Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T11:49:28.170Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Equilibrium in the Pricing of Capital Assets, Risk-Bearing Debt Instruments, and the Question of Optimal Capital Structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Extract

After integrating risky debt instruments into the generalized asset pricing model developed by Sharpe and Lintner, we have demonstrated that the required return-to-equity capital in this model is a linear function of the debt-to-equity ratio with a slope equal to the difference between the unlevered cost of equity and the direct cost of debt. Consequently, we take the average cost of capital to be invariant with respect to leverage. The particular nature of the debt instrument issued by the firm does not affect this result.

Our analysis supporting the net operating income valuation construct is of interest in that it takes into account not only the variance of the probability distribution of equity returns but also the covariance relationships between these returns and all other returns in the system. Further, we need not rely on assumptions of “equivalent return” classes or arbitrage possibilities to arrive at our solution. More important, our conclusion is quite general in that we demonstrate indifference toward finance with any instrument regardless of its inherent risk characteristics.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1971

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

[1]Ben-Shahar, Haim. “The Capital Structure and the Cost of Capital: A Suggested Exposition.The Journal of Finance, XXIII, September 1968, pp. 639653.Google Scholar
[2]Durand, David. “Cost of Debt and Equity Funds for Business: Trends and Problems of Measurement.”National Bureau of Economic Research, Conference on Research in Business Finance,New York,1952.Google Scholar
[3]Fama, Eugene F.Risk, Return and Equilibrium: Some Clarifying Comments.The Journal of Finance, XXIII, March 1968, pp. 2940.Google Scholar
[4]Fama, Eugene F. “Risk, Return and Equilibrium.” Unpublished manuscript, University of Chicago, 1968.Google Scholar
[5]Hamada, Robert S.Portfolio Analysis, Market Equilibrium and Corporation Finance.The Journal of Finance, XXIV, March 1969, pp. 1331.Google Scholar
[6]Kumar, Prem. “Market Power, Growth, Leverage and the Valuation of the Firm.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1970.Google Scholar
[7]Lintner, John. “Security Price, Risk and Maximal Gains from Diversification.The Journal of Finance, XIX, December 1965, pp. 587615.Google Scholar
[8]Lintner, John. “The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments on Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets.The Review of Economics and Statistics, XLVII, February 1965, pp. 1337.Google Scholar
[9]Markowitz, Harry. “Portfolio Selection.The Journal of Finance, VII, March 1952, pp. 7791.Google Scholar
[10]Modlgliani, Franco, and Miller, Merton. “The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment.” American Economic Review, XLVIII, June 1958, pp. 261297.Google Scholar
[11]Mossin, J. “Equilibrium in a Capital Asset Market.” Econometrica, October 1966, pp. 768783.Google Scholar
[12]Sharpe, William F.Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions of Risk.The Journal of Finance, XVIII, September 1964, pp. 425442.Google Scholar
[13]Tobin, J.Liquidity Preference as Behavior Towards Risk.The Review of Economic Studies, XXVI, February 1958, pp. 6586.Google Scholar
[14]Weston, J. Fred. “A Test of Cost of Capital Propositions.The Southern Economic Journal, XXX, November 1963, pp. 105112.Google Scholar