This research examined the alternatives of Jensen’s alpha (α) estimation models in the Capital Asset Pricing Model, discussed by Treynor (1961), Sharpe (1964), and Lintner (1965), using the robust maximum likelihood type m-estimator (MM estimator) and Bayes estimator with conjugate prior. According to finance literature and practices, alpha has often been estimated using ordinary least square (OLS) regression method and monthly return data set. A sample of 50 securities is randomly selected from the list of the S&P 500 index. Their daily and monthly returns were collected over a period of the last five years. This research showed that the robust MM estimator performed well better than the OLS and Bayes estimators in terms of efficiency. The Bayes estimator did not perform better than the OLS estimator as expected. Interestingly, we also found that daily return data set would give more accurate alpha estimation than monthly return data set in all three MM, OLS, and Bayes estimators. We also proposed an alternative market efficiency test with the hypothesis testing Ho: α = 0 and was able to prove the S&P 500 index is efficient, but not perfect. More important, those findings above are checked with and validated by Jackknife resampling results.

This research examines the alternative ways of estimating the coefficient of non-diversifiable risk, namely beta coefficient, in Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) introduced by Sharpe (1964) that is an essential element of assessing the value of diverse assets. The nonparametric methods used in this research are the robust Least Trimmed Square (LTS) and Maximum likelihood type of M-estimator (MMestimator). The Jackknife, the resampling technique, is also employed to validate the results. According to finance literature and common practices, these coecients have often been estimated using Ordinary Least Square (LS) regression method and monthly return data set. The empirical results of this research pointed out that the robust Least Trimmed Square (LTS) and Maximum likelihood type of M-estimator (MM-estimator) performed much better than Ordinary Least Square (LS) in terms of eciency for large-cap stocks trading actively in the United States markets. Interestingly, the empirical results also showed that daily return data would give more accurate estimation than monthly return data in both Ordinary Least Square (LS) and robust Least Trimmed Square (LTS) and Maximum likelihood type of Mestimator (MM-estimator) regressions.