Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 136

Anchoring holds back your investing

We all have trouble buying stocks that have gone up and selling stocks that have gone down. If that’s you then I regret to inform you that you are being affected by a well-established financial concept called ‘anchoring’.

Source: Wikipedia

Source: Wikipedia

Source: Wikipedia

You hear the issue every day in a broking office and in stock discussions. It’s when someone says “I can’t buy that because the share price is up X%” or “You can’t sell that, the price is down Y%”. An even more soft-brained development on the theme is when you find yourself saying “It’s down X% so it’s cheap” or “It’s up Y% so it’s expensive.”

It’s the future that matters

Making money in shares is about where the share price is going in the future. Where the share price has been in the past is pretty much irrelevant. What you paid for a stock and what price it was in the past is a distraction from what the company is worth now or in the future and where the market might take the price.

Anchoring, also known as ‘focusing bias’, is the use of a reference point against which to judge value. For share prices it means using past share prices as a reference point for the current share price even though the past price is not a factor in assessing current value.

How often do you reference how much a stock has moved from the lowest price it hit or the highest price it hit? Those prices form an anchor point from which we judge the current price and, left to idly ponder, we tend to develop a bias that says something is expensive or cheap.

Past performance is simply a statement of where the price was. The more important consideration is where the price is now relative to what the company is worth. On the basis that the market's appreciation of the value of a company changes as time progresses, past prices become redundant as a reference point as soon as the value of a company changes, which arguably it does every day.

Academic studies suggest that the less known about the subject matter, the more prevalent the use of anchoring. In other words, the higher the level of guesswork involved, the more likely we are to employ anchoring, to use (even randomly generated) reference points to help us make a decision we have to make. It’s grasping for an ‘irrelevant crutch’. There is no wisdom in basing investment decisions on anything other than an estimate of current value.

When forecasters ‘herd’ together

On a related matter there is an interesting phenomenon in forecasting which says that the more uncertainty there is and the more difficult it is to forecast something, the more tightly grouped the forecasts tend to be. You would imagine the opposite but it seems that one of the biggest drivers for forecasters is the fear of getting it wrong, of standing out from the crowd alone ... and being wrong. This manifests itself in 'herding' in the face of heightened uncertainty. When something is difficult to forecast, the moment the first forecaster publishes their forecast, rather than reflect the wide range of uncertainty, others herd to the first forecast. This 'rallying to the flag' creates a tight forecast range which makes it even harder for other forecasters to 'go wide'.

Using anchoring in negotiations

Back to anchoring. Anchoring is also a tool for the smart negotiator.

The skill of the second hand car salesman, for instance, is to put down an anchor as quickly as possible that will then act as a standard for the rest of the negotiation. It is a technique used by flea market stall holders. As a buyer, the worst mistake is to feed into this process by asking the price (rookie error), you’re simply going to open the negotiation at the top price straight away.

A smart buyer will go in hard and early with their own anchor price point so the negotiation starts at the bottom rather than the top and it is the stall holder who has to pull it up, rather than you spending the rest of the negotiation trying to drag it down.

You see anchoring in the stock market all the time. Look out for anyone that starts their assessment of a stock with “It’s up X% from the low”, as they are clearly an amateur or lazy investor with no ‘intrinsic value’ reference point.

You’ll know if your trading is driven by anchoring if you are the sort of trader that buys stocks because they have fallen a lot. This is technically wrong anyway but also ignores the fact that the market’s assessment of the value of the company has been changing constantly for the worse.

Purchase price as the anchor point

The other very widespread use of anchoring is when traders use their purchase price as a reference point. “I’ll sell it if it goes up 10%” or “I’ll sell if it goes below my purchase price.” All very nice but not rational (although, in its defence, anything, even unscientific anchoring, is better than nothing when it comes to having some trading discipline).

The best way to avoid anchoring is to forget the past price as a reference point and simply assess ‘cheap or expensive’ on some other criteria (PE history perhaps, or price relative to an intrinsic value calculation would be more useful).

Meanwhile you can amuse yourself by listening out for anyone (you, perhaps) making comments or decisions on the basis that a stock is up X% or down Y%. Your sole focus is whether a stock is going up or not. Whether it’s gone up or not is irrelevant.

MP Figure2 271115

Marcus Padley is a stockbroker and founder of the Marcus Today share market newsletter. He has been advising institutional clients and a private client base for over 32 years. This article is for general education purposes only and does not address the personal circumstances of any individual.


 

Leave a Comment:

     
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

House prices surge but falls are common and coming

We tend to forget that house prices often fall. Direct lending controls are more effective than rate rises because macroprudential limits affect the volume of money for housing leaving business rates untouched.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

100 Aussies: five charts on who earns, pays and owns

Any policy decision needs to recognise who is affected by a change. It pays to check the data on who pays taxes, who owns assets and who earns the income to ensure an equitable and efficient outcome.

Three good comments from the pension asset test article

With articles on the pensions assets test read about 40,000 times, 3,500 survey responses and thousands of comments, there was a lot of great reader participation. A few comments added extra insights.

Coles no longer happy with the status quo

It used to be Down, Down for prices but the new status quo is Down Down for emissions. Until now, the realm of ESG has been mainly fund managers as 'responsible investors', but companies are now pushing credentials.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

The 'Contrast Principle' used by super fund test failures

Rather than compare results against APRA's benchmark, large super funds which failed the YFYS performance test are using another measure such as a CPI+ target, with more favourable results to show their members.

Property

RBA switched rate priority on house prices versus jobs

RBA Governor, Philip Lowe, says that surging house prices are not as important as full employment, but a previous Governor, Glenn Stevens, had other priorities, putting the "elevated level of house prices" first.

Investment strategies

Disruptive innovation and the Tesla valuation debate

Two prominent fund managers with strongly opposing views and techniques. Cathie Wood thinks Tesla is going to US$3,000, Rob Arnott says it's already a bubble at US$750. They debate valuing growth and disruption.

Shares

4 key materials for batteries and 9 companies that will benefit

Four key materials are required for battery production as we head towards 30X the number of electric cars. It opens exciting opportunities for Australian companies as the country aims to become a regional hub.

Shares

Why valuation multiples fail in an exponential world

Estimating the value of a company based on a multiple of earnings is a common investment analysis technique, but it is often useless. Multiples do a poor job of valuing the best growth businesses, like Microsoft.

Shares

Five value chains driving the ‘transition winners’

The ability to adapt to change makes a company more likely to sustain today’s profitability. There are five value chains plus a focus on cashflow and asset growth that the 'transition winners' are adopting.

Superannuation

Halving super drawdowns helps wealthy retirees most

At the start of COVID, the Government allowed early access to super, but in a strange twist, others were permitted to leave money in tax-advantaged super for another year. It helped the wealthy and should not be repeated.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.