The article deals with the theoretical classification of “classic” capital market securities, i.e. corporate stocks and bonds. Its aim was to make a detailed analysis of the individual types of these securities from the viewpoint of their main characteristic features, and to look for possible ways of systemizing them and distinguishing them as unambiguously as possible. As the aim of this analysis was to identify the most important and typical properties of not only corporate stocks and long-term bonds that are commonplace in investing but also of those that are rare on financial markets, the analysis was made from a global viewpoint, i.e. without regard to the individual countries’ legislative conditions.The analysis focused, above all, on looking for ways to construct the individual types of stocks and bonds and of the most important rights connected with them. Using the obtained results, these types were mutually compared and possible ways of their systemization were explored. Taking into account these facts, certain significant properties (which, however, concern all securities in general, such as “issuer type” or conditions of transferability/ways of tradeability) were intentionally abstracted.The result of the analysis confirms the meaningfulness of certain existing theories concerning the existence of three relatively different groups of “classic” securities: common stocks, preferred stocks, and bonds. At the same time, the analysis has shown that as far as this classification is concerned, it is based mainly on the function of the securities, which means that the properties regarding their structure and legal content are covered only partially. This is also proved by making a proposal for a comprehensive systemization, which shows that on the current financial market there are many situations when (except the legal identification) it is difficult to judge from the particular properties of a security whether it is a bond or a stock, or (in the latter case) which type of stock it is. For the above-mentioned reason, the conclusion stresses the necessity to create at least partly harmonised international legislation in the given area, and presents recommendations for the establishment of the fundamental part of a harmonised system of legislation, which increasingly appears to be essential.