Jin you’re right. I gave a bad example Better example Anchoring is market performed well and then it performed terrible in later years but I still think it will perform well. - giving disproportionate weight to the first memory/experience
I think forzajuve got it right. Anchoring is about forecasts, status quo is about allocation of assets. Forza Inter!
nailer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think forzajuve got it right. Anchoring is about > forecasts, status quo is about allocation of > assets. > > Forza Inter! Sorry please allow me to correct, we have 6 “traps” to remember, all of them are traps of forecast. 
Anchoring trap Status quo trap Confirming evidence trap prudence trap overconfidence trap recallability trap while status quo bias is seen in defined contribution pension allocations.
Acronym isn’t mine, but for TRAPS think O’CRAPS I have trouble recalling the R (recalability - how ironic), but it helps that TRaps starts with TR and I start thinking about Arnie in Total RECALL, and if you saw Arnie in a dark ally at night, you really would be going O’CRAP.
Read the Glossary at the back of CFAI Volume 2: anchoring trap - the tendency to give disproportionate weight to the first information received. status quo trap - the tendency for forecasts to perpetuate recent observations So anchoring favors the first information received while status quo favors the last. It makes sense when you think of the meaning of the status quo. It means the way things are now. So if you have a status quo bias, you think things will not change from the way they are now. Maybe one way to remember this is to think bothl of these biases will cause your ship to sink. What will hit bottom first? The anchor. Thus anchoring favors the first info received.
My acronym for the forecast traps is “SO CRAP”.
Status quo seems to favor not changing views and just keeping the same. Object in motion must stay in motion. Anchoring puts too much credence in prior views and not enough in current views. Object is in motion but has slowed but will speed back up again. Representativeness is the opposite of anchoring, imo. Object slowed down, now it is really going to slow down. Bayesian Rigidity uses same views even in the face of new and very conflicting information. I do not believe that the object has slowed down, even if it did slow down it is temporary.