What is the bogle refutation to the 'Inelastic Markets Hypothesis'?
IMH, in a paper by [Xavier Gabaix](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=297281) and [Ralph S. J. Koijen](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=374406) (if I've understood it correctly) suggests that small amounts of money flowing in or out of individual stocks or sectors cause large amount (perhaps \~5 times as much) of passive money to follow them, amplifying price swings.
Suggested strategies to profit from inelastic markets are momentum strategies, and perhaps buyback funds, since when a company performs a buyback a tonne of passive money will follow it (wheras dividends are reinvested across the whole index, so disproportionately ). Plus frontrunning the index rebalancing, which already happens and is known to cause drag on index fund performance.