The Efficient Market Hypothesis ( Emh )

Capital markets provide a function which facilitates the buying and selling of long-term financial securities to increase liquidity and their value, Watson & Head (2013). Hence, the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) explains the relationship that exists with the prices of the capital market securities, where no individual can beat the market by regularly buying securities at a lower price than it should be. This means that in order to be an efficient market prices of securities will have to fairly and fully reflect all available information, Fama (1970). Consequently, Watson & Head (2013) believe that market efficiency refers to the speed and quality of how share price adjusts to new information. Nevertheless, the testing of the efficient markets has led to the recognition of three different forms of efficiency in which explains how information available is used within the market. In this essay, the EMH will be analysed; testing of EMH will show that the model does provide strong evidence to explain share behaviour but also anomalies will be discussed that refutes the EMH. Therefore, a judgment will be made to see which structure explains the efficient market and whether there are some implications with the EMH, as a whole.

It is believed that Efficient Market Theory is based upon some fallacies and it does not provide strong grounds of whatever that it proposes. More importantly the Efficient Market theory is perceived to be too subjective in its definition and details and because of this it is close to impossible to accommodate this theory into a meaningful and explicit financial model that can actually assist investors in making the investment decisions (Andresso-O’Callaghan, B., 2007).

As Chapter 10 questions, if further evidence continues to surface that capital markets do not always behave in accordance with the efficient market hypothesis, then should we reject the research that has embraced the EMH as a fundamental assumption? In this regard we can return to earlier chapters of this book in which we emphasised that theories are abstractions of reality. Capital markets are made of individuals and as such it would not (or perhaps, should not) be surprising to find that the

Week 1 – Introduction – Financial Accounting (Review) Week 2 – Financial Markets and Net Present Value Week 3 – Present Value Concepts Week 4 – Bond Valuation and Term Structure Theory Week 5 – Valuation of Stocks Week 6 – Risk and Return – Problem Set #1 Due Week 7* – Midterm (Tuesday*) Week 8 - Portfolio Theory Week 9 – Capital Asset Pricing Model Week 10 – Arbitrage Pricing Theory Week 11 – Operation and Efficiency of Capital Markets Week 12 – Course Review – Problem Set #2 Due

The Efficient-Market Hypothesis (EMH) states that it is impossible to beat the market because stock market efficiency causes existing share prices to always incorporate and reflect all relevant information.

It was previously assumed that economic investors and regulators (agents) utilised all available information and thus market prices were a reflection of this information with assets representing their fundamental value, encouraging the position that agents’ actions were rational. The 2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis (GFC) is posited to have originated from the notion that all available information was utilised, causing agents to fail to thoroughly investigate and confirm “the true values of publicly traded securities,” leading to a failure to register the presence of an asset price bubble preceding the GFC (Ball 2009).

This document is authorized for use only by Yen Ting Chen in FInancial Markets and Institutions taught by Nawal Ahmed Boston University from September 2014 to December 2014.

The efficient-market hypothesis (EMH) is one of the well-known methods for measuring the future value of stock prices. According to this hypothesis, the market is efficient if its prices are formed on the basis of all disposable information. According to EMH if there is a possibility to predict the future price of shares, that is the first sign of an inefficient market.

Efficient Market Hypothesis has been controversial issues among researcher for decades. Until now, there is no united conclusion whether capital markets are efficiency or not. In 1960s, Fama (1970) believed that market is very efficient despite there are some trivial contradicted tests. Until recently, both empirical and theatrical efficient market hypothesis was being disputed by behavior finance economist. They have found that investor have psychological biases and found evidences that some stocks outperform other stocks. Moreover, there are evidences prove that market are not efficient for instance financial crisis, stock market bubble, and some investor can earn abnormal return which happening regularly in stock markets all over the world. Therefore, the purpose of this essay is to demonstrate that Efficient Market Hypothesis in stock (capital) markets does not exist in the real world by proofing four outstanding unrealistic conditions that make market efficient: information is widely available and cost-free, investor are rational, independent and unbiased, There is no liquidity problem in stock market, and finally stock prices has no pattern.

Franco Modigliani and Merton Miller examined how a corporation should select securities to sell in order to attain an optimal mix between debt and equity, the mirror image of what Markowitz and Tobin had studied. Their findings led them to the conclusion that the market value of a firm is independent of its capital structure. In an efficient market, the market will place the same value on firms with equal earnings power and equal risk. Their most innovative contribution to the theory of finance was in elevating arbitrage to the level of a driving force. This Law of One Price states, “two assets with identical attributes should sell for the same price… a profitable opportunity will arise to sell the asset where it is overpriced and to buy it back when it is underpriced. The arbitrager will then lock in a sure profit, otherwise known as a free lunch.” (171) In effect, arbitragers actually fix the imperfections in the market by bidding away the

The efficient market, as one of the pillars of neoclassical finance, asserts that financial markets are efficient on information. The efficient market hypothesis suggests that there is no trading system based on currently available information that could be expected to generate excess risk-adjusted returns consistently as this information is already reflected in current prices. However, EMH has been the most controversial subject of research in the fields of financial economics during the last 40 years. “Behavioural finance, however, is now seriously challenging this premise by arguing that people are clearly not rational” (Ross, (2002)). Behavioral finance uses facts from psychology and other human sciences in order to

In modern financial economics, one of the most essential constructions , which plays a significant role in financing strategy, is efficient market hypothesis (henceforth EMH). Despite the fact that its first theoretical formulation, which was founded by Paul

The analysis of this paper will derive the validity of the Fama and French (FF) model and the efficiency of the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM). The comparison of the Fama and French Model and CAPM (Sharpe, 1964 & Lintner, 1965) uses real time data of stock market to practise its efficacy. The implication of the function in realistic conditions would justify the utility of the CAPM theory. The theory suggests that the expected return demanded by investors on a risky asset depends on the risk-free rate of interest, the expected return on the market portfolio, the variance of the return on the market portfolio, and

“In an efficient market, security (example shares) prices rationally reflect available information” (Arnold 2005, p.684). The efficient market hypothesis

Ever since Ross (1976) proposed the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT) as an alternative to the capital pricing model, many economists and investors have applied APT across different markets. Whereas the traditional capital pricing model explained asset returns with one beta, sensitivity to the market return, APT decomposes the return with a multiple number of factors. This idea became particularly popular for investors who aim to gain systematic risk other than market risk. However, the model specification aspect has been challenging to many practitioners as the theory does not require any specific sets of variables to be used (Azeez 2006).