Not by our current implementation. A free-market can approach a proxy of free with a few important caveats and ridden of foregone conclusions.
First, the freedom in free cannot be defined as absolutism, for an absolutism of freedom is by definition not free. Second, a market is a consequence of a marketplace of economic activity. Confounding a market with a marketplace is confounding consequence with cause, leading to the depravity of reason.
So, to achieve self-regulating marketplaces based on the kind of freedom that spawns dynamic meritocracies, one must redefine the definition of freedom from stale absolutism to a dynamic relativity theory. To learn how, start reading about Einstein’s theory of relativity, or learn about mine.
Based on the aforementioned, the cheap and wide-spread use of the economic catchphrase “free-market,” even by some reputable economists, does not quite do the term justice. Precisely because its principles have been so poorly defined is the economic outcomes of “free-markets” so disappointing and must their composition and validity be scrutinized, as your question rightfully indicates.