My Sunday Washington Post Business Section column is out. This morning, we look at “noise” levels, and what you can do to reduce them.

Here’s an excerpt from the column, that asks: Do these inputs add to signal or to noise?

News: Most of it is actually old. By the time information hits the papers, it’s pretty much already in the stock price.

• TMI: Too much information can lead to the paradox of overconfidence and bad investment decisions.

• Anecdotes: A good narrative is more compelling than statistical data, but the data are more determinative of future returns.

• Talking heads: Your goal is to safely grow your assets — but what are the goals of those you see on TV? What’s their agenda?

• Short-term goals: How much of your information consumption is short-term, meaningless noise?”

I also expand on our earlier post of looking at what it would be like if we purposefully tried to get more noise in our daily media diet.


Reduce the noise levels in your investment process
Barry Ritholtz
Washington Post, November 32013 

Category: Apprenticed Investor

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

One Response to “Reduce Your Investing Noise Level”

  1. mugabe says:

    Josh ain’t so sure about this:

    Just because a piece of information is not “useful” for investors in a practical sense right away, that doesn’t mean it ought to be completely ignored. … I would encourage you to absorb everything


    I personally prefer the Ritholtz doctrine on this one.