Risk, Duration, and Capital Budgeting: New Evidence on Some Old Questions
- 1 April 1999
- journal article
- Published by University of Chicago Press in The Journal of Business
- Vol. 72 (2), 183-200
- https://doi.org/10.1086/209609
Abstract
In a provocative article Campbell and Mei suggest that systematic risk arises not because of correlation between a company's cash flow and the market return but primarily because of common variation in expected returns. If true, the Campbell‐Mei hypothesis has important implications for capital budgeting, particularly at high‐technology companies that have long duration, idiosyncratic investment projects. This article presents some new evidence related to the Campbell‐Mei hypothesis and then evaluates the impact of the hypothesis with a case study of Amgen Corporation.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- Contrarian Investment, Extrapolation, and RiskThe Journal of Finance, 1994
- Where do betas come from? Asset price dynamics and the sources of systematic riskThe Review of Financial Studies, 1993
- A Variance Decomposition for Stock ReturnsThe Economic Journal, 1991
- Timely Aggregate Analyst Forecasts As Better Proxies for Market Earnings ExpectationsJournal of Accounting Research, 1991
- The Dividend-Price Ratio and Expectations of Future Dividends and Discount FactorsThe Review of Financial Studies, 1988
- Investor growth expectationsThe Journal of Portfolio Management, 1988
- An evaluation of alternative proxies for the market's assessment of unexpected earningsJournal of Accounting and Economics, 1987
- The Superiority of Analyst Forecasts as Measures of Expectations: Evidence from EarningsThe Journal of Finance, 1978
- Capital Budgeting and the Capital Asset Pricing Model: Good News and Bad NewsThe Journal of Finance, 1977