The “article” is trying to do a basic refutation of the efficient market hyppthesis (EMH), but there’s really not much meat here. In fact this looks like pretty weak content marketing in order to sell a product (and the tone is little ranty - Eugene Fama is just “someone in academia”???). The author’s argument is that the EMH doesn’t really work because we can’t assume information spreads instantly - which is true, okay sure, but that’s actually not a core claim Fama postulated in the EMH.<p>While we’re at it, what’s the point of quantifying your pedagogy using the mathematical formalisms if you don’t explain any of the variables? More importantly none of the conclusions are rigorously defended, which is suspect since there are half-baked attempts at quantifying the ideas. The author presents an under-specified equation and then basically sums up his argument by saying, “well this seems like a stretch, because everyone wouldn’t receive the same information and act simultaneously, right?”<p>But that’s not what the EMH postulates! Informational efficiency does not require simultaneity. Either the author doesn’t actually understand the EMH or isn’t attempting to refute it in good faith. Even if the model doesn’t perfectly map real world markets, it’s not so simple than you can just rhetorically debunk it like this.<p>I think this[1] is a much more substantive and nuanced article on the same topic. It was coauthored by Cliff Asness, who has the following qualifications:<p>1. He has a PhD in finance/economics from the University of Chicago. His dissertation was focused on value momentum.<p>2. His advisor was Eugene Fama himself. He’s famously disagreed with (or at least critiqued) his mentor’s work.<p>3. He founded AQR Capital Management, one of the most successful hedge funds in the world. As can be expected, he’s now a billionaire.<p>4. He still regularly publishes research and hosts a commentary blog in which he critiques the research of others.<p>Asness obviously doesn’t believe in the EMH, but his take is much more balanced than an outright refutation.<p>_________________________<p>1. <a href="https://www.aqr.com/-/media/AQR/Documents/Insights/Journal-Article/The-Great-Divide.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.aqr.com/-/media/AQR/Documents/Insights/Journal-A...</a>