• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Chap 1 -EMH Shiller's methodology

Bill SD

Ton up Member
Hi,
Three Questions on the section about Shiller's test of the semi-strong form of the Efficient Markets Hypothesis (EMH):

1. This CT8 post: Ch1 & Ch8 | Actuarial Education (acted.co.uk) explains Shiller's observed "systematic forecast errors" to mean systematically over-estimating or under-estimating the price. Does this mean that Shiller's discounted dividend model always overestimated the price of each equity at each month over the 100 years?

2. Could one argue that the results of his test also contradicts the strong form of EMH - since insiders (eg Directors) may know future dividends (in the same way that Shiller knew the 100 years of dividend data) but it still wouldn't help them predict the future share price?

3. Please explain these criticisms of Shiller's methodology (page 12 of notes):
"1) the choice of terminal value for the stock price
2) the use of a constant discount rate
3) bias in estimates of the variances due to autocorrelation
4) possible non-stationarity of the series, ie the series may have stochastic trends which invalidate the measurements obtained for the variance of the stock price."

Wouldn't the terminal value be the observed share price at end of 100 years? And what is meant by 3) and 4)?

Thanks in advance!
 
On reflection, a simple answer to Question 2 is that disproving semi-strong EMH automatically disproves strong EMH (since if markets don't auto consider public information they certainly don't consider confidential information) .
But appreciate any answers to Questions 1 and 3 (above).
 
Yes, exactly on Question 2!

For Question 1, not quite. What Shiller's discounted dividend model is doing is underestimating the variance of the stock price. In other words, what was being observed was that historic prices were being underestimated by the model in good times and overestimated by the model in bad times.

For Question 3:
- the terminal value is the discounted value of dividends if the share is held in perpetuity. However, Shiller used an arbitrary value for the terminal value in the model.
- 3) means that the model did not take into account that there is a correlation between stock prices in different periods, which would have affected the estimated variances.
- For 4), Shiller's model assumed stationarity, ie the variance of the dividends is constant (and independent of the time). However, this may not be true in practice.
 
Back
Top