 Semi-strong form efficient market hypothesis says that security prices reflect all public information available in the market. So there are certain tests that are conducted in order to check whether the data sport these hypotheses are not. Two types of studies are there in this regard. The first is the time series studies and the second is the event studies. Time series analysis of the returns for individual stock using the available public information beyond the pure market information. In terms of event studies, the examination is there that how fast the stock prices adjust to specific significant economic event. The test results signify that the results should adjust securities return for the market during the particular period under the study. This differential return is termed as the abnormal return. So far as the time series tests are there, these are the time series tests for abnormal rate of returns in these tests. Short horizon returns have limited results that is sported by the empirical literature. But long-time horizon results analysis are based on dividend yield, default spread and the term structure spread. So far as the studies on quarterly earnings reporting is there, these studies say that quarterly earnings reporting may yield abnormal return due to the unanticipated report earning changes, which means that large standardized unexpected earnings result over 50% of the changes happening after the quarterly earnings announcements. Long-time periods effects have also been studied in the empirical literature and in this case the January effect or the January anomaly has also been considered, which says that the stocks with negative returns during prior year had high returns right after the first month of the coming year. Also there are studies that considered certain other effects of a year in terms of the calendar effects. In these calendar effects, these studies support that all the market's cumulative advances occur during the first half of the trading period. And for large firms, the negative Monday effect occurred before the market opened and this effect is termed as the weekend effect, whereas for smaller firms, most of the negative Monday effect occurred on Monday, which is termed as the Monday trading effect. The studies in this regard also experienced the use of accounting ratios that an investor used in order to decide his buying or selling decisions. In this case, the price earning ratios are studied in the empirical finance literature. The literature shows that low and high price earnings stock showed superior and significantly inferior risk adjusted results that respectively relative to the overall market. So far as the publicly available price earning ratio usage is there, such information possesses valuable information regarding the future returns and the results on using the price earning ratio for the investment decision. The results in these studies are inconsistent with the semi strong efficiency. Also there are studies on price earning growth rates or the peg rates in which the studies have hypothesized an inverse relationship between the peg ratio and the subsequent rate of return. In this case, the results are mixed using the peg ratio to select a particular stock. Empirical finance literature also studied the size effect on the investment decision of the investors and in this case, the size effect has been studied in terms of overall market value. Here several studies examined the impact of size on the risk adjusted rate of returns and in these studies, the results indicate that the small firm consistently experience significantly large risk adjusted returns than the larger firms and firm size has been observed by these studies being a major efficient market anomaly. The price earning studies and the size studies are experienced by these empirical finance researchers as the dual test of efficient market hypothesis and the capital asset pricing model. Then there are studies on the neglected firms that confirms small firms effect and this caused by lack of information and limited institutional interest. This neglected firm concept was applied across size classes. There is another study that contradicted the above results. So in this particular case, we can say that results are also mixed. Then the empirical studies also considered the trading volume for the investment decision by the investors. These studied the relationship between returns, market value and the trading volume and size effect they also considered and confirmed in the presence of the trading volume as a factor that determine the investors decision. These studies find no significant difference between mean returns of highest and lowest trading portfolios. The second class of studies in this case of semi strong efficient market hypothesis is the event studies and in these event studies, it was observed that stock prices quickly adjust to three things namely unexpected event and economic news, announcements of stock splits and accounting changes, corporate events such as mergers and other offerings. But these studies observed that these offer no opportunities for earning abnormal returns. The studies in this case of event studies also found that EPOs seem to be underpriced but that varies over time and the price is adjusted within one day after the announcement. These above studies, all of the above studies sport the semi strong firm efficient market hypothesis. If we draw a conclusion from the studies we have recently seen, the conclusion is that we have a mixed evidence for the semi strong firm efficient market hypothesis where we have strong support from numerous event studies with the exception of exchange listed studies. This also included the cross section predictors such as size, book value to market value ratio when there is an expensive monetary policy and the earning to price ratio and the neglected firms.