rss

Confusion and Frustration for Traders

Maslow one commented that, when all you have is a hammer, you tend to treat everything as a nail. So it is with psychologists that involve themselves in markets. Lacking an understanding of actual speculative strategies and tactics–not to mention portfolio construction–they reduce performance problems to the lowest, psychological denominator. In so doing, they confuse cause and effect: they observe frustrated traders and assume that relieving frustration is the key to making money.

The professional speculator, unlike the retail daytrader, rarely falls into performance problems because of derelict discipline or runaway emotions. Rather, it is the very competence of the professional that leads to performance challenges. *It is when pros are most in sync with markets, identifying and profiting from themes and patterns, that they are most vulnerable to ever-changing patterns of direction, volatility, and correlation*. The confidence that permits healthy risk-taking under the best of speculative conditions inevitably gives way to confusion and frustration when skilled participants are no longer in sync with their markets. (more…)

Think Less & Keep It Simple

Every once in awhile I read something from another trader who I respect that I really wish I wrote myself. Here’s one such example:

 “One of the most difficult things to get investors and traders to understand is that no matter how much they investigate an investment, they will probably do better if they did less. This is certainly counter-intuitive, but the way that our brains function almost guarantees that this will happen. This kind of failure also happens to those investors frequently regarded as the smartest. In essence, the more information that investors have, the more opportunity that they have to choose the misinformation that suits their emotional purposes.

 

Speculation is observation, pure and experiential. Thinking isn’t necessary and often just gets in the way. Yet everywhere we turn, we read and hear opinion after opinion and explanation on top of explanation which claim to connect the dots between economic cause and market effect. Most of the marketplace is long on rationale and explanation and short on methods. (more…)

Herd Mentality

“Making money is easy, it is keeping it that is hard.” 

Keeping the profits is what successful trading is all about. It’s not about making money. It is about risk management. Good risk management translates into good profits. Great risk management translates to great profits and a long-term career.

So what about the herd mentality?

You have all heard about it over the years. Psychologists talk about it all the time, but how does it play out in the applied trading world?

The cliché is that following the herd is dangerous – bad for trading and leads to huge losses.

But my perspective is different and one that states that following the herd is  bad only if it was not YOUR game plan. You see, traders don’t mind losing money. That’s right. They don’t. What they mind is losing money doing stupid things. And one of the stupidest things a trader can do is to follow someone else’s game plan instead of their own.

If you are going to lose money (and you are going to about half the time) then you might as well lose it doing the right thing, which is listening to YOUR ideas. Your instincts. Your research and YOUR game plan.

Trading is not complicated. We make it complicated.

Simplify the process. Break your trading down to its basics and follow your plans. And if your plans happen to be in line with the herd, then so be it. And if they don’t, that is fine too. The point is to be consistent in your approach and let the market come to you.

7 Psychological habits

1. Overconfidence and optimism

Most of us are way too confident about our ability to foresee the future, and overwhelmingly too optimistic in our forecasts.

This finding holds across all disciplines, for both professionals and non-professionals, with the exceptions of weather forecasters and horse handicappers.

Lesson: Learn not to trust your gut.

2. Hindsight

We consistently exaggerate our prior beliefs about events.

Market forecasters spend a lot of time telling us why the market behaved the way it did. They’re great at telling us we need an umbrella after it starts raining as well, but it doesn’t improve our returns. We’re all useless at remembering what we used to believe.

Lesson: Keep a diary, revisit your thinking constantly.

3. Loss aversion

We hurt more when we sell at a loss than we feel happy when we (more…)

Psychological testing

The following questionnaire asks you to assess your emotional experience during your trading. Specifically, you’ll be rating how often you’ve experienced the following feelings over the past two weeks. Below, I’ll explain how to score the questionnaire; please complete the items before looking at the scoring. My next post will explain how to interpret your results.

Please use the following scale for your responses:

1 = rarely
2 = occasionally
3 = sometimes
4 = often
5 = most of the time

1) I feel happy when I’m trading __5___
2) I feel stressed when I’m trading __1___
3) I feel alert and energetic when I’m trading __5___
4) I feel discouraged when I’m trading __1___
5) I feel capable of succeeding at my trading __5___
6) I blame myself when my trading doesn’t work out __5___
7) I feel satisfied with my trading results __5___
8) I feel edgy and frustrated when I’m trading __1___
9) I feel in control of what happens in my trading __5___
10) I make impulsive decisions when I’m trading __1___ (more…)

