Which of the following statements is a reasonable criticism of the MM and Miller models?

Both MM and Miller assume that personal and corporate leverage are perfect substitutes. However, an individual investing in a levered firm has less loss exposure as a result of corporate limited liability than if $$homemade$$ leverage had been used.

Brokerage costs were assumed away by MM and Miller, making the switch from L to U costless$.$ Even though brokerage and other transaction costs do exist, they would not impede the arbitrage process.

MM initially assumed that corporations and investors can borrow at the risk$-$free rate, because most individual investors must borrow at the same rates as those paid by large corporations.

MM and Miller assume that there are no costs associated with financial distress, and they also consider agency costs