IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jacrfn/v14y2002i4p47-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting Market Efficiency: The Stock Market As A Complex Adaptive System

Author

Listed:
  • Michael J. Mauboussin

Abstract

Well‐functioning financial markets are key to efficient resource allocation in a capitalist economy. While many managers express reservations about the accuracy of stock prices, most academics and practitioners agree that markets are efficient by some reasonable operational criterion. But if standard capital markets theory provides reasonably good predictions under “normal” circumstances, researchers have also discovered a number of “anomalies”—cases where the empirical data appear sharply at odds with the theory. Most notable are the occasional bursts of extreme stock price volatility (including the recent boom‐and‐bust cycle in the NASDAQ) and the limited success of the Capital Asset Pricing Model in accounting for the actual risk‐return behavior of stocks. This article addresses the question of how the market's efficiency arises. The central message is that managers can better understand markets as a complex adaptive system. Such systems start with a “heterogeneous” group of investors, whose interaction leads to “self‐organization” into groups with different investment styles. In contrast to market efficiency, where “marginal” investors are all assumed to be rational and well‐informed, the interaction of investors with different “decision rules” in a complex adaptive system creates a market that has properties and characteristics distinct from the individuals it comprises. For example, simulations of the behavior of complex adaptive systems suggest that, in most cases, the collective market will prove to be smarter than the average investor. But, on occasion, herding behavior by investors leads to “imbalances”—and, hence, to events like the crash of '87 and the recent plunge in the NASDAQ. In addition to its grounding in more realistic assumptions about the behavior of individual investors, the new model of complex adaptive systems offers predictions that are in some respects more consistent with empirical findings. Most important, the new model accommodates larger‐than‐normal stock price volatility (in statistician's terms, “fat‐tailed” distributions of prices) far more readily than standard efficient market theory. And to the extent that it does a better job of explaining volatility, this new model of investor behavior is likely to have implications for two key areas of corporate financial practice: risk management and investor relations. But even so, the new model leaves one of the main premises of modern finance theory largely intact–that the most reliable basis for valuing a company's stock is its discounted cash flow.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael J. Mauboussin, 2002. "Revisiting Market Efficiency: The Stock Market As A Complex Adaptive System," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 14(4), pages 47-55, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:14:y:2002:i:4:p:47-55
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6622.2002.tb00448.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2002.tb00448.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2002.tb00448.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Xin & Podobnik, Boris & Kenett, Dror Y. & Eugene Stanley, H., 2014. "Systemic risk and causality dynamics of the world international shipping market," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 415(C), pages 43-53.
    2. Jasman Tuyon & Zamri Ahmada, 2016. "Behavioural finance perspectives on Malaysian stock market efficiency," Borsa Istanbul Review, Research and Business Development Department, Borsa Istanbul, vol. 16(1), pages 43-61, March.
    3. Jasman Tuyon & Zamri Ahmad, 2021. "Dynamic risk attributes in Malaysia stock markets: Behavioural finance insights," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(4), pages 5793-5814, October.
    4. Dang, Tam Hoang Nhat & Balli, Faruk & Balli, Hatice Ozer & Gabauer, David & Nguyen, Thi Thu Ha, 2024. "Sectoral uncertainty spillovers in emerging markets: A quantile time–frequency connectedness approach," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 93(PB), pages 121-139.
    5. Mahla Afghahi & Farzaneh Nassirzadeh & Davood Askarany, 2024. "Exploring the impact of customer concentration on stock price crash risk," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    6. Thomas Schuster, 2003. "Meta-Communication and Market Dynamics. Reflexive Interactions of Financial Markets and the Mass Media," Finance 0307014, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Zhang, Yaozhong & Wu, Junfeng & Zhang, Chao, 2021. "Risk transfer between stock and open-ended equity fund markets in China based on a multi-layer network model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 565(C).
    8. Uechi, Lisa & Akutsu, Tatsuya & Stanley, H. Eugene & Marcus, Alan J. & Kenett, Dror Y., 2015. "Sector dominance ratio analysis of financial markets," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 421(C), pages 488-509.
    9. Yong Kheng Goh & Haslifah M Hasim & Chris G Antonopoulos, 2018. "Inference of financial networks using the normalised mutual information rate," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Jasman Tuyon & Zamri Ahmad, 2018. "Behavioural Asset Pricing Determinants in a Factor and Style Investing Framework," Capital Markets Review, Malaysian Finance Association, vol. 26(2), pages 32-52.
    11. Fang, Yi, 2012. "Aggregate investor preferences and beliefs in stock market: A stochastic dominance analysis," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 528-547.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:14:y:2002:i:4:p:47-55. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1078-1196 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.