{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021604938271604937, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006172839506172839, 'mean_word_length': 4.643478260869565, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Pricing Within and Across Asset Classes

Abstract When an asset-pricing model is claimed to explain a cross-section of portfolio returns, it should do so both within one asset class and across different asset classes. This paper illustrates that this is not always the case using the CAPM and Asness, Moskowitz and Pedersen (AMP, 2013) models applied to momentum and value portfolio returns as examples. Apparently, on one hand, the CAPM is almost as good as the AMP model in explaining the portfolio returns across asset classes, but on the other hand, the AMP model is almost as bad as the CAPM in explaining these returns within one asset class.