He noted that mispricing is the norm in equities, and very rare in real estate, so you can get a really good deal pretty often with shares.

This makes me scratch my head.

I've always thought the market with the most transparent pricing and the ability for anyone to actively participate (no barriers really based on price) would be closest to what one would expect an efficient market to look like. And that sounds a whole lot like the stock market.

On the other hand, real estate, because of how incredibly local it is (or has historically been), has had very limited market participation. And it's also very illiquid due to the high cost of transacting. That, plus the high price of a piece of real estate seems like it would create a perfect storm of barriers to market participation.

Shouldn't there be more inefficiencies in the real estate market than the stock market if that's the case? The competition seems like it would be far less in real estate, which I thought should translate to a less efficient market and more inefficiencies to exploit.