In 1981, Banz discovered evidence suggesting that small-cap firms outperform large-cap firms when considering risk-adjusted returns. Banz (1981), called this the “size effect” and raised concerns regarding the ability of current asset pricing models to set accurate prices for assets. This resulted in new models being developed, such as the Fama and French three-factor model which takes the size of a company into consideration (Fama & French, 1992). However, since the discovering of the size effect, several researchers have started to question its existence. (Asgharian & Hansson, 2008) Moreover, short after Banz findings, a study by Keim (1983) introduced results that complements the size effect. Keims study suggests that the size effect is present due to the fact that small-cap firms outperform large- cap firms during the month of January. This seasonal anomaly is called the “January effect” and could possibly be the reason for the existence of the size effect. The purpose of this study is to investigate if there is a size effect and/or a January effect present on the Swedish stock market (OMX) when using Enterprise Value as the measure for size. Enterprise Value has been chosen in order to consider the full capital structure of companies, hence, not solely the equity value. In order to answer these research questions, a quantitative study has been conducted on companies being listen on the OMX during the time period 2000-2019. The findings of the research are that there is no size effect present on the OMX. Furthermore, the research has found that there is a January effect present on the OMX. This paper suggests that the January effect might have been the reason for the presence of the size effect in history, but as of now, the size effect has diminished but the January effect still remains.

Value creation in any stock market is a highly discussed topic with an abundant amount of generalized models aiming to predict future returns. Although no such tool exists yet there are, however, acknowledged models from peer-reviewed journals that have received a lot of attention over the years in examining company performance. This thesis is therefore built on the well-known Fama-French three-factor model. The original Fama-French three-factor model is extended by adding a new size premium and a new value premium, both based upon the spread between the return on invested capital (ROIC) – the weighted average cost of capital (WACC). The purpose of this is to make the returns of a portfolio account for cash flow and debt on top of risk, size, and value premium for a company. This thesis finds that the ROIC-WACC spread adds explanatory power to the existing Fama and French three-factor model on the Swedish stock market. The research method of this study is quantitative and deductive. The considered period is six years between the years 2014 and 2020.

Inledning: Hållbarhet blir allt viktigare för svenska fondsparare. Följaktligen har detta lett till en ökning av antalet hållbara fonder som förutspås fortsätta att öka. Tidigare forskning har studerat hur hållbara fonder presterar i jämförelse med icke-hållbara fonder. Studierna visar på skilda resultat. Det finns studier som visar att hållbara fonder överpresterar de icke-hållbara fonderna, men det finns också studier som visar på det motsatta.  Syfte: Studien syftar till att jämföra prestationen hos hållbara och icke-hållbara fonder genom att använda alfa som ett mått på avkastning. Med utgångspunkt i tidigare forskning och teorier syftar studien vidare till att diskutera fondernas prestationer för att identifiera eventuella skillnader och förklaringar till dessa.  Metod: Studien följde en kvantitativ forskningsstrategi och en deduktiv ansats. Studien inkluderade 21 hållbara fonder samt 16 icke-hållbara fonder. Studien tillämpade regressioner med utgångspunkt i CAPM samt Fama och French trefaktormodell för varje fond. För att studera fondernas prestation studerades regressionens intercept alfa, som förklarar tillgångens förväntade avkastningen i förhållande till riskfaktorerna. Slutsats: Studiens resultat tyder på att hållbara fonder underpresterar marknaden, medan icke-hållbara fonder överpresterar marknaden. Det är dock inte möjligt att dra några statistiska slutsatser från studiens resultat. Studiens resultat analyseras och förklaras utifrån modern portföljteori, prissättning av aktier, EHM samt beteendefinans. / Introduction: Sustainability is becoming increasingly important for Swedish fund savers. Consequently, this has led to an increase in the number of sustainable funds that is predicted to continue to increase. Previous research has studied how sustainable funds perform in comparison to non-sustainable funds. The studies show different results. There are studies that show that sustainable funds outperform non-sustainable funds, but there are also studies that show the opposite. Purpose: The study aims to compare the performance of sustainable funds and non-sustainable funds using alpha as a measure of performance. Building upon prior research and theories, the study further seeks to discuss the funds’ performances to identify any differences and explanations for these results. Method: This study followed a quantitative research strategy and a deductive approach. The study included 21 sustainable funds and 16 non-sustainable funds. The study applied regression based on the CAPM and the Fama & French three factor model for each fund. To study the performance of the funds, the intercept alpha of the regression was studied. Alpha explains the asset's expected return in relation to the risk factors.  Conclusion: The study's findings suggest that sustainable funds underperform the market, while non-sustainable funds outperform the market. However, it is not possible to draw any statistical conclusions from this study's result. The results of the study are analyzed and explained based on modern portfolio theory, pricing of shares, EHM and behavioral finance.

