Background: Since the early 60’s, the CAPM or Capital Asset Pricing Model, has been an invaluable tool for assessing an asset's expected return, assuming that the asset is added to an already well-diversified portfolio of assets. CAPM theory assume that the unsystematic risk can be diversified and that the systematic, market-specific, risk is determined by the Beta value, from the Greek β. An investor who takes big risks expect higher returns. One of the CAPM’s basic assumptions is that disruption in the market is not taken into account. This assumption may lead to results that do not correspond to reality. Objective: This study examined the relationship between systematic risk, and return on a stable and volatile market. Methodology: The study was performed using a quantitative research with secondary data, in which 30 companies listed on the OMX 30 on the Stockholm stock exchange was studied. The investigation period was from 2003 to 2012 and was divided into three parts. Using the statistics program SPSS and Excel the data required to answer the purpose of the essay was calculated. Results: The analysis of the first time period between 2003 and 2007 showed that there was a statistically significant relationship between beta value and the average return for the period. The second time period between 2008 and 2012, which was characterized by an extremely volatile stock market, showed different results. The result of this period showed no statistical relationship existed when the market was characterized by high volatility. The third and final period between 2003 and 2012, which was a combination of a stable and a volatile market. The results for this period showed no significant association between beta value and average returns. The conclusion of this study is therefore that the CAPM model to assess an asset's return fails when the market is unstable, e.g. due to a financial crisis. To compensate for this error that is built into the model, one should therefore use alternative models, or revised versions of the CAPM, if the aim is to produce data in a realistic way that can be used as basis for investment decisions. / Bakgrund: Sedan början av 60-talet har CAPM, eller Capital Asset Pricing Model, varit ett ovärderligt instrument för att bedöma en tillgångs förväntade avkastning, där man antar att tillgången läggs till i en redan väldiversifierad portfölj av tillgångar. CAPM teorin antar vidare att den osystematiska risken diversifieras bort samt att den systematiska, marknadsspecifika, risken bestäms med hjälp av Beta-värdet, från grekiskans β. En investerare som tar stora risker förväntar sig högre avkastning. Ett av CAPM:s grundantaganden är att störningar på marknaden inte tas hänsyn till. Detta antagande kan leda till resultat som inte stämmer överens med verkligheten.   Syfte: I denna studie undersöktes sambandet mellan systematisk risk, samt avkastning på en stabil respektive volatil marknad. Metod: Undersökningen genomfördes med en kvantitativ forskningsmetodik med sekundära data där 30 bolag noterade på OMX30 på stockholmsbörsen studerades. Undersökningsperioden var mellan 2003 till 2012 och delades upp till tre delar Med hjälp av statistikprogrammet SPSS samt Excel beräknades nödvändiga data för att svara på uppsatsens syfte. Resultat: Analysen av den första tidsperioden mellan 2003-2007 visade att det förelåg ett statistiskt signifikant samband mellan betavärdet och den genomsnittliga avkastningen för perioden. Den andra tidsperioden mellan 2008-2012, som kännetecknades av en mycket volatil aktiemarknad, visade annorlunda resultat. Resultatet av denna tidsperiod visade att inget statistiskt samband förelåg när marknaden kännetecknades av en hög volatilitet. Den tredje och sista och perioden mellan 2003-2012, som alltså var en kombination av en stabil och en volatil marknad. Resultatet för denna tidsperiod visade inget signifikant samband mellan betavärdet och den genomsnittliga avkastningen. Slutsatsen av denna studie blir därmed att CAPM som metod för att bedöma en tillgångs avkastning fallerar när marknaden är ostabil, t.ex. beroende på en finanskris. För att kompensera för detta fel som är inbyggt i modellen bör därför alternativa modeller, eller justerade versioner av CAPM, användas om syftet är att ta fram data som på ett verklighetstroget sätt kan vara underlag för investeringsbedömningar.

This paper evaluates the ability of single and multi-ratio investment strategies, such as P/E, P/B, Magic Formula and Piotroski F-score, to generate excess returns and positive alpha values on the Stockholm Stock Market. Performances of the strategies tested are compared to the Stockholm Stock Market as a whole, also known as the index “OMXSPI”. In this paper, three single-ratio strategies are investigated along with three multi-ratio strategies, chosen on the basis of popularity among private investors, according to our observations. We also compare these strategies’ returns to the returns of the ten best performing funds, over the last ten years, found on SEB’s and Handelsbanken’s fund lists. We find that both multi and single-ratio strategies generated alpha values and that single-ratio strategies performed well, relative to multi-ratio strategies, considering their simplicity. The current portfolio composition from screening stocks based on low P/E, P/B and high dividend yield alone are also associated with less risk, expressed in volatility, than portfolios that would be composed based on the multi-ratio methods. We even find that one of the more complex strategies, Graham Screener, underperformed single-ratio strategies, when comparing yearly alpha values over 15 and 17 years, respectively. The funds’ alpha values are also very poor compared to both single and multi-ratio strategies considering the managers’ likely investment experience and complex investment systems. In sum, our empirical data suggests that excess returns were indeed attainable during the investigated time-periods by following a rule-based investing philosophy in conjunction with single or multi-ratio strategies, and unless the investor has sublime experience and knowledge, he or she is probably better off using this type of investing rather than making investment decisions in a discretionary manner.We also conclude that the Stockholm Stock Market probably suffered from lower market efficiency, from the perspective of the Efficient Market Hypothesis, and lower screening abilities and tools, such as Börsdata, among investors in the beginning of the testing periods, which could be one reason as to why these ratio strategies worked as well as they did. However, the results are still interesting because complexity does not seem to imply value (extra alpha generation) of significant magnitude, if at all. What does seem to imply value, are the minimization of human interactions with investment models and emotional stability.