Oo Some academic work has criticized or found flaws with parts of the EMH. For example, when beta is used as the measure of risk, it appears that certain types of investments, when held in a portfolio, actually DO outperform the risk-adjusted benchmark portfolio and that the outperformance is statistically significant. For example, "small company stocks" seem to outperform a benchmark portfolio with a similar beta, but consisting of a mix of medium and large company stocks. Assume the studies are properly designed, executed and interpreted. Which of the following statement BEST summarizes an argument that an academic defender of EMH might offer in response to this finding? Beta alone may not be the best measure of financial risk. The existence of insider trading is evidence against EMH The betas of the studied stocks, and therefore the betas of the studied portfolios, were mis-calculated. EMH must be correct as it is based on a significant body of studies, so this study, and studies like it must be wrong. Markets may deviate temporarily from "true" pricing, but in the long run the stock market is a "weighing" market