exactly zero serious people draw that connection, and it suggests that you either dont know what the term means or are constructing a strawman. Most of the economic literature for the last 150 has explored the constraints on markets and their function.

The efficient market hypothesis TM is a very narrow theory about price information, it says nothing about Economic Development or Direction. It is a theoretical extreme that can be used to compare real world Systems.

Further, China's success relies heavily on market processes

You're correct that China today is not fully capitalist, but you're using the term "5 year plan" in a way that overstates the difference with the U.S. The term "5-year plan" means different things pre- and post-Deng Xiaoping. Classic central planning was a disaster in China. In 1990, after 78 years of communist rule, China's per-capita income was comparable to India and Bangladesh. In the 1980s, Deng Xiaoping undertook market reforms which, over the next decades, turned China into an authoritarian state-capitalist country. It was widely known at the time the classic model had failed and that China was trying something different. Here's Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew talking about it early on: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jw8wI9risfI

The modern Chinese system embraces Econ 101 "capitalism" in the sense that it relies on markets for price discovery. Today, the "5 year plans" are more like what we would call "industrial policy" in the west. That's different than pure capitalism, but so is the American system. Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln both advocated strong federal intervention in the economy in service of industrial policy: https://emergingamerica.org/blog/alexander-hamilton-founder-... ("Hamilton’s plan involved the following aspects: 1) the creation of a Federally backed source of credit, the First Bank of the United States; 2) a system of tariffs, bounties, and other financial incentives or penalties to support the “essential” sectors of the U.S. economy; and 3) Federal support for developing manufactures by helping fund physical infrastructure ( transportation, in particular), regulating quality standards, and creating an institution to promote 'the prosecution and introduction of useful discoveries, inventions and improvements.'").

Gotcha. I was talking about American "people" generally; I don't know enough about the financial world to know if assets are appropriately priced or not. If you're talking about investment into China versus the U.S., I assume it reflects expropriation risk.