Skip to content

CMA Final · Strategic Financial Management · Efficient Market Hypothesis

A analyst tests weak-form efficiency on Nifty-listed stock Surya Ltd. Using 101 daily returns she finds the first-order serial correlation coefficient is 0.02, statistically insignificant. A trading rule based on past prices earns no excess return after costs. Which conclusion is most consistent with this evidence?

The evidence is consistent with weak-form efficiency. Insignificant serial correlation and no profit from past-price trading rules show that historical prices carry no exploitable information. The test uses only price history, so it cannot prove or disprove semi-strong or strong forms.

  1. ASemi-strong form is proven false because prices ignore public news
  2. BPast price information cannot be used to earn abnormal returns, consistent with weak-form efficiencyCorrect
  3. CStrong form is proven true because insiders earn no gains
  4. DPrices follow a predictable cycle that technical analysts can exploit

Explanation

Insignificant serial correlation and no profitable rule based on past prices support weak-form efficiency. The test uses only historical prices, so it says nothing proven about semi-strong or strong forms.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Efficient Market Hypothesis shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

More Efficient Market Hypothesis questions