top of page
  • Writer's pictureAlpesh Patel

The Fallacy of Precise Economic Forecasts: A Lesson from Central Banks

Updated: Nov 15, 2023

By Alpesh Patel OBE, Former Visiting Fellow in Business and Industry, Corpus Christi College, Oxford University. Founder,, and author of The Mind of a Trader (Financial Times)

The Bank of England made a candid admission in the recent past that carries significant implications for all of us who participate in the financial markets: its economic forecasts, like those of many central banks, are invariably incorrect.

This revelation may not come as a surprise to seasoned investors, yet it underscores a critical point in the world of finance and economics. Greater information does not necessarily translate into more accurate forecasts but often breeds overconfidence. As we dive deeper into this topic, we will draw upon insights from the fields of behavioural economics and cognitive biases.

Information Overload and Overconfidence

Behavioural economics, a field that combines psychology and economics, has extensively studied the phenomena of overconfidence and information overload. In a world where we can access enormous amounts of data, the assumption is often that more information leads to better decision-making. However, this is only sometimes the case.

A study by Gigerenzer and Brighton (2009) showed that experts armed with more information could have made more accurate predictions. In fact, they were more likely to become overconfident in their predictions. In this context, overconfidence refers to the disparity between an individual's ability to predict an outcome accurately and their belief in their ability to do so. This discrepancy becomes wider as individuals access more information, creating a false sense of security and precision.

Biases in Economic Forecasting

The impact of cognitive biases on economic forecasting is well-documented. These biases, which are systematic errors in thinking that affect people's decisions and judgments, can lead to faulty forecasting.

One example is the confirmation bias, where forecasters may selectively process information that confirms their existing beliefs and ignore data that contradicts them. This bias can lead to overconfidence as forecasters may believe their forecasts are more accurate than they really are because they need to consider all relevant information.

Another relevant bias is the anchoring bias. This bias occurs when forecasters rely too heavily on the first piece of information they receive (the "anchor") when making decisions.

Even when new information is presented, forecasters might need to adjust their predictions sufficiently because they are anchored to their initial views. This, too, can contribute to overconfidence in their economic forecasts.

Implications for Investors

For investors, these findings are paramount. When we place undue confidence in central banks' forecasts or other authoritative sources, we risk being caught off guard by market volatility.

We must approach these forecasts with a healthy degree of skepticism and awareness of such predictions' inherent biases and limitations.

While staying informed and updated is important, we must be wary of the illusion of knowledge and certainty that excess information may provide. The world of economics is, after all, a realm of ambiguity and unpredictability.

In conclusion, the Bank of England's admission serves as a timely reminder of the fallibility of economic forecasts. This is where behavioural economics and game theory meet.

My job as an investor is to determine what the rest of the market will be thinking, even if I disagree with what they should be considering. This is why momentum trading is not about 'the truth' or what should happen but about what is happening.

As a hedge fund manager, trading is simple – it's momentum. As someone who educates investors, however, it is about explaining to them what should happen and not what is happening.

As investors, we must navigate the markets with a clear understanding of the limitations of these predictions and the biases that can affect them. Ultimately, striking a balance between information gathering and critical evaluation of that information is key to successful investing in the stock market.

Alpesh Patel OBE

Former Visiting Fellow in Business and Industry, Corpus Christi College, Oxford University


bottom of page