Essay on Bill Miller Value Trust Case Study

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

Fund flows are positively related to past performance, and better performing partnerships are more likely to raise follow-on funds and larger funds. Figure 1 aggregates the historical returns of Exhibition 1 and compares them to the fund sizes of Accel since 1983 vintage. The graph shows that there is a positive correlation between the historical returns of both the average and upper quartile with the fund size of Accel. However, it can be seen that as returns for top performers and average VC funds decline after 1996, Accel was still able to increase its fund size by 83%. Accel continued ability to raise larger funds implies not only the success of the company’s past strategic performance but also the existing high demand for investing with Accel. Hence, it would be justified that for the latest VC fund Accel has proposed to charge a carried interest of 30% rather than 20%. Our analysis then looks into this latest VC fund, Accel Partners VII, and forecasts the NPV and IRR of the investment under specific standard assumptions. Table 2 shows a part of our NPV and IRR calculations under different steady growth rate. It should be noted that for investors to be indifferent between investing in a typical 20/80 VC fund versus the 30/70 Accel VII fund, Accel must outperform the average in every NPV and IRR

The Yale Endowment is known in the financial industry as a pioneer in using a combination of innovative asset allocation and active management to produce impressive long-term performance. In fact, the Endowment produced a 17.8% average annual return, net of fees, in the ten-year period ending June 30, 2007.1 This performance is particularly impressive given that, in recent years, the Endowment portfolio has carried less than a 40% weighting in equities. Instead, under the leadership of Chief Investment Officer Dave Swensen, the Yale Investments Office

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.

The Selected Value (ticker VASVX) is an actively managed common stock fund with a 4 star Morningstar rating with a minimum investment of $3,000. This fund does not have a front or rear load fee. The total annual fund operating expenses are 0.41% which means that for every $100 you invest, $.41 goes to paying the

The premise of an efficient market is that stock prices adjust accordingly as information is received. The speed and accuracy of the pricing changes are a reflection of the strength of the market efficiency, where in theory a perfectly efficient market will re-adjust prices immediately and precisely with new information. The efficient market hypothesis aligns with beliefs about whether technical and fundamental analyses are useful in making investment decisions or whether a passive approach is appropriate. In a perfectly efficient market, these types of analyses are not able to predict stock price trends (based on market inefficiencies or price abnormalities) which could assist in portfolio positioning or investment management. However, some investors belive that the market pricing is not precise and that there are timing windows and pricing trends that can be identified through analysis of past performance and finding price abnormalities where all information is not correctly reflected in the stock price (Hirt, Block and Basu, 2006).

Under the idea that markets are efficient, stock prices reflect new information quickly and accurately. Furthermore, Morningstar (n.d.) contributes details on the strongest supportive theory of efficient markets, EMH exists in three forms: weak, semi-strong and strong. The hypothesis calls for the existence of informationally efficient markets, were current stock prices reflect all information, and attempts to outperform the market will only come in the form of riskier investments. Also, because of a large number of independent investors actively analyzing new information simultaneously as it enters the market, investors react accordingly and is immediately reflected in the stock

When establishing financial prices, the market is usually deemed to be well-versed and clever. In a stock market, stocks are based on the information given and should be priced at the accurate level. In the past, this was supposed to be guaranteed by the accessibility of sufficient information from investors. However, as new information is given the prices would shift. “Free markets, so the hypothesis goes, could only be inefficient if investors ignored price sensitive data. Whoever used this data could make large profits and the market would readjust becoming efficient once again” (McMinn, 2007, ¶ 1). This paper will identify the different forms of EMH, sources supporting and refuting the EMH and finally

“However, there are over 10,000 mutual funds in operation, and these funds vary greatly according to investment objective, size strategy, and style. Mutual funds are available for virtually every investment strategy (e.g. value, growth), every sector (e.g. biotech, internet), and every country and region of the world. So even the process of selecting a fund can be tedious” (Staff).

The world of stock investing has seen drastic changes since its popularization nearly two-hundred years ago. Currently, with the rise of big data in the age of information, one is better able to predict and understand the financial successes of certain companies and individuals in the stock market. One such advancement came from the introduction of value investing and the idea of intrinsic value – the underlying fair value of a stock based on its future earning power (Harper). One man, Warren Buffet, led to the rapid growth of value investing due to both his exceptional success and extreme transparency. This combination of success and transparency has given those interested in investing in the stock market a clear, yet successful path forward. His influence on investors, as well as the stock market itself, can be seen through the swift advancement of ‘Buffettology’, the study of Warren Buffett’s investing strategies, as well as the ‘Warren Buffett Effect’, an impact felt in the markets when Warren Buffett announces a change in his current position regarding stocks (Hyman).

Further, our strategy involved paying attention to current events and attempting to use them to generate a return. For example, Horizon Pharmaceuticals’ stock price took a nosedive after an October 19th New York Times article suggested that Horizon was attempting to thwart Express Scripts’ attempts to lower the price of prescription drugs. The decision was made to buy 100 shares of stock in Horizon when its price spiraled down to a measly $14.62 per share, as we expected Horizon would do something to stop the bleeding, and historically has been a pretty volatile stock. Horizon came back with a scorching rebuttal in an open letter later that day, spiking its stock price more than 30% on October 23rd, and by October 28th, this move landed us our greatest return of any stock that we purchased and held until the end of the period: 18% (see appendix).

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.

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