Part 4: Behavioral Finance and Biases
Key insights. Human psychology can materially affect trading decisions. Common pitfalls include the favorite–longshot bias (systematically overvaluing low-probability outcomes and undervaluing high-probability ones), overconfidence (overestimating one’s knowledge or predictive skill, leading to excessive risk-taking and under-diversification), and recency bias (overweighting recent events as if they were durable trends). The antidote is a structured process: quantify probabilities, compare them to market-implied odds, follow predefined sizing rules, use checklists, and actively seek contrary evidence. Awareness is step one; consistent process is step two.
Favorite–Longshot Bias
The favorite–longshot bias is widely documented in price-based forecasting venues: participants tend to overpay for unlikely outcomes and underpay for highly likely outcomes. In practice, positions on extreme longshots often have negative expected value once you account for true base rates and fees, while positions aligned with high-probability outcomes can offer better risk-adjusted value—even if they are less “exciting.”
Why does this happen? First, there’s the appeal of a dramatic payoff profile: a very small outlay for a potentially large return can feel attractive even when the odds do not justify the price. Second, people routinely overweight very small probabilities, perceiving “rare” as less rare than it is. Third, narrative pulls matter: unexpected outcomes are engaging stories, which can crowd out sober probability assessments. Finally, pricing can reflect this demand: if many participants prefer longshots, quoted prices may embed an extra premium on those outcomes.
How to avoid it? Treat low-probability outcomes with extra skepticism. Ask whether the break-even frequency implied by price is remotely supported by historical or model-based base rates. Do not dismiss “favorites” simply because the payout per contract is modest; if your assessed probability exceeds the market-implied probability by a healthy margin (after fees), the trade can be attractive. Prefer model- or data-driven estimates over intuition, and be cautious with combinatorial exposures that effectively convert a set of likely views into one low-probability composite.
Overconfidence and Recency Bias
Overconfidence in trading shows up as oversized positions, narrow concentration, and insufficient respect for uncertainty. A few wins can create an illusion of special insight and a tendency to dismiss disconfirming evidence. Recency bias compounds the problem by extrapolating the latest pattern—price momentum, a streak of personal success, or a recent shock—as if it were the base case, while long-run frequencies are ignored.
How to avoid it? Keep a simple log of each trade: your pre-trade probability, the market-implied probability, the sizing rationale, and the outcome. This record often reveals overestimation of skill or edge and helps recalibrate. Proactively read or write a short “contrary case” before entering a position: what specific facts would make me wrong? Anchor forecasts to base rates first, then adjust for current information. Diversify across uncorrelated markets to keep single-theme conviction from dominating total risk.
Structured Decision-Making
A lightweight decision framework reduces bias and improves consistency:
Research check. Have you gathered objective data and identified the key drivers of the outcome?
Probability & edge. What is your assessed probability (p)? What is the market-implied probability (c) (price/100)? Is (p) materially greater than (c) after fees?
Sizing rule. Apply a fractional-Kelly or fixed-fraction rule to translate edge into position size; avoid discretionary “feel” sizing.
Correlation scan. Are you already exposed to the same underlying theme elsewhere? If so, size the theme, not each ticket independently.
Bias audit. Are you trading to “get even,” chasing a narrative, or extrapolating a short streak? If yes, pause.
When in doubt, trade smaller. Small-scale tests of a new idea protect capital while you validate that your edge is real. If emotions run hot—after a large loss or win—step away. Process discipline, not short-term emotion, should govern entries and exits.
Bottom line. Trade the probability, not the story. Choose positions where quantified edge exists, size them conservatively, spread risk across uncorrelated markets, and let a written process override impulses. This approach yields more consistent outcomes and aligns with Glimpse’s suitability and client-protection standards.
Last updated