📖Ray Dalio
Believability Weighting
Weight opinions by the track record and reasoning of who holds them
Make believability-weighted decisions. Not all opinions are equal - weight them by the track record and expertise of the person offering them.
🏠 Everyday Analogy
📖 Core Interpretation
Seek thoughtful disagreement from people with relevant expertise.
💎 Key Insight：Not all opinions are equal. Some people have demonstrated expertise through repeated success in a domain; others have not. Believability-weighted decision-making means giving more weight to those with proven track records and sound reasoning. This requires assessing both someone's past results and their thinking process. Democratizing every decision wastes the insight of true experts. Create systems to identify who is believable in which domains, and weight their input accordingly when making important decisions.
AI Deep Analysis
Get personalized insights and practical guidance through AI conversation
❓ Why It Matters
Democratic decision-making can lead to mediocre outcomes. Expertise matters.
🎯 How to Practice
Track people's predictions and decisions. Give more weight to those with proven track records.
🎙️ Master's Voice
Don't treat all opinions as equally valuable.
Dalio weighs opinions by track record and reasoning. A novice's opinion is not equal to an expert's.
⚔️ Practical Guide
✅ Decision Checklist
- Am I weighting opinions properly?
- What is this person's track record?
- Is the reasoning sound?
📋 Action Steps
- Weight by track record
- Consider the source
- Value reasoning over opinion
🚨 Warning Signs
- Equal weighting
- Ignoring track records
- Democratic decision-making
⚠️ Common Pitfalls
Ignoring good ideas from non-experts
Creating echo chambers of experts
📚 Case Studies
1
Buffett Backs Seabury Stanton Over Believable Analysts (1957)
In the late 1950s, young Warren Buffett bought Dempster Mill shares largely on the bullish assurances of CEO Seabury Stanton, despite skeptical assessments from more experienced analysts who doubted the business quality and management. Buffett effectively overweighted Stanton’s optimistic view and underweighted the track records of more seasoned, dispassionate observers.
✨ Outcome：Dempster Mill badly underperformed, forcing Buffett into a protracted restructuring. He later cited it as a mistake in not properly weighing the credibility of opinions, reinforcing his shift toward Graham-style, evidence-based and later Munger-influenced qualitative judgments.
2
Buffett’s LTCM Warning Ignored by Wall Street (1998)
In 1998, Long-Term Capital Management, run by star traders and Nobel laureates, faced collapse. Warren Buffett offered a rescue at a steep discount, arguing LTCM’s models underestimated risk. Many counterparties discounted his warning, overvaluing the opinions of LTCM’s own partners and quants, who insisted the crisis was a temporary liquidity issue.
✨ Outcome：LTCM imploded, nearly destabilizing the financial system. Buffett’s stance proved prescient. The episode showed that impressive credentials don’t equal believability; real risk-management track records should carry more weight than elegant but untested models.
See how masters handle real scenarios?
30 real investment dilemmas answered by legendary investors
Explore Scenarios →