Skip to main content

The Rise and Fall of Neoclassical Finance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Financial Consequences of Behavioural Biases
  • 1408 Accesses

Abstract

The principles of neoclassical finance can be rationalized in terms of classical game theory, which reduces human behaviour to pure mathematics. The neoclassical finance era started in the early 1950s with the work of Harry Markowitz on portfolio optimization theory, followed by the work of Modigliani and Miller on capital structure and the work of Sharpe and Lintner on asset pricing models, including the CAPM, and the development of the efficient market hypothesis by Eugene Fama. While the principles of neoclassical finance, as the mainstream school of thought, were at one time unquestionable, some market events pose a challenge to the soundness of these principles, particularly the propositions that market prices reflect the intrinsic values of the underlying assets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, S., & Born, J. (2002). Closed-End Fund Pricing: Theories and Evidence. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Black, F. (1993). Beta and Return. Journal of Portfolio Management, 20, 8–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, F., & Scholes, M. (1973). The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities. Journal of Political Economy, 81, 637–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. (1998). Revisiting the Capital Asset Pricing Model. Dow Jones Asset Manager, May/June, 20–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caginalp, G., & DeSantis, M. (2011). A Paradigm for Quantitative Behavioral Finance. American Behavioral Scientist, 55, 1014–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caplinger, D. (2012, December 12). Negative-Beta Stocks: Worth Buying? https://www.fool.com/how-to-invest/2012/12/12/negative-beta-stocks-worth-buying.aspx.

  • Cassidy, J. (2010, January 11). After the Blowup: Laissez-Faire Economists Do Some Soul-Searching—And Finger-Pointing. The New Yorker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, N. (2012, January 24). Efficient Markets Hypothesis Inefficient. Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, K., & Titman, S. (1997). Evidence on the Characteristics of Cross Sectional Variation in Stock Returns. Journal of Finance, 52, 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehnad, K. (2009). Efficient Market Hypothesis: Another Victim of the Great Recession. Journal of Financial Transformation, 27, 35–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. (1965). Random Walks in Stock Market Prices. Financial Analysts Journal, 21, 55–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. (1970). Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work. Journal of Finance, 25, 383–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., & French, K. (1993). Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 33, 3–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., & French, K. (1996). Multifactor Explanations of Asset Pricing Anomalies. Journal of Finance, 51, 55–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., & French, K. (2004). The Capital Asset Pricing Model: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18, 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. & MacBeth, J. (1973). Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests. Journal of Political Economy, 81, 607–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J. (2009). The Myth of Rational Market. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, C. R., Liu, Y. & Zhu, H. (2015). … and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns, Journal of Financial Studies (published online).

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugen, R. (1999). The Inefficient Stock Market. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagannathan, R., & McGrattan, E. R. (1995). The CAPM Debate. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review, 19, 2–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. (1978). Some Anomalous Evidence Regarding Market Efficiency. Journal of Financial Economics, 6, 95–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jerusalem Post. (2009, June 11). Has ‘Guiding Model’ for Global Markets Gone Haywire?

    Google Scholar 

  • Kothari, S. P., Shanken, J., & Sloan, R. G. (1995). Another Look at the Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns. Journal of Finance, 50, 185–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, T.-Y. (2011). Yes, the CAPM is Dead. Paper presented at the 19th annual conference on Pacific Basin Finance, Economics, Accounting and Management, Taipei, 8–9 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leamer, E. (1983). Let’s Take the Con Out of Econometrics. American Economic Review, 73, 31–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lintner, J. (1965). The Valuation of Risky Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47, 13–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E. (1978). Asset Prices in an Exchange Economy. Econometrica, 46, 1429–1445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, H. M. (1952). Portfolio Selection. Journal of Finance, 7, 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. C. (1973). An Intertemporal Capital Asset Pricing Model. Econometrica, 41, 867–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. H. (1958). The Cost of Capital. Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment. American Economic Review, 48, 261–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. H. (1963). Corporate Income Taxes and the Cost of Capital: A Correction. American Economic Review, 53, 433–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moosa, I. A. (2002). Exchange Rates and Fundamentals: A Microeconomic Approach. Economia Internazionale, 55, 551–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moosa, I. A. (2012). The Failure of Financial Econometrics: “Stir-Fry” Regressions as an Illustration. Journal of Financial Transformation, 34, 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moosa, I. A. (2017a). Econometrics as a Con Art: Exposing the Shortcomings and Abuses of Econometrics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Moosa, I. A. (2017b). The Econometrics of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Applied Economics, 49, 4927–4945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moosa, I. A. (2017c). Publish or Perish: Perceived Benefits versus Unintended Consequences. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nocera, J. (2009, June 5). Poking Holes in a Theory on Markets. New York Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasour, E. C. (1989). The Efficient-Market Hypothesis and Entrepreneurship. Review of Austrian Economics, 3, 95–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quiggin, J. (2009). Six Refuted Doctrines. Economic Papers, 28, 239–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. A. (1978). The Current Status of the Capital Asset Pricing Model. Journal of Finance, 33, 885–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. J. (1982). Capital Market Theory—A Case Study in Methodological Conflict. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 9, 443–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe, W. F. (1964). Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions of Risk. Journal of Finance, 19, 425–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiller, R. J. (2000). Irrational Exuberance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiller, R. J. (2003). From Efficient Markets Theory to Behavioral Finance. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17, 84–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shostak, F. (1997). In Defense of Fundamental Analysis: A Critique of the Efficient Market Hypothesis. Review of Austrian Economics, 10, 27–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, J. (2010, April 9). The Efficient Market Theory and the Recent Financial Crisis. The Inagural Conference of the Institute of New Economic Thinking, King’s College, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statman, M. (1999). Behavioral Finance: Past Battles and Future Engagements. Financial Analysts Journal, November/December 18–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subrahmanyam, A. (2010). The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns: What Have We Learnt from the Past Twenty-Five Years of Research? European Financial Management, 16, 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2011, February 26). Killing off the Monster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volcker, P. (2011, November 24). Financial Reform: Unfinished Business, New York Review of Books. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/nov/24/financial-reform-unfinished-business/.

  • von Mises, L. (1998). Human Action: A Treatise on Economics. Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washington Post (2009, June 7). Book Review: ‘The Myth of the Rational Market’ by Justin Fox. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/05/AR2009060502053.html.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Imad A. Moosa .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Moosa, I.A., Ramiah, V. (2017). The Rise and Fall of Neoclassical Finance. In: The Financial Consequences of Behavioural Biases. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69389-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69389-7_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69388-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69389-7

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics