Buying the Dip vs. Dollar-Cost Averaging: Which Strategy Wins?

Introduction: The Eternal Debate

In March 2020, the S&P 500 dropped 34% in just 23 trading days. It was the fastest bear market decline in history. Social media exploded with two camps screaming opposite advice: one group shouted “buy the dip, this is the opportunity of a lifetime,” while the other insisted “keep your regular contributions going, don’t try to be a hero.” The people who bought aggressively near the March 23rd bottom saw gains of over 100% within 18 months. The people who stuck to their monthly investment plan also did extremely well. And the people who panicked and sold? They missed one of the greatest recoveries in stock market history.

This scenario plays out in every market downturn, and it surfaces a question that has divided investors for decades: Is it better to buy the dip or dollar-cost average? On the surface, buying the dip sounds brilliant. Prices are low, fear is everywhere, and you swoop in like a bargain hunter at a clearance sale. Dollar-cost averaging sounds boring by comparison — you just keep investing the same amount at regular intervals regardless of what the market does. No drama, no heroics, no trying to time anything.

But here is the uncomfortable truth that most financial content glosses over: the strategy that sounds smarter on paper is not always the strategy that wins in practice. The gap between theory and execution is where most investors lose money, and it is a gap that psychology — not math — creates. Buying the dip requires you to do something that goes against every survival instinct you have: voluntarily putting more money at risk when everything around you screams danger. Dollar-cost averaging requires something arguably just as difficult: the discipline to keep investing when your portfolio is bleeding red and every headline tells you the worst is yet to come.

In this article, we are going to settle this debate with data, not opinions. We will look at what academic research actually says about lump-sum investing versus DCA. We will backtest both strategies through the 2008 financial crisis, the 2020 COVID crash, and the 2022 bear market. We will dissect the psychology that makes each strategy harder than it looks. And we will introduce a hybrid approach — modified DCA with opportunistic boosts — that captures the upside of dip-buying without requiring you to have nerves of steel and perfect timing. Whether you have $1,000 or $100,000 to invest, by the end of this piece you will know exactly which approach fits your temperament, your financial situation, and your long-term goals.

Defining the Strategies

What Is Dollar-Cost Averaging?

Dollar-cost averaging (DCA) is the practice of investing a fixed amount of money at regular intervals — weekly, biweekly, monthly — regardless of what the market is doing. If you invest $500 every month into an S&P 500 index fund, you are dollar-cost averaging. When prices are high, your $500 buys fewer shares. When prices are low, your $500 buys more shares. Over time, this mechanical approach smooths out your average purchase price.

The beauty of DCA is its simplicity. You set up an automatic transfer, pick your investment, and forget about it. There is no analysis required, no watching CNBC, no checking futures at 6 AM. The strategy removes emotion from the equation entirely because there are no decisions to make. Your money goes in on the 15th of every month whether the market had its best week in years or its worst.

Consider a practical example. Suppose you invest $1,000 per month into an ETF tracking the S&P 500. In January, the price is $100 per share, so you buy 10 shares. In February, the market drops and the price falls to $80, so your $1,000 buys 12.5 shares. In March, the market recovers to $90, and you buy 11.1 shares. After three months, you have invested $3,000 and own 33.6 shares. Your average cost per share is $89.29 — lower than the simple average price of $90 across those three months. This is the mathematical advantage of DCA: it naturally buys more when prices are cheap.

What Is Buying the Dip?

Buying the dip means waiting for a meaningful market decline and then deploying capital aggressively. Instead of investing $500 every month no matter what, a dip-buyer might accumulate cash during normal or rising markets and then invest a larger amount — say $3,000 or $5,000 at once — when the market falls by 10%, 15%, or 20% from recent highs.

The logic is straightforward and appealing: why buy at full price when you can wait for a sale? If the S&P 500 is at 5,000 and drops to 4,000, you are buying at a 20% discount. Your future returns are mathematically higher because your entry point is lower. Warren Buffett himself has said, “Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful.” That is essentially the buy-the-dip philosophy distilled into one sentence.

But “buying the dip” is not really a single strategy. It exists on a spectrum. On one end, you have the casual dip-buyer who adds a little extra to their regular investments when the market drops 5%. On the other end, you have the tactical investor who sits on 100% cash for months or even years, waiting for a major correction to deploy everything at once. These are vastly different approaches with vastly different risk profiles, and lumping them together is one reason this debate gets so confused.

The Key Differences at a Glance

Now that we understand what each strategy actually involves, let us look at what happens when we put them to the test against decades of real market data. The results might surprise you — or they might confirm what you have long suspected.

What Historical Data Actually Shows

The Lump-Sum vs. DCA Research

Before we compare DCA to buying the dip specifically, we need to address a closely related question that has been studied extensively: lump-sum investing versus dollar-cost averaging. This research is directly relevant because buying the dip is essentially an attempt to time a lump-sum investment for maximum effect.

The most cited study on this topic comes from Vanguard, published in 2012 and updated since. Vanguard analyzed rolling 12-month periods across the U.S., U.K., and Australian markets from 1926 to 2011. Their conclusion was clear: lump-sum investing beat DCA approximately two-thirds of the time. On average, lump-sum outperformed DCA by about 2.3 percentage points over 12 months when investing in a 60/40 stock-bond portfolio.

Why does lump-sum win so often? Because markets go up more than they go down. The S&P 500 has posted positive annual returns in roughly 73% of calendar years since 1926. If you have money and you delay investing it, you are statistically more likely to be waiting while the market climbs higher. Every day your cash sits uninvested is a day you miss potential gains. Economists call this opportunity cost, and it is the silent killer of the buy-the-dip strategy.

A study by Dimensional Fund Advisors covering data from 1926 through 2023 found nearly identical results. They examined what happened if you invested $1,000 per month via DCA versus deploying the full $12,000 at the start of each year. Over the entire 97-year dataset, lump-sum investing won 68% of the time, with an average annual outperformance of 1.5% to 2.5%.

What About Buying the Dip Specifically?

The research on pure dip-buying strategies is less flattering than most investors expect. A 2021 analysis by Of Dollars and Data looked at what happened if you had perfect timing — literally omniscient knowledge of every market bottom — versus simply dollar-cost averaging every month. Even with perfect timing (which is impossible in practice), the improvement over DCA was surprisingly modest: roughly 0.4% per year in additional returns over a 40-year period.

How can that be? Because dips are relatively infrequent compared to the time the market spends going up. If you are sitting on cash waiting for a 10% correction, you might wait 12 to 18 months or longer. During that waiting period, the market might climb 15% or 20%. When the 10% dip finally comes, the market is still above where it was when you started waiting. Your “discounted” entry point is actually higher than if you had just invested immediately.

Here is a concrete illustration. Imagine the S&P 500 is at 4,000 in January. You decide to wait for a 10% dip before investing. The market climbs steadily through the year, reaching 4,800 by November — a 20% gain. Then in December, bad economic data triggers a 10% sell-off, bringing the index down to 4,320. You triumphantly buy the dip. But 4,320 is still 8% higher than the 4,000 level where you could have invested eleven months earlier. Your “dip” was actually a peak compared to your original starting point.

Time in the Market Beats Timing the Market

This brings us to perhaps the most important finding in all of investment research: time in the market almost always beats timing the market. JPMorgan’s annual “Guide to the Markets” report shows that if you missed just the 10 best trading days in the S&P 500 over the 20-year period from 2003 to 2022, your annualized return would drop from 9.8% to 5.6%. Miss the 20 best days, and you are down to 2.9%. Miss the 30 best days, and you actually lose money over a 20-year period with a return of just 0.8%.

Here is the kicker: seven of the 10 best days occurred within two weeks of the 10 worst days. The biggest up days tend to happen during periods of extreme volatility — exactly the periods when dip-buyers are trying to decide whether the bottom is in. If you are sitting on the sidelines during the crash waiting for “confirmation” that the bottom has arrived, you are very likely to miss the explosive recovery days that account for the majority of long-term returns.

This data does not mean buying the dip never works. It means that for the average investor, the risk of missing the recovery outweighs the benefit of catching the bottom. But psychology, not math, is what makes this debate truly interesting — and that is where we turn next.

The Psychology Problem Nobody Talks About

Buying Dips Sounds Easy Until You Try It

Here is a thought experiment. It is October 2008. Lehman Brothers has just collapsed. AIG was bailed out. Your 401(k) is down 40%. Every financial news channel is using words like “catastrophe,” “depression,” and “systemic collapse.” Your coworkers are talking about pulling all their money out of the market. Your spouse is asking if your savings are safe. The VIX — Wall Street’s “fear gauge” — has hit 80, a level never seen before or since.

Now, in that environment, reach into your savings and invest an extra $10,000 in stocks.

Can you do it? Really? Because that is what buying the dip requires. Not buying the dip on a 5% pullback during a calm bull market — that is easy. True dip-buying means deploying serious capital when the world feels like it is ending. When you genuinely believe your investment could go down another 20% or 30% or 50% before it recovers. When the smartest people on television are telling you this time really is different.

Loss aversion, a concept from behavioral economics pioneered by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, shows that humans feel the pain of losses roughly twice as intensely as the pleasure of equivalent gains. A $1,000 loss feels about as bad as a $2,000 gain feels good. This asymmetry is hardwired into our brains, and it creates an almost irresistible urge to protect what we have rather than risk losing more during a downturn. Buying the dip is not just a financial decision — it is an act of defiance against your own neurobiology.

The Quieter Psychological Challenge of DCA

Dollar-cost averaging has its own psychological traps, though they are less dramatic. The primary challenge is regret aversion during prolonged declines. If you invested $1,000 in January and the market drops 30% by June, you have invested $6,000 and watched it shrink to roughly $4,200. You know your July contribution is also going to lose money in the short term. Every instinct tells you to pause your contributions and “wait for things to stabilize.”

This is where most DCA strategies actually fail in practice. Not because the math is wrong, but because the investor stops contributing during the exact period when their dollars buy the most shares. Fidelity Investments analyzed customer data during the 2020 COVID crash and found that approximately 18% of 401(k) participants reduced or stopped their contributions during Q1 and Q2 2020. Those participants missed buying shares at prices 25% to 35% below their pre-crash levels. The participants who maintained their contributions through the crash had portfolio values approximately 12% higher by the end of 2021 compared to those who paused.

The other psychological challenge with DCA is boredom. Automated investing is not exciting. There is no story to tell at dinner parties. Nobody writes breathless blog posts about how they heroically continued their automatic $500 monthly transfer during a market crash. DCA is the financial equivalent of eating vegetables and going to bed early — everyone knows it works, but it is deeply unsatisfying to the part of our brain that craves action and narrative.

The Anchoring Trap

Dip-buyers face another insidious cognitive bias: anchoring. Once you decide to wait for a dip, you anchor to a specific price or percentage decline. “I will buy when the S&P hits 4,000” or “I will buy when it drops 20%.” But what happens when the market drops 10% and starts recovering? You think, “It is going to drop more, I will wait.” It drops another 5% and then bounces. “That was not the real bottom, there will be another leg down.” Before you know it, the market has recovered 30% from the low and you are still sitting in cash, waiting for a dip that already happened.

This is not hypothetical. After the March 2020 crash, countless investors on forums and social media talked about waiting for a “retest of the lows.” That retest never came. The S&P 500 went from 2,237 on March 23, 2020, to 3,756 by the end of 2020 — a 68% gain — without ever looking back. Many would-be dip-buyers were still holding cash and waiting well into 2021.

Backtested Crash Scenarios: Real Numbers

Theory and psychology are important, but numbers settle arguments. Let us walk through three major market downturns and see how each strategy would have performed. For each scenario, we will compare three approaches: (1) a pure DCA investor contributing $1,000 per month throughout the period, (2) a dip-buyer who accumulated $12,000 in cash and deployed it all at the market bottom, and (3) a lump-sum investor who invested $12,000 on the first day of the period.

Scenario: 2008 Global Financial Crisis

The S&P 500 peaked at 1,565 in October 2007 and bottomed at 677 in March 2009 — a decline of 56.8%. The recovery to pre-crisis levels took until March 2013.

The dip-buyer wins in a landslide here — if they timed the exact bottom. But let us be honest: nobody knew March 9, 2009 was the bottom until months later. The market had already crashed 45% by November 2008. Many investors thought that was the bottom and bought in, only to watch another 25% decline. The actual bottom came with no warning. There was no bell, no signal, no “all clear.” If our dip-buyer had deployed their $12,000 in November 2008 instead of March 2009, their return by March 2013 would have been +68% instead of +131% — still good, but much less dramatic. And if they had waited until June 2009 (many did, wanting “confirmation” the bottom was in), they would have missed a 40% rally from the lows.

Scenario: 2020 COVID Crash

The S&P 500 dropped from 3,386 on February 19, 2020 to 2,237 on March 23, 2020 — a 34% decline in just 23 trading days. The recovery was the fastest in history: the index reclaimed its pre-crash high by August 18, 2020, just 148 days later.

Again, perfect dip-buying wins — spectacularly. But the COVID crash illustrates the timing problem better than almost any other episode. On March 16, 2020, the market dropped 12% in a single day. It felt like the end of the financial system. The Federal Reserve held an emergency meeting on a Sunday night. Entire countries were locking down. Nobody on earth knew if the economy would recover in months or years. Investing $12,000 into stocks on March 23 — seven days after the worst single-day drop since 1987 — would have required almost superhuman conviction.

Notice that the DCA investor did very well too, returning 54% by December 2021. They did not need to make any heroic decisions. They did not need to know the exact bottom. They just kept investing $1,000 per month, and the math of buying more shares at lower prices during March, April, and May did its work automatically.

Scenario: 2022 Bear Market

The 2022 bear market was driven by aggressive Federal Reserve rate hikes to combat inflation. The S&P 500 fell from 4,797 at the start of 2022 to a low of 3,577 in October 2022 — a decline of 25.4%. Unlike the V-shaped recovery of 2020, this was a grinding, multi-month decline with several head-fake rallies.

The 2022 bear market is the most instructive scenario because it was the hardest one for dip-buyers to navigate. The market dropped 13% by mid-June 2022, then rallied 17% through mid-August. Many dip-buyers deployed cash during that summer rally, thinking the bottom was in. Then the market dropped another 17% into October. Those who bought the June “dip” were underwater again within weeks. The real bottom in October came without any clear catalyst — inflation was still high, the Fed was still hiking, and the consensus outlook was grim. Buying at the actual October bottom required ignoring all the bearish evidence and acting purely on faith.

Summary Across All Three Crashes

The pattern is clear: perfect dip-buying always wins. But “perfect” is the operative word. In the real world, imperfect dip-buying — buying too early, buying too late, not buying at all because the fear was too intense — often underperforms simple DCA. And across non-crisis periods, which represent the majority of market history, DCA and lump-sum investing beat dip-buying because there is no dip to buy.

The Modified DCA Hybrid: Best of Both Worlds

The Concept

What if you did not have to choose between the two strategies? What if you could capture the consistency of DCA while still taking advantage of genuine market dislocations? This is the idea behind modified DCA with opportunistic boosts — a hybrid approach that an increasing number of financial advisors and sophisticated individual investors are adopting.

The concept is simple: you maintain a regular DCA schedule as your baseline, but you also keep a reserve of cash — typically 10% to 20% of your total investable amount — specifically earmarked for deployment during significant market declines. This reserve is not “money on the sidelines” in the way that pure dip-buyers accumulate cash. It is a small, deliberate allocation designed to boost your returns during periods of high value without sacrificing the benefits of continuous investing.

How to Implement It

Here is a concrete framework for implementing the modified DCA hybrid strategy:

Step 1: Establish your baseline DCA. Decide how much you will invest each month. For example, if you have $1,200 per month available for investing, allocate $1,000 to your regular DCA and $200 to your “opportunity fund.”

Step 2: Define your trigger levels. Pre-commit to specific decline thresholds that will activate your reserve. A common framework:

Step 3: Automate what you can. Your baseline DCA should be fully automated. The opportunistic boosts require manual action, but having pre-defined rules removes most of the emotional decision-making. Some brokerage platforms even allow you to set limit orders at specific index levels, effectively automating your dip-buying triggers.

Step 4: Replenish the reserve. After a deployment, rebuild your opportunity fund gradually. If you deployed $2,000 during a market correction, add an extra $100 per month to rebuild the reserve over 20 months. This ensures you are ready for the next opportunity without disrupting your core DCA.

Why This Hybrid Works

The modified DCA hybrid addresses the core weaknesses of both pure strategies:

It eliminates cash drag. Unlike pure dip-buyers who might sit on large cash positions for years, you are keeping 80-90% of your money invested at all times through your regular DCA. The opportunity reserve is small enough that its drag on your overall returns is minimal during bull markets.

It removes the timing problem. You do not need to identify the exact bottom. By deploying your reserve in tranches at pre-defined levels (-10%, -15%, -20%, -30%), you are spreading your “dip-buying” across a range of prices. You will not buy at the absolute bottom, but you will buy at significantly depressed levels — and that is more than enough to boost returns.

It is psychologically manageable. Because you have pre-committed to specific rules, you are making decisions based on a framework rather than emotions. The amounts are also relatively small, so the fear factor is reduced. Deploying $1,000 from your reserve when the market drops 15% feels very different from deploying your entire $50,000 savings.

When Does Pure Dip-Buying Actually Work?

Despite the data favoring DCA in most scenarios, there are specific situations where buying the dip is a genuinely superior strategy:

Clear market overreaction to a contained event. When the market drops sharply on news that is dramatic but unlikely to cause lasting economic damage, dip-buying has excellent odds. The August 2015 “flash crash” triggered by concerns about China’s economy sent the S&P 500 down 11% in a week. Fundamentals of U.S. companies were unchanged. Investors who bought that dip saw a full recovery within four months.

Strong company fundamentals unchanged despite sector-wide selling. Individual stock dip-buying can work well when a high-quality company gets dragged down by sector rotation or market-wide panic rather than company-specific problems. If Apple drops 20% because the entire tech sector sells off due to rising interest rates, but Apple’s revenue, margins, and competitive position are unchanged, that is a fundamentally different situation than Apple dropping 20% because iPhone sales are collapsing.

You have genuine analytical edge. Professional or highly experienced investors who deeply understand valuation metrics, industry dynamics, and business models can sometimes identify when a stock or market is genuinely undervalued versus merely cheap for good reason. This is a real skill, but it is rare, and most retail investors dramatically overestimate their ability to do this.

Which Strategy Fits Your Personality?

An Honest Self-Assessment

The best investment strategy is the one you will actually follow. This is not a platitude — it is backed by research. Dalbar’s annual Quantitative Analysis of Investor Behavior consistently shows that the average equity mutual fund investor earns returns far below the funds they invest in, primarily because they buy and sell at the wrong times. Over the 30-year period ending in 2022, the average equity fund investor earned 6.8% annually while the S&P 500 returned 10.7%. That gap — nearly 4 percentage points per year — is almost entirely attributable to behavioral mistakes driven by emotions.

So before you choose a strategy, ask yourself these honest questions:

How did you actually behave during the last market crash? Not how you wish you had behaved. Not what you tell people at parties. What did you actually do? Did you increase your investments? Maintain them? Reduce them? Panic-sell? Your past behavior in a crisis is the single best predictor of your future behavior in a crisis.

How do you react to unrealized losses? Check your brokerage account during a 10% market decline. If seeing red numbers makes your stomach drop and you start thinking about selling, pure DCA with automated contributions is your friend. If you can look at a 20% unrealized loss and think “that is 20% more shares I can buy at a discount,” you might have the temperament for the hybrid strategy.

How much do you check your portfolio? If you check your portfolio multiple times per day, you are more susceptible to short-term emotional decision-making. Frequent checkers tend to perform worse than set-it-and-forget-it investors, regardless of strategy. Research by Shlomo Benartzi and Richard Thaler found that investors who checked their portfolios quarterly rather than daily were willing to take on significantly more risk and earned higher returns as a result.

Matching Strategy to Personality Type

Practical Implementation Guide

Regardless of which strategy you choose, here are the practical steps to get started:

For Pure DCA:

• Open a brokerage account with automatic investment capability (Fidelity, Schwab, and Vanguard all offer this for free)
• Choose your investment — a broad market index fund like VOO (Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, expense ratio 0.03%) or VTI (Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF, expense ratio 0.03%) is ideal for most people
• Set up automatic transfers from your bank account on a specific day each month
• Enable automatic dividend reinvestment (DRIP)
• Check your portfolio no more than once per quarter
• Increase your contribution amount by at least 1% each year or whenever you get a raise

For the Modified DCA Hybrid:

• Follow all the Pure DCA steps above for your baseline investment
• Open a separate high-yield savings account for your opportunity fund (earning 4-5% APY while waiting)
• Set up a small automatic transfer to the opportunity fund each month
• Write down your deployment rules on paper and keep them in your desk drawer or saved as a note on your phone
• Set up price alerts on your brokerage app for your trigger levels (e.g., S&P 500 at -10%, -15%, -20% from the all-time high)
• When a trigger hits, execute immediately — do not wait to “see what happens next”
• After deploying, start rebuilding the opportunity fund

The Emotional Discipline Required

Let us be blunt about what each strategy demands from you emotionally:

Pure DCA demands patience and acceptance. You must accept that you will sometimes invest at the worst possible time. Your January contribution might go in the day before a 10% correction. You must be okay with that. You must also resist the urge to “pause” contributions when things look scary. The emotional discipline of DCA is passive — you succeed by doing nothing special, but that “nothing” can feel excruciating when the market is crashing.

