We have covered in the previous sections of portfolio management topics including investment framework, time horizon and position sizing. We now focus on perhaps the most important aspect of successful investing: behaviour. How can we instil discipline into our investment framework? Investor time horizon and behaviour are intrinsically linked. For instance if the market sells off aggressively on the back of a disappointing set of earnings announcements do you react or do you sit on your hands? If it’s the latter, then you may be better suited to more strategic, longer-term investing given you have the discipline to hold your nerve. A period of self-reflection is important for most investors and like life you learn a whole lot more about the nature of your character when the market is slumping than when it is making higher highs. Crucially, we must ask ourselves a simple question: is this market noise or has there been a visible shift in the factors determining our longer-term view.
I have read the famous Market Wizards book by Jack Schwager a number of times. It is a fascinating read and I always learn something new. There are five key lessons that I have take from studying these super-investors/ traders:
Without exception, legends of the investment world including Ed Seykota, Marty Schwartz, Richard Dennis and Bruce Kovner pointed to human psychology as a major contributing factor to investment success. In this couple of paragraphs we take a closer look at some of these behavioral biases so we are better prepared to recognize them in ourselves.
There are two key questions that behaviour models need to address:
The phrase the “price is right” is short-hand for the efficient market hypothesis. However in some Behavioural models prices do not equal fundamental values – Why? The rational traders are inhibited in some way from arbitraging away any mis-pricing caused by the noise traders.
Psychological experiments tend to show that individuals make systematic mistakes. I have compiled a list of the more common examples below:
It is instructive to dig a little deeper into just some of these examples
Loss/ Risk Aversion – Ellsberg Paradox
Numerous experiments have shown that individuals do not follow the basic axioms of expected utility theory. The most famous experiments were conducted by Savage (1964). In short there are two boxes each containing a mixture of red and blue balls presented. You are told that box A contains 100 balls with 50 red and 50 black. Box B also contains 100 balls. We are not told how many are red and how many are black. You are told that you have the opportunity of winning $100 if you reach into one of the boxes (without looking) and choose a red ball. The facilitator has one simple question: which box would you choose? The majority will opt for A. Lets continue. Using the same boxes, the facilitator advises that you will receive $100 if you draw out a black ball. Now which ball will you choose? Most likely it will be A again. This is fascinating and illogical. In the first round you assumed that B contained fewer red balls and more black balls. If you are rational you should opt for box B this time around. The research indicates that we favour ”Known probabilities (Box A) over Unknown probabilities (Box B)”.
The impact of Loss Aversion on lifetime utility clearly depends upon the frequency with which investors monitor their portfolios – i.e. the more often that an investor reviews their individual portfolio holdings then the more likely they are to experience negative periods.
Apparently, people conform for two main reasons: because they want to fit in with the group (normative influence) and because they believe the group is better informed than they are (informational influence).
Phone: 01 2248790
Email: info@priyawm.ie
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional | 11 months | The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". |
viewed_cookie_policy | 11 months | The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
_ga | 1 year 11 months 29 days | It records a particular ID used to come up with data about website usage by the user. It is a HTTP cookie that expires after 2 years. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
NID,CONSENT,1P_JAR | Various | Set by Google. This group sets a unique ID to remember your preferences and other information such as website statistics and track conversion rates. |