Journal Home
Login
Register
Open Access Journal
Submit a Paper
Propose a Special lssue
Open Access
ARTICLE
Revisiting Global Asset Pricing Paradigms: Theoretical Evolution, Empirical Contestation, And Bibliometric Insights Across Developed AndEmerging Markets
Issue Vol. 3 No. 01 (2026): Volume 03 Issue 01 --- Section Articles
PDF
Abstract
Asset pricing theory occupies a central position in modern financial economics, serving as the conceptual backbone for understanding how risk is priced in capital markets and how expected returns are determined across assets, time, and geographies. Since the formalization of the Capital Asset Pricing Model, the field has experienced successive waves of theoretical refinement, empirical testing, and methodological critique, culminating in a rich ecosystem of multifactor models and global extensions. This article offers an extensive, integrative, and theoretically grounded examination of global asset pricing paradigms by synthesizing classical theory, empirical evidence from developed and emerging markets, and bibliometric perspectives on the evolution of the literature. Particular attention is devoted to the intellectual structure and thematic trajectories identified in recent bibliometric analyses of global asset pricing research, which illuminate how scholarly focus has shifted from single-factor equilibrium models toward multifactor, behavioral, and market-specific frameworks (Keshari& Gautam, 2022).
The study is positioned at the intersection of theory, evidence, and scholarly meta-analysis. It revisits the foundational assumptions of equilibrium asset pricing, critically interrogates the empirical validity of canonical models such as the Capital Asset Pricing Model, and explores the motivations behind the development of multifactor alternatives including the Fama–French three-factor, four-factor, and five-factor models. The discussion extends beyond model mechanics to address deeper epistemological questions concerning risk measurement, market efficiency, and the contextual dependence of asset pricing relationships across institutional environments. By drawing on a wide range of empirical studies from Europe, Australia, and emerging markets, the article demonstrates that asset pricing is not a monolithic phenomenon but a context-sensitive process shaped by market structure, investor behavior, and macroeconomic conditions.
Methodologically, the article adopts a qualitative, theory-driven synthesis of prior empirical findings rather than new econometric estimation. This approach allows for a nuanced interpretation of results reported in the literature, highlighting patterns of convergence and divergence across markets and time periods. The results section articulates how empirical regularities such as size, value, momentum, and profitability effects have been documented, contested, and reinterpreted, often yielding contradictory conclusions depending on sample selection and methodological choices. The discussion section provides a deep comparative analysis of competing scholarly viewpoints, identifies persistent limitations in global asset pricing research, and outlines promising avenues for future inquiry, including the integration of bibliometric insights with substantive theory development.
Overall, the article contributes a comprehensive, publication-ready synthesis that situates global asset pricing models within their historical, theoretical, and empirical contexts. By embedding bibliometric evidence within a broader conceptual narrative, it advances a more reflexive understanding of how asset pricing knowledge is produced, validated, and contested in the global academic community.
Keywords
References
1. Black, F., Jensen, M. C., & Scholes, M. (1972). The Capital Asset Pricing Model: Some empirical tests. In M. C. Jensen (Ed.), Studies in the theory of capital markets. Praeger.
2. Cakici, N., Tang, Y., & Yan, A. (2016). Do the size, value, and momentum factors drive stock returns in emerging markets? Journal of International Money and Finance, 69, 179–204.
3. Fabozzi, F. J., & Francis, J. C. (1978). Beta as a random coefficient. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 13(1), 101–116.
4. Beltratti, A., & Trio, M. (2002). The cross-section of risk premium in the Italian stock market. Economic Notes, 31(3), 389–416.
5. Keshari, A., & Gautam, A. (2022). Asset pricing in global scenario: A bibliometric analysis. IIM Ranchi Journal of Management Studies, 2(1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/IRJMS-02-2022-0025
6. Campbell, J. Y. (1996). Understanding risk and return. Journal of Political Economy, 104(2), 298–345.
7. Connor, G., & Sehgal, S. (2003). Tests of the Fama and French model in India. Decision, 30(2), 1–20.
8. Carhart, M. (1997). On the persistence of mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance, 52, 57–82.
9. Faff, R. (2004). A simple test of the Fama and French model using daily data: Australian evidence. Applied Financial Economics, 14, 83–92.
10. Daniel, K., & Titman, S. (1997). Evidence on the characteristics of cross-sectional variation in stock returns. Journal of Finance, 52(1), 1–33.
11. Brennan, M. J. (1970). Taxes, market valuation and corporate financial policy. National Tax Journal, 23(4), 417–427.
12. Elfakhani, S., & Wei, J. (2003). The survivorship bias, share price effect, and small firm effect in Canadian markets. Review of Financial Economics, 12(4), 397–411.
13. Cakici, N., Fabozzi, F. J., & Tan, S. (2013). Size, value, and momentum in emerging market stock returns. Emerging Markets Review, 16, 46–65.
14. Barber, B., Lyon, J., & Tsai, C. (1997). Firm size, book-to-market ratio, and security returns. Journal of Finance, 52(2), 875–883.
15. Davis, J. L., Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2000). Characteristics, covariances, and average returns. Journal of Finance, 55(1), 389–406.
16. Breeden, D. (1979). An intertemporal asset pricing model with stochastic consumption and investment opportunities. Journal of Financial Economics, 7, 265–296.
17. Ajili, S. (2005). The Capital Asset Pricing Model and the Three Factor Model of Fama and French revisited in the case of France. Working paper.
18. Bahl, B. (2007). Testing the Fama and French three factor model and its variants for the Indian stock returns. Working paper.
19. Bundoo, S. K. (2007). An augmented Fama and French three factor model: New evidence from an emerging stock market. Working paper.
20. Chaudhary, R., &Bakhshi, P. (2021). Selection of the right proxy market portfolio for CAPM. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 18(3), 16–26.
21. Chiah, M., Chai, D., Zhong, A., & Li, S. (2016). A better model? An empirical investigation of the Fama–French five-factor model in Australia. International Review of Finance, 16(4), 595–638.
22. Czapkiewicz, A., &Wójtowicz, T. (2014). The four-factor asset pricing model on the Polish stock market. Economic Research–EkonomskaIstraživanja, 27(1), 771–783.
23. Erb, C. B., & Harvey, C. R. (2006). The strategic and tactical value of commodity futures. Financial Analysts Journal, 62(2), 69–97
