Skip to content

FRM Part II · FRM Exam Part II · Factors

An analyst runs a regression of a portfolio's excess returns on the market factor and finds a beta of 0.70 and a positive alpha. The portfolio holds stocks with low past volatility. Under the low-volatility anomaly, which is the most consistent interpretation of the positive alpha relative to the CAPM?

The positive alpha is consistent with the low-risk anomaly: low-beta, low-volatility stocks have historically delivered higher risk-adjusted returns than the CAPM security market line predicts. The risk-return relationship is flatter than theory implies, so low-beta holdings show positive alpha and high-beta holdings tend to show negative alpha.

  1. ALow-beta stocks have historically earned higher risk-adjusted returns than the CAPM's security market line predictsCorrect
  2. BLow-beta stocks earn returns exactly proportional to beta, so the alpha is estimation noise by definition
  3. CHigh-beta stocks have historically earned more than the CAPM predicts
  4. DThe alpha arises because low-volatility stocks have higher market beta than assumed

Explanation

The low-risk anomaly states that low-beta or low-volatility stocks have earned returns above those implied by the CAPM, giving positive alpha, while high-beta stocks tend to earn less than predicted. The flat or inverted risk-return relationship is the core of the anomaly.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Factors shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

More Factors questions