More Research Confirms The Benefits Of Overconfidence

over-confidenceOverconfidence may cause people to invest too much in volatile stocks because such stocks have a greater diversity of beliefs, and so if people dismiss the objectively bad odds of beating the market, such people will be drawn to stocks where they are in the extremum, and highly volatile stocks have the most biased extremums.  One might think these people are irrational, but in the big picture people with this bias actually have a huge advantage, why Danny Kahneman said it’s the bias he most wants his children to have.
Two economists at Washington State University looked at twitter accounts for sports prognosticators and found that confidence was much more important than accuracy in generating followers. Their sad conclusion: Pundits have a false sense of confidence because that’s what the public, seeking to avoid the stress of uncertainty, craves. In other words, to be popular (read: successful), you need to be unwarrantedly confident. This takes either an amoral cognitive dissonance or ignorance. (more…)

How to compose a successful critical commentary

How to Criticize with Kindness: Philosopher Daniel Dennett on the Four Steps to Arguing Intelligently:

In Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking — the same fantastic volume that gave us Dennett on the dignity and art-science of making mistakes — he offers what he calls “the best antidote [for the] tendency to caricature one’s opponent”: a list of rules formulated decades ago by the legendary social psychologist and game theorist Anatol Rapoport, best-known for originating the famous tit-of-tat strategy of game theory.

Dennett synthesizes the steps: How to compose a successful critical commentary:

1.    You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.

2.    You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).

3.    You should mention anything you have learned from your target.

4.    Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.

If only the same code of conduct could be applied to critical commentary online, particularly to the indelible inferno of comments.

But rather than a naively utopian, Pollyannaish approach to debate, Dennett points out this is actually a sound psychological strategy that accomplishes one key thing: It transforms your opponent into a more receptive audience for your criticism or dissent, which in turn helps advance the discussion.

Think Less & Keep It Simple

“One of the most difficult things to get investors and traders to understand is that no matter how much they investigate an investment, they will probably do better if they did less. This is certainly counter-intuitive, but the way that our brains function almost guarantees that this will happen. This kind of failure also happens to those investors frequently regarded as the smartest. In essence, the more information that investors have, the more opportunity that they have to choose the misinformation that suits their emotional purposes.

 Speculation is observation, pure and experiential. Thinking isn’t necessary and often just gets in the way. Yet everywhere we turn, we read and hear opinion after opinion and explanation on top of explanation which claim to connect the dots between economic cause and market effect. Most of the marketplace is long on rationale and explanation and short on methods.

A series of experiments to examine the mental processes of doctors who were diagnosing illnesses found little relationship between the thoroughness of data collection and accuracy of the resulting diagnosis. Another study was done with psychologists and patient information and diagnosis. Again, increasing knowledge yielded no better results but did significantly increase confidence, something which the smartest among us are most prone to have in abundance. Unfortunately, in the markets, only the humble survive.

The inference is clear and important. Experienced analysts have an imperfect understanding of what information they actually use in making judgments. They are unaware of the extent to which their judgments are determined by just a few dominant factors, rather than by the systematic integration of all of their available information. Analysts use much less available information than they think they do.

Think Less & Keep It Simple

“One of the most difficult things to get investors and traders to understand is that no matter how much they investigate an investment, they will probably do better if they did less. This is certainly counter-intuitive, but the way that our brains function almost guarantees that this will happen. This kind of failure also happens to those investors frequently regarded as the smartest. In essence, the more information that investors have, the more opportunity that they have to choose the misinformation that suits their emotional purposes.

 Speculation is observation, pure and experiential. Thinking isn’t necessary and often just gets in the way. Yet everywhere we turn, we read and hear opinion after opinion and explanation on top of explanation which claim to connect the dots between economic cause and market effect. Most of the marketplace is long on rationale and explanation and short on methods.

A series of experiments to examine the mental processes of doctors who were diagnosing illnesses found little relationship between the thoroughness of data collection and accuracy of the resulting diagnosis. Another study was done with psychologists and patient information and diagnosis. Again, increasing knowledge yielded no better results but did significantly increase confidence, something which the smartest among us are most prone to have in abundance. Unfortunately, in the markets, only the humble survive.

The inference is clear and important. Experienced analysts have an imperfect understanding of what information they actually use in making judgments. They are unaware of the extent to which their judgments are determined by just a few dominant factors, rather than by the systematic integration of all of their available information. Analysts use much less available information than they think they do.

Think Less & Keep It Simple

Every once in awhile I read something from another trader who I respect that I really wish I wrote myself. Today’s post from Jeff Cooper is a must-read:

“One of the most difficult things to get investors and traders to understand is that no matter how much they investigate an investment, they will probably do better if they did less. This is certainly counter-intuitive, but the way that our brains function almost guarantees that this will happen. This kind of failure also happens to those investors frequently regarded as the smartest. In essence, the more information that investors have, the more opportunity that they have to choose the misinformation that suits their emotional purposes.

 

Speculation is observation, pure and experiential. Thinking isn’t necessary and often just gets in the way. Yet everywhere we turn, we read and hear opinion after opinion and explanation on top of explanation which claim to connect the dots between economic cause and market effect. Most of the marketplace is long on rationale and explanation and short on methods. (more…)