We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
CPP Investments' CEO warns that spending more time on a flawed deal doesn't improve it; you just risk convincing yourself it's viable. The most critical skill is recognizing a bad investment early and having the discipline to walk away, rather than trying to structure your way out of its fundamental flaws.
The worst feeling for an investor is not missing a successful deal they didn't understand, but investing against their own judgment in a company that ultimately fails. This emotional cost of violating one's own conviction outweighs the FOMO of passing on a hot deal.
The effort invested in sourcing and negotiating a deal can create a psychological bias to complete it. To combat this sunk cost fallacy, ask: "If this opportunity appeared today with zero prior effort, would I still write the check?" This separates effort from the actual investment decision.
Post-mortems of bad investments reveal the cause is never a calculation error but always a psychological bias or emotional trap. Sequoia catalogs ~40 of these, including failing to separate the emotional 'thrill of the chase' from the clinical, objective assessment required for sound decision-making.
The absence of significant flaws or negative perspectives on a deal is a red flag, suggesting something was missed in diligence. True exceptionality is what carries a great investment, not a lack of risk. If everyone agrees it's a great deal, you're likely too late or wrong.
To avoid becoming emotionally invested in a deal, it's crucial to institutionalize a "devil's advocate" role. Proactively searching for reasons *not* to do the deal ensures a sober, realistic assessment. The final decision is a calculated risk based on incomplete (e.g., 80%) information.
A crucial, yet unquantifiable, component of alpha is avoiding catastrophic losses. Jeff Aronson points to spending years analyzing companies his firm ultimately passed on. While this discipline doesn't appear as a positive return on a performance sheet, the act of rigorously saying "no" is a real, though invisible, driver of long-term success.
Investor Chris Reisach argues that if an investment doesn't make sense to you, the problem likely lies with the business, not your intellect. He advises junior VCs to trust their confusion as an adverse signal. A founder's inability to clearly articulate their vision is a fundamental flaw, and investing without true conviction is a recipe for failure.
Our brains are wired to find evidence that supports our existing beliefs. To counteract this dangerous bias in investing, actively search for dissenting opinions and information that challenge your thesis. A crucial question to ask is, 'What would need to happen for me to be wrong about this investment?'
Before committing capital, professional investors rigorously challenge their own assumptions. They actively ask, "If I'm wrong, why?" This process of stress-testing an idea helps avoid costly mistakes and strengthens the final thesis.
A core discipline from risk arbitrage is to precisely understand and quantify the potential downside before investing. By knowing exactly 'why we're going to lose money' and what that loss looks like, investors can better set probabilities and make more disciplined, unemotional decisions.