Link
Abstract
This paper focuses on inconsistencies arising from the use of NPV and CAPM for capital budgeting. It shows that: (i) CAPM capital budgeting decision-making based on disequilibrium NPV is deductively inferred by the capital asset pricing model, (ii) the use of the disequilibrium NPV is widespread in finance both as a decision rule and as a valuation tool, (iii) the disequilibrium NPV does not guarantee additivity nor consistency with arbitrage pricing, so that it is unreliable for valuation, (iv) Magni's [Magni, C.A., 2002. Investment decisions in the theory of finance: Some antinomies and inconsistencies. European Journal of Operational Research 137, 206-217; Magni, C.A., 2007a. Project valuation and investment decisions: CAPM versus arbitrage. Applied Financial Economics Letters 3 (2), 137-140] criticism of the NPV criterion refers to the disequilibrium NPV, and De Reyck's [De Reyck, B., 2005. On investment decisions in the theory of finance: Some antinomies and inconsistencies. European of Operational Research 161, 499-504] project valuation method, on the basis of which Magni's criticism to NPV is objected, leaves decision makers open to arbitrage losses and incorrect decisions.
Volume
192
Page
549-560
Number
2
Year
2009
Keywords
Finance; Investment analysis; Net present value; Capital Asset Pricing Model; Disequilibrium; Decision; Valuation; Nonadditivity; Arbitrage
Categories
CAPM/Asset Pricing
Publications
European Journal of Operational Research