The hybrid strategy demands execution under pressure. You have your rules, you have your triggers, and when the alert goes off, you must act. This is harder than it sounds. When your phone buzzes to tell you the S&P 500 has dropped 15% from its high, your first instinct will not be to buy — it will be to check the news, see what is causing the decline, and look for reasons not to buy. Pre-committed rules only work if you actually follow them.

Pure dip-buying demands ice in your veins. You must be comfortable watching the market rise without you for months or years. You must be comfortable deploying large amounts of capital in a single transaction during peak uncertainty. And you must be comfortable being wrong — because sometimes what looks like a dip is actually the start of a much deeper decline, and sometimes the dip you are waiting for never comes at all. Very few investors honestly have this temperament, and even fewer have it consistently across decades.

Conclusion: The Strategy You Will Actually Follow

We have covered a lot of ground. We have looked at Vanguard’s research showing lump-sum investing beats DCA two-thirds of the time. We have seen that even perfect dip-buying provides only modest improvement over consistent DCA across long time horizons. We have backtested three major crashes and found that yes, perfect dip-buying wins every time — but “perfect” is a luxury that real investors never have. And we have explored the psychological barriers that make both strategies far harder in practice than they appear in a spreadsheet.

So what is the answer? Which strategy wins?

The honest answer is: the strategy you will actually follow through a full market cycle wins. A perfect strategy you abandon at the worst moment is worse than an average strategy you maintain consistently. Dollar-cost averaging is not theoretically optimal, but it is practically excellent because it removes the decisions that cause investors to underperform. Its greatest strength is not mathematical — it is behavioral. It turns investing from an active, emotional process into a passive, habitual one.

If you are among the rare investors who can genuinely buy when others are terrified, the modified DCA hybrid is likely your best approach. It keeps 80-90% of your money working at all times through regular DCA while giving you a structured, rules-based framework for deploying extra capital during downturns. It satisfies the desire to be strategic without requiring the impossible feat of consistently calling market bottoms.

If you are honest with yourself and know that you struggle with emotional discipline during market turbulence — and there is absolutely no shame in that, most investors do — then pure automated DCA is your path. Set it up, automate it, and focus your energy on earning more income to invest rather than trying to invest more cleverly. Warren Buffett himself has repeatedly said that for the vast majority of investors, a low-cost S&P 500 index fund with regular contributions will outperform nearly every other approach over a 20- to 30-year period.

The market will drop again. It always does. When it does, you will either have a plan that you follow, or you will make emotional decisions in the heat of the moment. The time to choose your strategy is now, while markets are functioning normally and your amygdala is not screaming at you to sell everything. Write down your plan. Set up your automation. Define your rules. Then, when the next crash comes — and it will — you will not need to think about what to do. You will already know.

Because in the end, the greatest edge in investing is not finding the perfect entry point. It is having the discipline to stay invested, keep contributing, and let compound returns do what they have done for every patient investor across every generation: build wealth slowly, reliably, and inevitably.

References

• Vanguard Research, “Dollar-cost averaging just means taking risk later” (2012, updated 2023) — Vanguard.com
• Dimensional Fund Advisors, “Lump Sum Investing vs. Dollar Cost Averaging” (2023) — Dimensional.com
• JPMorgan Asset Management, “Guide to the Markets” — JPMorgan.com
• Of Dollars and Data, “Even God Couldn’t Beat Dollar-Cost Averaging” (2021) — OfDollarsAndData.com
• Dalbar, “Quantitative Analysis of Investor Behavior” (2023) — Dalbar.com
• Benartzi, S. & Thaler, R., “Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle” (1995), The Quarterly Journal of Economics
• Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A., “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk” (1979), Econometrica
• Fidelity Investments, “Lessons from COVID-19: How investor behavior impacted portfolio values” (2021) — Fidelity.com