Anomalies

Edward E. Williams and John A. Dobelman

Chapter 7 in A Random Walk to Nowhere:How the Professors Caused a Real “Fraud-on-the-Market”, 2020, pp 115-130 from World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

Abstract: Precedent and inertia impede change in any significant field, such as the legal system or academic financial economics. In the Erika P. John vs. Halliburton fraud on the market case discussed earlier in the Preface and Chapter 1, the District and U.S. Supreme Courts acknowledged a growing field of anomalies research which calls into question the EMH. In spite of Halliburton’s presentation of numerous studies providing “overwhelming empirical evidence” which “now suggest[s] that capital markets are not fundamentally efficient” (Fed. Sec. Reporter, 2014), “scores” of “efficiency-denying anomalies” make market efficiency more contestable than ever (Langevoort, 2002). But in the end, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the EMH principles espoused in Basic Inc. v. Levinson (1988)…

Keywords: Efficient Market Hypothesis; Market Inefficiency; Mathematical Economics; Academic Finance; Real-World Markets; Fraud; Random Walk (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: B26 O16 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789811207792_0007 (application/pdf)
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789811207792_0007 (text/html)
Ebook Access is available upon purchase.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wsi:wschap:9789811207792_0007

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in World Scientific Book Chapters from World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Tai Tone Lim ().