MSG Team's other articles

12814 How Should Companies Communicate With Wall Street?

Wall Street is very sensitive to communication. Every quarter, executives from top companies communicate their results to the street. Based on the content of this communication, the market reacts. Sometimes the market turns volatile. However, at other times the market remains stable. Apart from the content being communicated, the manner in which it is also […]

11968 Why Doesn’t the Private Sector Invest In Infrastructure Projects?

As explained in the previous articles, the infrastructure sector is facing a significant funding gap. There is an urgent need to double the spending on infrastructure projects. One of the ways to fulfill this gap is by increasing the participation of the private sector in infrastructure projects. At the present moment, the private sector is […]

8962 Disadvantages of in Store Automation in Retail Stores

The concept of in-store automation is increasingly becoming popular in the retail sector. In the previous articles, we have already seen what in store automation is. We are now also aware of the various advantages which result from in store automation. However, it would be incorrect to assume that in store automation does not have […]

10998 Revenue Based Financing

The manner in which startup companies obtain their financing can have a very large impact on the future of their business. In the previous articles, we have already discussed how bootstrapping as well as investments by professional investors work. Both of these approaches have their own advantages and disadvantages. Up until recently, it was assumed […]

10507 Operating Cash Flow to Sales Ratio – Formula, Assumptions and Interpretation

Formula The formula for this ratio can be easily judged by its name: Operating Cash Flow to Sales Ratio = Operating Cash Flow / Sales Meaning Used Over a Period of Time: Conclusions must not be drawn based on a single number. A company may be able to convert its sales to cash for one […]

Search with tags

  • No tags available.

In the previous article, we learned about how certain psychological factors make a huge impact on our decision-making about financial investment. We studied about what loss aversion is and how it impacts the decisions that we make. There is another psychological fallacy that is responsible for a lot of losses in the stock market.

In this article, we will have a closer look at what the sunk cost fallacy is and how it impacts decision making.

What is the Sunk Cost Fallacy?

The sunk cost fallacy describes an emotional tendency to invest more and more money, time, and effort into an endeavor that we have already invested in. Often times, individuals and businesses are not focused on the benefits that will be derived in the future. Instead, the focus is on costs that have already been incurred. In common business parlance, the sunk cost fallacy has been defined as “throwing good money after bad.” Traditional financial theory labels sunk costs as irrelevant. This means that sunk costs are not considered in analyses such as capital budgeting and capital rationing.

The sunk cost fallacy is closely linked to loss aversion. When investors invest in a stock or a project, they become so deeply psychologically involved that they are not willing to accept failure. Hence, they tend to invest more money trying to make the investment work. This happens because, as humans, we are trained to abhor failure. We try to hide our failure and hide the facts until the facts themselves change, and we emerge successful.

An investor’s failure to follow through on his/her decision causes cognitive dissonance within them. This is because when they fail to follow through on their initial decision, they somehow view it as a failure. This remains the fact that even if not committing more resources was actually the wise thing to do. If we are not aware of the sunk cost fallacy, we could make a lot of suboptimal decisions that could seriously affect our net worth.

How Stock Cost Affects Investor Behaviour

As mentioned earlier, sunk costs stem from loss aversion. Hence, all the mistakes made by investors because of loss aversion also apply to sunk costs. There are some additional mistakes which the investors make in the case of sunk costs. They are mentioned below:

  • Aggressive Investing: It has been observed that if investors lose a certain amount of money, their risk tolerance suddenly starts going up. The same investor who was very risk-averse to begin with, starts taking undue risks such as investing in aggressive stocks. This often happens because investors are making decisions looking in the rear-view mirror instead of looking ahead. Since they have already lost some money, they feel psychological dissonance. This is the reason that they want to recover as soon as possible. Since riskier stocks provide a higher probability of recovering those costs faster, investors often choose them. On careful evaluation, we can easily see why this is a fallacy. The decision to invest in risky stocks has no connection to the losses made in the past. Linking the two is actually a mistake being made by the investor’s mind.

  • Averaging: In the previous article, we already discussed how investors get emotionally attached to their investments, and when the price falls, they pick up an even bigger stake in order to average out the costs. Apart from being driven by loss aversion, this is also driven by the sunk costs fallacy. This is because the investor probably would not invest in the share at all had they not lost money in it. Since they lost money in the shares, they got hooked to invest more in it.

How to Avoid the Sunk Cost Fallacy?

One of the best ways to avoid the sunk cost fallacy is to think of losses as useful. It is not only gains that are useful to the investor. Sometimes, losses can also be put to good use. For instance, losses faced can be used to reduce the income and therefore also reduce the tax payable. Hence, there is a small portion of a loss, which works out to be useful for the investor.

Another way to avoid getting locked in the sunk cost fallacy is to only pay attention to the aggregates. Investors should look at the aggregate return that they made on their portfolio instead of fixating on the values of certain stocks. For instance, if a stock contributes only 5% of an investor’s portfolio, the loss is quite small even if the value has fallen down by 50%! Hence, instead of focusing on the 50% number, the investor should think of it as a 2.5% loss on the portfolio. This will help them to avoid getting carried over by emotion and hence make rational decisions.

The bottom line is that sunk costs should ideally not be considered while making decisions. However, this is not the case in real life. Cognitive biases skew the thought process of the investor, and they are more likely to invest more in a stock that they have already invested in. If investors are no aware of this tendency and do not actively seek to avoid it, they are likely to end up throwing good money after bad.

Article Written by

MSG Team

An insightful writer passionate about sharing expertise, trends, and tips, dedicated to inspiring and informing readers through engaging and thoughtful content.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Cultural Influences on Financial Decisions

MSG Team

Contrarian Investing

MSG Team

Conservatism Bias

MSG Team