Finance pp 127-134 | Cite as

Efficient Market Hypothesis

  • Burton G. Malkiel
Part of the The New Palgrave book series (NPA)

Abstract

A capital market is said to be efficient if it fully and correctly reflects all relevant information in determining security prices. Formally, the market is said to be efficient with respect to some information set, ϕ, if security prices would be unaffected by revealing that information to all participants. Moreover, efficiency with respect to an information set, ϕ, implies that it is impossible to make economic profits by trading on the basis of ϕ.

Keywords

Stock Price Abnormal Return Price Change Mutual Fund Financial Economic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Bachelier, L. 1900. Théorie de la speculation. Annales de l’Ecole normale Supérieure, 3rd series, 17, 21–86. Trans. by A.J. Boness in The Random Character of Stock Market Prices, ed. P.H. Cootner, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1967Google Scholar
  2. Ball, R. 1978. Anomalies in relationships between securities’ yields and yield-surrogates. Journal of Financial Economics 6(2–3), 103–26, June/September, 1981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banz, R. 1981. The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of Financial Economics 9(1), March 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Basu, S. 1977. Investment performance of common stocks in relation to their price earnings ratios: a test of the efficient markets hypothesis. Journal of Finance 32(3), June, 663–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Basu, S. 1983. The relationship between earnings’ yield, market value and the return of NYSE common stocks: further evidence. Journal of Financial Economics 12(1), June, 129–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornell, B. and Roll, R. 1981. Strategies for pairwise competitions in markets and organizations. Bell Journal of Economics 12(1), Spring, 201–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cowles, A. 1933. Can stock market forecasters forecast? Econometrica 1(3), July, 309–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cowles, A. and Jones, H. 1937. Some posteriori probabilities in stock market action. Econometrica 5(3), July, 280–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dodd, P. 1981. The effect on market value of transactions in the market for corporate control, Proceedings of Seminar on the Analysis of Security Prices, CRSP. Chicago: University of Chicago, May.Google Scholar
  10. Fama, E. 1965. The behavior of stock market prices. Journal of Business 38(1), January, 34–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fama, E. and Blume, M. 1966. Filter rules and stock market trading. Security Prices: A Supplement, Journal of Business 39(1), January, 226–41.Google Scholar
  12. Fama, E., Fisher, L., Jensen, M. and Roll, R. 1969. The adjustment of stock prices to new information. International Economic Review 10(1), February, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. French, K. 1980. Stock returns and the weekend effect. Journal of Financial Economics 8(1), March, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Friend, I., Brown, F., Herman, E. and Vickers, D. 1962. A Study of Mutual Funds. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  15. Granger, D. and Morgenstern, O. 1963. Spectral analysis of New York Stock Market prices. Kyklos 16, January, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grossman, S. and Stiglitz, J. 1980. On the impossibility of informationally efficient markets. American Economic Review 70(3), June, 393–408.Google Scholar
  17. Gultekin, M. and Gultekin, N. 1983. Stock market seasonality, international evidence. Journal of Financial Economics 12(4), December, 469–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jaffé, J. 1974. The effect of regulation changes on insider trading. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 5(1), Spring, 93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaffé, J. and Westerfield, R. 1984. The week-end effect in common stock returns: the international evidence. Unpublished manuscript, University of Pennsylvania, December.Google Scholar
  20. Jensen, M. 1969. Risk, the pricing of capital assets, and the evaluation of investment portfolios. Journal of Business 42(2), April, 167–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jensen, M. 1978. Some anomalous evidence regarding market efficiency. Journal of Financial Economics 6(2–3), June-September, 95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keim, D. 1983. Size related anomalies and stock return seasonality: further empirical evidence. Journal of Financial Economics 12(1), June, 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kendall, M. 1953. The analysis of economic time series. Part I: Prices. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 96(1), 11–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kleidon, A. 1986. Variance bounds, tests and stock price valuation models. Journal of Political Economy 94(5), October, 953–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kraus, A. and Stoll, H. 1972. Price impacts of block trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Journal of Finance 27(3), June, 569–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Malkiel, B. 1980. The Inflation-Beater’s Investment Guide. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  27. Malkiel, B. 1985. A Random Walk Down Wall Street. 4th edn, New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  28. Mandelbrot, B. 1966. Forecasts of future prices, unbiased markets, and martingale models. Security Prices: A Supplement, Journal of Business 39(1), January, 242–55.Google Scholar
  29. Marsh, T. and Merton, R. 1983. Aggregate dividend behavior and its implications for tests of stock market rationality. Working Paper, Sloan School of Management, September.Google Scholar
  30. Merton, R. 1980. On estimating the expected return on the market: an exploratory investigation. Journal of Financial Economics 8(4), December, 323–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Osborne, M. 1959. Brownian motions in the stock market. Operations Research 7(2), March/April, 145–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pearson, K. and Rayleigh, Lord. 1905. The problem of the random walk. Nature 72, 294, 318, 342.Google Scholar
  33. Rendelman, R., Jones, C. and Latané, H. 1982. Empirical anomalies based on unexpected earnings and the importance of risk adjustments. Journal of Financial Economics 10(3), November, 269–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roberts, H. 1959. Stock market ‘patterns’ and financial analysis: methodological suggestions. Journal of Finance 14(1), March, 1–10.Google Scholar
  35. Roberts, H. 1967. Statistical versus clinical prediction of the stock market. Unpublished manuscript, CRSP, Chicago: University of Chicago. May.Google Scholar
  36. Roll, R. 1984. Orange juice and weather. American Economic Review 74(5), December, 861–80.Google Scholar
  37. Samuelson, P. 1965. Proof that properly anticipated prices fluctuate randomly. Industrial Management Review 6(2), Spring, 41–9.Google Scholar
  38. Scholes, M. 1972. The market for securities: substitution versus price pressure and the effects of information on share prices. Journal of Business 45(2), April, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shiller, R.J. 1981. Do stock prices move too much to be justified by subsequent changes in dividends? American Economic Review 71(3), June, 421–36.Google Scholar
  40. Solnik, B. 1973. Note on the validity of the random walk for European stock prices. Journal of Finance 28(5), December, 1151–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Thompson, R. 1978. The information content of discounts and premiums on closed-end fund shares. Journal of Financial Economics 6(2–3), June-September, 151–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Watts, R. 1978. Systematic ‘abnormal’ returns after quarterly earnings announcements. Journal of Financial Economics 6(2–3), June-September, 127–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Working, H. 1934. A random difference series for use in the analysis of time series. Journal of the American Statistical Association 29, March, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Burton G. Malkiel

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations