Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41576139›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Revisiting the excess volatility puzzle through the lens of the Chiarella model.

Jutta G Kurth, Adam A Majewski, Jean-Philippe Bouchaud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jutta G KurthCFM Chair of Econophysics and Complex Systems, École polytechnique, Palaiseau Cedex, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7874-0004
Adam A MajewskiCapital Fund Management, Rue de l'Université, Paris, France.
Jean-Philippe BouchaudCapital Fund Management, Rue de l'Université, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We amend and extend the Chiarella model of financial markets to deal with arbitrary drift in long-term value in a consistent way. This allows us to improve upon existing calibration schemes, opening the possibility of calibrating individual monthly time series instead of classes of time series. The technique is employed on spot prices of four asset classes from ca. 1800 onward (stock indices, bonds, commodities, currencies). The so-called fundamental value is a direct output of the calibration, which allows us to (a) quantify the amount of excess volatility in these markets, which we find to be large (e.g. a factor [Formula: see text] for stock indices) and consistent with previous estimates; and (b) determine the distribution of mispricings (i.e. the log-difference between market price and value), which we find in many cases to be bimodal. Both findings are strongly at odds with the Efficient Market Hypothesis. We also study in detail the 'sloppiness' of the calibration, that is, the directions in parameter space that are weakly constrained by data. The main conclusions of our study are remarkably consistent across different asset classes, and reinforce the hypothesis that the medium-term fate of financial markets is determined by a tug-of-war between trend followers and fundamentalists.

Indexed as

CommerceModels, Economic

Identifiers

PMID41576139
PMCPMC12829972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.