在知識經濟時代下，無形資產的對於公司的重要性愈來愈高。有別於在工業時代下的生產重心，著重在大量的土地，機器設備...等有形的資產，在二十一世紀競爭中致勝的關鍵因素卻是那些無實體存在的知識累積，例如：研究發展的能力、員工的素質、顧客關係的維持…等;然而，會計處理對於無形資產卻是停留在歷史的取得成本，而不是現時的市場價值，更甚，有些無形資產根本無法入帳;因此，資本市場如何看待與反應公司的無形資產就是一項有趣的議題。本研究之研究目的是：依據Fama and French (1993)三因子模型，以橫斷面的分析方式，欲控制了系統風險、規模效果和淨值與市價比效果後，進一步分別探討研究發展活動與專利權對於股票報酬之影響，是否擁有投入愈多的研發活動與專利可以在股票市場獲得愈高的報酬？是否研究發展費用與專利權數對於股票報酬有遞延效果的影響？ 樣本期間從民國七十一年到民國九十三年，包含上市與上櫃公司，總共有21717筆觀察值，在研究發展活動方面，本研究採用了當期研究發展費用與依五年資本化後之研究發展費用二種替代變數，專利權方面，採用專利權數與累積專利權數二種代理變數，其實證結果發現： (1)當期研究發展費用溢酬與股票超額報酬呈現顯著的正向相關，將研究發展費用依五年資本化後，資本化後之研究發展費用溢酬仍與股票超額報酬呈現顯著的正向相關。 (2)專利權數之溢酬與股票超額報酬卻是顯著的負相關，累積專利權數之溢酬與股票超額報酬也是呈現顯著的負向關係，可能的原因是：在本研究樣本裡的大部分的專利權數量是非常集中在少部分的公司。 (3)研究發展溢酬對於超額報酬最多有三年的遞延效果，專利權溢酬對於超額報酬至少有五年遞延的效果。 (4)當期研究發展費用溢酬與資本化後之研究發展費用溢酬對於超額報酬有顯著不同的影響，二者比較下，當期研究發展費用溢酬對於股票報酬的影響程度大於資本化後之研究發展費用溢酬。可能的原因是:Fama and French三因子模型某種程度上代表著流量的概念，因此，當期研究發展費用溢酬的效果較為顯著。 (5)在專利權數之溢酬與累積專利權數之溢酬二者之間，對於超額報酬不具有顯著差異性的影響。可能的原因是:大部分的樣本都沒有專利權，因此，專利權數之溢酬與累積專利權數之溢酬沒有太大的差異。 (6)以研究發展與專利來說，二者對於超額報酬具有顯著不同差異的影響。 / Since the change in the global economy in the last decade, from manufacturing and industry-based to knowledge-based, it has created new interest in intellectual capital and increased the demand for measuring and reporting the effect on business and profitability. Nonetheless, accounting conventions based on historical cost often understate their value. Thus, from a practical point of view, how the stock market responses to the innovative activity is an interesting issue. Here, the major objective of this study is, on the basis of the three-factor model in Fama and French (1993), to investigate the relationship between innovation activities in firms and stock returns. That is, the aim in this study is to examine whether the intellectual capital, in particularly focusing on R&D and patents, has impact on stock returns. Does the market provide the premium for the value of the innovation in firms? Do the stocks with more innovation efforts worth the higher market rate of returns? Do R&D and patents have time lag effect on returns? We find that: (1) The return premiums are significantly greater for high-level of R&D than for low-level R&D. The mimicking returns both for the R&D-expense factor and capitalized-R&D factors are significantly positive related to excess stock returns. (2) Contrary to our intuition and expectation, the mimicking returns both for patent count and cumulated patent count are significantly negative associated with excess stock returns. One possible explanation is that the distribution of patented innovation is known to be extremely skewed, implying that a few patents are very valuable and many are worth almost nothing. (3) R&D-related return premiums have 3-year lag effect on excess stock returns at most. As for patent-related return premiums, it shows 5-year lag at least for excess stock returns. (4) R&D expenses have more impact on stock returns than the R&D capitalization. One possible explanation is that the “flow” concept is more suitable than the “stock” concept in the Fama and French (1993) regression of stock returns. (5) There is no difference between patent count and cumulated patent count in explaining stock returns. It is likely that, for a large proportion of the sample, they do not possess any patents. (6) When it comes to compare R&D to patents, we find that there is statistically significant difference between the two in explaining excess stock returns.

NY, Columbia Univ., Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Diss.--New York, 2003. / Kopie, ersch. im Verl. UMI, Ann Arbor, Mich. - Enth. 3 Beitr.

This thesis provides evidence of size and value premiums in returns in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region, through its analysis of financial markets in 12 countries. Following the portfolio construction methodology of Fama and French (1996) we use a sample of 1245 stocks and record that small stocks outperform big stocks (size premium) and value stocks outperform growth stocks (value premium). In addition, we create nine portfolios to test the Fama and French three-factor model and show that the factor-mimicking portfolios that have been documented in the developed markets, SMB (small minus big) and HML (high minus low), also capture most of the cross-section variation in average stock returns in the CEE region. We demonstrate a similar pattern in terms of size return as documented in the U.S. market, but with small differences in the value returns found. Although the Gibbons-Ross-Shanken (GRS) test does not reject the null with 95%, we do not agree that the model completely explains the variation in average returns across the portfolios. The GRS rejects the null at 90% and implies that other factors are omitted from the model. Nevertheless, this thesis contributes to the literature applying asset pricing models to the CEE region, and should provide insights to investors active in the CEE...

Det är sedan länge känt att det finns en positiv korrelation mellan risk och avkastning. Investerare och bolag kan välja mellan flera olika prissättningsmodeller för att förutspå priset på en aktie. Forskare har, med den kända enfaktormodellen CAPM som utgångspunkt, utvecklat en modell som tar hänsyn till mer än bara marknadsfaktorn. Detta resulterade i framtagandet av Fama & French-trefaktormodellen (FF3) som även inkluderar storleksfaktorn SMB samt värdefaktorn HML. Syftet med studien är att utvärdera två prissättningsmodeller, CAPM och FF3, för att kunna bedöma deras prestanda vid värdering av förväntad avkastning. Tidigare forskning, inom området för nämnda modeller, berör ofta internationella marknader samt modellernas prestanda för portföljer. Vår studie utförs på utvalda enskilda svenska aktier inkluderade på Stockholmsbörsens Large Cap för januari år 2011 till december år 2015, genom att replikera tidigare forskning gjord av Bartholdy & Peare (2005). Utvalda bolag analyseras efter regressioner för modellerna för att kunna utvärdera dessa var för sig, samt för att se om FF3 har en högre justerad förklaringsgrad än CAPM för enskilda svenska aktier. Resultatet av studien visar att både CAPM och FF3 är applicerbara för utvalda enskilda svenska aktier. Ställs FF3 i förhållande till CAPM föreligger skillnad i justerad förklaringsgrad, dock är den ytterst marginell. Sammanfattningsvis bidrar studien med kunskapen om att CAPM och FF3 går att applicera på enskilda svenska aktier, men att det inte föreligger någon större skillnad i val av dessa två modeller. / Investors and companies can choose between multiple pricing models to predict the price of shares. With the known one factor model CAPM, researchers have developed a model that consider more than just the market factor. This resulted in the creation of the Fama & French three factor model (FF3), which also includes the size factor SMB and the value factor HML. The purpose of the study is to evaluate two pricing models, CAPM and FF3, to assess their performance when evaluating expected returns. Previous research often deal with international markets and model performance of portfolios. We study selected individual Swedish shares for January 2011 to December 2015 by replicating previous research by Bartholdy & Peare (2005). Selected companies are analysed by regressions for the models to be able to evaluate these separately, and to see if FF3 has a higher degree of explanation than CAPM for individual Swedish shares. The result of the study shows that both CAPM and FF3 are applicable for selected individual Swedish shares. There is a difference in the adjusted degree of explanation between the models but it is marginal. In conclusion, the study contributes with the knowledge that CAPM and FF3 can be applied to individual Swedish shares, but there is no major difference in the choice of these two models.

[pt] Este trabalho busca analisar a divergência observada, quanto à aplicabilidade do prêmio de risco por tamanho, entre a proposta apresentada pela TBG – Transportadora Gasoduto Bolívia-Brasil e a resposta da ANP - Agência Nacional de Petróleo para estimação do custo de capital próprio que balizará a tarifa máxima de transporte de gás natural para a empresa regulada. Tanto a TBG quanto a ANP adotaram o Capital Asset Price Model – CAPM como modelo para estimação do custo de capital próprio, no entanto, a proposta da TBG considerou o prêmio de risco por tamanho, ao passo que a resposta da Agência Reguladora não acatou a inclusão desse prêmio, conforme consta na nota técnica nº 007/2018-SIM de 16 de julho de 2018. Para analisar a divergência em relação ao prêmio de risco por tamanho, foi o utilizado modelo de três fatores de Fama e French (1993), que considera, além do risco sistemático adotado no CAPM, os fatores tamanho e índice B/M (book-to-market) para mensuração do custo de capital próprio. Os resultados encontrados, com base no modelo de três fatores de Fama e French (1993), não indicam aplicabilidade do prêmio de risco por tamanho para estimação do custo de capital próprio no mercado regulado de transporte de gás natural, pois os coeficientes dos fatores small minus big (SMB) e high minus low (HML) não apresentaram resultados com significância estatística para diversas das carteiras analisadas. Adicionalmente, as empresas de menor porte (small) e de alto índice B/M (high) apresentaram, entre julho de 2009 e junho de 2018, retornos médios inferiores às empresas maiores (big) e de baixo índice B/M (low), não evidenciando a existência de prêmios de risco por tamanho e por valor. / [en] The purpose of this study is to analyze the divergence observed regarding the applicability of the size risk premium, between the proposal presented by TBG - Brazilian Transporter Gasoduto Bolívia-Brasil and the response of ANP - National Petroleum Agency, in the estimation of the cost of equity that will define the maximum rate for the transport of natural gas to the regulated company. Both TBG and ANP adopted the Capital Asset Price Model (CAPM) model, however, TBG proposal considered the size risk premium while ANP response did not accept the inclusion of this premium as stated in technical note no. 007/2018-SIM of July 16, 2018. To analyze this divergence was used the Fama and French three factor model (1993) that considers, besides the systematic risk adopted in the CAPM, the factors size and B/M (book-to-market) index for measuring the cost of equity. The results obtained, based on Fama and French three factors model (1993), do not indicate the applicability of the size risk premium for estimative of the cost of equity in the regulated natural gas transportation market, since the small minus big (SMB) and high minus low (HML) factor s coefficients did not present statistical significant results for some of the analyzed portfolios. In addition, smaller and high B/M companies presented, between July 2009 and June 2018, lower average returns than bigger and low B/M companies, not evidencing the existence of size and value risk premiums.