Open Access

The Risk-Return Disconnect: A Study on Beta Anomaly in Indian Stock Market

Volume 3, Issue 10

  • Author(s)Muhammed Rafi N, Dr. Ganesh R
  • Affiliation1. Research Scholar, PG & Research Department of Commerce, St. Mary’s College, Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad, Kerala. Email: nmsrafi@gmail.com - ORCID ID: 0009-0004-4944-0573 2. (Corresponding Author) Assistant Professor & Research Guide, PG & Research Department of Commerce, St. Mary’s College, Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad, Kerala. Email: ganeshrppg@gmail.com - ORCID ID: 0000-0002-4539-9997
  • Page No.54-64
  • Volume, Issue & YearVolume 3 Issue 10,oct-2026
  • Published On30/10/2026
  • JournalInternational Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Application (IJAMA)
  • ISSN No.3048-9350

Abstract

Low-beta stocks tend to outperform high-beta stocks. The association of beta and return has been reported to be reverse in many studies. This study assesses whether that anomaly is found in Indian equity market. Further, it will also assess the direction and strength of beta and return relationship across market-capitalisation segments. This study employs a quantitative profile with a longitudinal design. It uses companies listed in the National Stock Exchange NIFTY 500 index for the period from 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2026. The planned stratified sample has companies divided as follows: four large-cap, six mid-cap and ten small-cap stocks. However, the reported small-cap statistical comparison covers seven stocks only, due to the inconsistency in availability of daily data and temporal alignment among the selected stocks. The secondary historical stock-price data are looked at with estimated market beta, descriptive statistics, Pearson and Spearman correlations, beta-sorted portfolios and tests with HAC standard errors. Results show a positive but not statistically significant beta–return correlation in the large-cap and small-cap samples. Although the mid-cap sample is strongly positively correlated, its specific permutation test does not achieve the five percent significance level. The high-beta portfolios tend to outperform the low-beta portfolios in terms of returns on average in the reported large-cap and mid-cap comparisons. However, the return spreads are statistically insignificant in these comparisons. On the whole, the evidence does not document a low-beta anomaly present across the segments. The study indicates that risk pricing is heterogeneous and reveals that beta is of limited use for investors. Generalisation is constrained and future analysis should be consistent and broad as the time periods for observations are unequal. The dividend adjustments are incomplete and the samples used in the analysis are small.

Keywords: Beta Anomaly, Systematic Risk, Risk–Return Relationship, NIFTY 500, Market Capitalisation.

References

  1. 1.Safeeda K A and Ganesh R(2024) Unmasking the Grey Swan: Investor Biases in times of turbulence, Indian Journal of Finance, 18(10), 56-72.
  2. 2. Tulsyan, D. P., Joshipura, M., & Mishra, A. V. (2025). Does profitability explain the low-risk anomaly in India? The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 104, Article 102060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2025.102060
  3. 3.. Saraf, M., & Kayal, P. (2023). How much does volatility influence stock market returns? Empirical evidence from India. IIMB Management Review, 35(2), 108–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2023.05.004
  4. 4.Ganesh R and Naresh G (2016). Practitioners’ View on the Use of Debt Derivatives in India and Judgemental Bias, Smart Journal of Business Management Studies, 12(1), 95-107.
  5. 5.Ali, A., & Badhani, K. N. (2021). Beta-anomaly: Evidence from the Indian equity market. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, 28(1), 55–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10690-020-09316-2
  6. 4 Frazzini, A., & Pedersen, L. H. (2014). Betting against beta. Journal of Financial Economics, 111(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.10.005
  7. 5. Campbell, John, Y., and Tuomo Vuolteenaho. 2004. "Bad Beta, Good Beta." American Economic Review 94 (5): 1249–1275.
  8. 5 Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1992). The cross-section of expected stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 47(2), 427–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1992.tb04398.x
  9. 6. Ganesh R., Naresh G., and Thiyagarajan S (2019). Institutional Herding in Sensitivity Index, Finance India, Vol. XXXIII, No. 4, 967-980.
  10. Newey, W. K., & West, K. D. (1987). A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix. Econometrica, 55(3), 703–708. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913610
  11. 7. Fama, E. F., & MacBeth, J. D. (1973). Risk, return, and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of Political Economy, 81(3), 607–636. https://doi.org/10.1086/260061
  12. 8. Sharpe, W. F. (1964). Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. The Journal of Finance, 19(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1964.tb02865.x
  13. 9. NSE Indices Limited. (2026). Methodology document for equity indices.
  14. 10. National Stock Exchange of India. (2026). Market timings and holidays.

Explore Our Related Journals

Looking for the right journal for your next manuscript? Explore our international peer-reviewed journals covering engineering, management, computer science, artificial intelligence and multidisciplinary research.