Dr. Peter Onorato, an accomplished anesthesiologist, found himself at a crossroads. With a lucrative career and a substantial income, he was eager to grow his wealth. Like many high-income earners, Peter believed he could outsmart the market. Despite his wife’s concerns, he decided to invest over $300,000 in a tech startup after several days of online “research” and hearing from several colleagues in the doctor’s lounge about the expected 25-30 percent returns.

What Peter didn’t take into account, however, was the behavioral finance principle known as overconfidence bias. He overestimated his ability to understand financial complexity and predict market trends and underestimated the risks involved. Within 20 months, an FDA ruling resulted in regulatory headwinds, and the startup eventually failed, leading to a painful financial loss for Peter’s family*.

This story highlights how even the most educated and successful individuals can fall prey to common behavioral finance mistakes.

Behavioral finance and its impact

Behavioral finance is a field that examines the psychological influences on investors and the resulting market anomalies. It challenges the traditional economic assumption that individuals are rational and make decisions purely based on logic and information. Instead, behavioral finance suggests that emotions and cognitive biases significantly impact financial decisions.

For high-income families like Peter’s, understanding these biases is crucial. Despite their financial understanding, they are not immune to the emotional and cognitive pitfalls that can lead to costly mistakes.

Here, we explore five common behavioral finance mistakes high-income earners often make.

1. Overconfidence bias. Overconfidence bias is the tendency to overestimate one’s knowledge or ability, particularly in areas like investing. High earners, who are often successful in their careers, may believe they can understand complex investments or have an innate ability to discern good investment opportunities. Sometimes, this manifests as simply managing their own portfolio with a conviction that they can outperform other professionals. Other times, this may show up as a willingness to invest in complicated, illiquid investments based on a marketing presentation or endorsement from a friend.

Here’s an example: Peter’s investment in the tech startup was a classic case of overconfidence. He believed his medical expertise and success translated into investment prowess, leading him to ignore the inherent risks of a volatile market.

2. Confirmation bias. Confirmation bias occurs when individuals seek out information supporting their existing beliefs while ignoring contradictory evidence. This behavior can lead to poor investment decisions, as investors may only focus on positive news about a particular stock or market trend, disregarding warning signs. Because social media apps like YouTube and Instagram monitor search history on computers and smartphones, it is increasingly common for an individual’s curiosity in a topic to turn to confidence when they later see articles and ads coincidentally reinforcing their earlier searches.

To illustrate: Peter only paid attention to the positive reviews and success stories about the tech startup, ignoring any financial information or opinions that contradicted the assumption. This selective attention contributed to his monetary loss.

3. Mental accounting. Mental accounting refers to the tendency to categorize and treat money differently based on its source or intended use. For instance, a bonus might be considered “fun money,” while regular income is earmarked for bills. This bias can lead to irrational spending and investment decisions, as individuals may take unnecessary risks with “extra” or “fun” money.

For instance: Peter decided to invest it all in the startup with his quarterly true-up, viewing it as separate from his regular income. This mental accounting led him to take on more risk than he would have with his primary earnings.

4. Loss aversion. Loss aversion is the tendency to prefer avoiding losses over acquiring equivalent gains. This bias can cause investors to hold onto losing investments for too long, hoping to recoup their losses rather than cutting their losses and reallocating their resources more effectively.

Case in point: Despite the startup’s poor performance, Peter held onto his investment, hoping it would eventually turn around. This decision was driven by his aversion to realizing a loss, ultimately resulting in a more significant financial setback.

5. Anchoring. Anchoring involves relying too heavily on the first piece of information encountered (the “anchor”) when making decisions. In finance, this might mean fixating on a stock’s initial purchase price, which can cloud judgment about its current value or future potential.

For example: Peter anchored his expectations on the startup’s initial valuation and potential, ignoring subsequent evidence that suggested a decline in its prospects. This fixation prevented him from making a more rational decision to divest earlier.

Mitigating behavioral finance mistakes

Understanding and acknowledging these biases is the first step toward mitigating their impact. High-income earners like Peter can benefit from the following strategies:

• Diversification: Spreading investments across different asset classes can reduce risk and minimize the impact of any single investment’s poor performance.
• Professional advice: Consulting with financial advisors can provide an objective perspective and help counteract personal biases.
• Setting rules: Establishing predetermined rules for buying and selling investments can help avoid emotional decision-making.
• Continuous education: Staying informed about behavioral finance principles can increase awareness of potential biases and improve decision-making.

By recognizing and addressing these common behavioral finance mistakes, high-income families can make more informed and rational financial decisions, ultimately leading to greater financial stability and success.

*Names have been changed in this example to protect the identity of those involved.

Disclaimer: Asset allocation does not guarantee a profit or protect against loss in declining markets. There is no guarantee that a diversified portfolio will outperform a non-diversified portfolio or that diversification among asset classes will reduce risk.

Shane Tenny is managing partner, Spaugh Dameron Tenny, LLC, and host of The Prosperous Doc podcast. 

Securities, investment advisory and financial planning services offered through qualified Registered Representatives of MML Investors Services, LLC. Member SIPC. Supervisory office: 4350 Congress Street, Suite 300, Charlotte, NC 28209, (704) 557-9600. Spaugh Dameron Tenny is not a subsidiary or affiliate of MML Investors Services, LLC or its affiliated companies. CRN202510-3194816