolio proxy is questionable (Roll's critique)
Assumptions
IRON LAW: CAPM only prices SYSTEMATIC risk — diversifiable (unsystematic)
risk earns NO premium. An asset's expected return depends solely on its
beta with the market portfolio.
Key assumptions:
- Investors are mean-variance optimizers with homogeneous expectations
- A risk-free asset exists for unlimited borrowing and lending
- Markets are frictionless — no taxes, transaction costs, or short-selling constraints
- All assets are infinitely divisible and publicly traded
Methodology
Step 1 — Identify Inputs
- Risk-free rate (Rf): government bond yield matching investment horizon
- Market return E(Rm): historical average or forward-looking estimate
- Beta: regression of asset returns against market returns
Step 2 — Compute Expected Return
E(Ri) = Rf + Bi x (E(Rm) - Rf). See references/derivation.md for the derivation from mean-variance optimization.
Step 3 — Plot on Security Market Line
Assets above the SML are undervalued (positive alpha); below are overvalued (negative alpha).
Step 4 — Interpret and Decide
- Beta > 1: amplifies market moves, higher risk-higher expected return
- Beta < 1: dampens market moves, lower risk-lower expected return
- Beta = 0: returns equal the risk-free rate
Output Format
⚠️ Decimal vs percent: When passing values to or from the bundled script, all rates
(risk_free, market_return, beta_contribution, expected_return, alpha) are
decimals — 0.05 means 5%, NOT 5.0. The narrative report below renders them as
percentages for humans, but never mix the two in the same JSON object.
## CAPM Analysis: [Asset / Portfolio]
### Inputs
| Parameter | Value | Source |
|-----------|-------|--------|
| Risk-free rate (Rf) | x% | [source] |
| Market return E(Rm) | x% | [source] |
| Beta | x.xx | [estimation method] |
### Expected Return
- E(Ri) = Rf + B x (E(Rm) - Rf) = x%
### SML Assessment
- Alpha = Actual return - Expected return = x%
- Interpretation: [undervalued / overvalued / fairly priced]
### Limitations in This Context
- [Note any assumption violations]
Gotchas
- Beta is backward-looking; future beta may differ from historical estimates
- Choice of market proxy matters enormously (Roll's critique, 1977)
- CAPM assumes a single risk factor; empirical evidence supports multi-factor models
- Risk-free rate selection (T-bill vs T-bond) affects results significantly
- Beta estimation is sensitive to return frequency (daily vs monthly) and sample period
- CAPM fails to explain the low-beta anomaly (low-beta stocks outperform predictions)
Scripts
| Script |
Description |
Usage |
scripts/capm.py |
Compute CAPM expected return and alpha |
python scripts/capm.py --help |
Run python scripts/capm.py --verify to execute built-in sanity tests.
References
- Sharpe, W. (1964). Capital asset prices. Journal of Finance, 19(3), 425-442.
- Lintner, J. (1965). The valuation of risk assets. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47(1), 13-37.
- Roll, R. (1977). A critique of the asset pricing theory's tests. Journal of Financial Economics, 4(2), 129-176.
1---2name: grad-capm3description: Apply the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) to estimate expected returns and assess risk-return tradeoffs. Use this skill when the user needs to calculate expected return on an asset, interpret beta as systematic risk exposure, evaluate whether an investment compensates for risk, or when they ask 'what return should I expect', 'what is the risk premium', or 'how does beta affect pricing'.4---56# Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM)78## Overview910CAPM (Sharpe, 1964; Lintner, 1965) establishes a linear relationship between systematic risk and expected return. The model states that the expected return on any asset equals the risk-free rate plus a premium for bearing market risk, scaled by the asset's beta.1112## When to Use1314- Estimating required rate of return for equity valuation15- Calculating cost of equity in WACC16- Comparing asset risk via beta17- Evaluating portfolio performance against the Security Market Line (SML)1819## When NOT to Use2021- When the asset has significant exposure to size, value, or other factors beyond market risk22- For illiquid or non-traded assets where beta estimation is unreliable23- When market portfolio proxy is questionable (Roll's critique)2425## Assumptions2627```28IRON LAW: CAPM only prices SYSTEMATIC risk — diversifiable (unsystematic)29risk earns NO premium. An asset's expected return depends solely on its30beta with the market portfolio.31```3233Key assumptions:341. Investors are mean-variance optimizers with homogeneous expectations352. A risk-free asset exists for unlimited borrowing and lending363. Markets are frictionless — no taxes, transaction costs, or short-selling constraints374. All assets are infinitely divisible and publicly traded3839## Methodology4041### Step 1 — Identify Inputs4243- Risk-free rate (Rf): government bond yield matching investment horizon44- Market return E(Rm): historical average or forward-looking estimate45- Beta: regression of asset returns against market returns4647### Step 2 — Compute Expected Return4849E(Ri) = Rf + Bi x (E(Rm) - Rf). See `references/derivation.md` for the derivation from mean-variance optimization.5051### Step 3 — Plot on Security Market Line5253Assets above the SML are undervalued (positive alpha); below are overvalued (negative alpha).5455### Step 4 — Interpret and Decide5657- Beta > 1: amplifies market moves, higher risk-higher expected return58- Beta < 1: dampens market moves, lower risk-lower expected return59- Beta = 0: returns equal the risk-free rate6061## Output Format6263> ⚠️ **Decimal vs percent**: When passing values to or from the bundled script, all rates64> (`risk_free`, `market_return`, `beta_contribution`, `expected_return`, `alpha`) are65> **decimals** — `0.05` means 5%, NOT `5.0`. The narrative report below renders them as66> percentages for humans, but never mix the two in the same JSON object.6768```markdown69## CAPM Analysis: [Asset / Portfolio]7071### Inputs72| Parameter | Value | Source |73|-----------|-------|--------|74| Risk-free rate (Rf) | x% | [source] |75| Market return E(Rm) | x% | [source] |76| Beta | x.xx | [estimation method] |7778### Expected Return79- E(Ri) = Rf + B x (E(Rm) - Rf) = x%8081### SML Assessment82- Alpha = Actual return - Expected return = x%83- Interpretation: [undervalued / overvalued / fairly priced]8485### Limitations in This Context86- [Note any assumption violations]87```8889## Gotchas9091- Beta is backward-looking; future beta may differ from historical estimates92- Choice of market proxy matters enormously (Roll's critique, 1977)93- CAPM assumes a single risk factor; empirical evidence supports multi-factor models94- Risk-free rate selection (T-bill vs T-bond) affects results significantly95- Beta estimation is sensitive to return frequency (daily vs monthly) and sample period96- CAPM fails to explain the low-beta anomaly (low-beta stocks outperform predictions)9798## Scripts99100| Script | Description | Usage |101|--------|-------------|-------|102| `scripts/capm.py` | Compute CAPM expected return and alpha | `python scripts/capm.py --help` |103104Run `python scripts/capm.py --verify` to execute built-in sanity tests.105106## References107108- Sharpe, W. (1964). Capital asset prices. *Journal of Finance*, 19(3), 425-442.109- Lintner, J. (1965). The valuation of risk assets. *Review of Economics and Statistics*, 47(1), 13-37.110- Roll, R. (1977). A critique of the asset pricing theory's tests. *Journal of Financial Economics*, 4(2), 129-176.