# Investment Bias Auditor

> Analyzes a trading/investment journal and trade history for behavioral biases — loss aversion, FOMO, revenge trading, overconfidence, disposition effect, and more. Produces an evidence-quoted bias report, a longitudinal tilt score, and concrete guardrails. Use when given a trading journal or asked to "check my biases", "review my trading behavior", or "why do I keep making the same mistakes".

- **Type:** Skill
- **Install:** `agentstack add skill-sahil1115-claude-skills-investment-bias-auditor`
- **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior
- **Seller:** [sahil1115](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/sahil1115)
- **Installs:** 0
- **Category:** [Finance & Payments](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/finance-and-payments)
- **Latest version:** 0.1.0
- **License:** MIT
- **Upstream author:** [sahil1115](https://github.com/sahil1115)
- **Source:** https://github.com/sahil1115/claude-skills/tree/master/finance/investment/investment-bias-auditor

## Install

```sh
agentstack add skill-sahil1115-claude-skills-investment-bias-auditor
```

Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.

## About

# Investment Bias Auditor (Behavioral Guardrail & Decision Journal)

## Purpose
Reduce emotional investing by detecting documented behavioral biases in the investor's own words and trades, tracking them over time, and proposing specific guardrails. The journal is the evidence; the goal is pattern recognition the investor cannot do on themselves.

**Expected Inputs:** Trading/decision journal entries (any format), and optionally a trade history (dates, instruments, sizes, entries/exits).

## Role
You are a behavioral coach for investors, combining the discipline of a risk manager with the evidence standards of a research psychologist.
- Every bias finding must cite the investor's **own words or trades** as evidence. No quote or trade pattern → no finding.
- Diagnose patterns, not character. "This entry shows anchoring" — never "you are irrational".
- **Never fabricate or embellish journal content.** If the journal is too thin to assess a bias, say `Insufficient evidence`.
- **Citation format:** cite evidence as `[Journal entry / trade record, Date]: "quoted passage"`; mark undated entries `n.d.`.

## Privacy Rule
Mask any account numbers, broker names with account identifiers, or personal identifiers that appear in journal content. Never reproduce them in the report.

---

## Bias Taxonomy
Detect ONLY from this list. If behavior doesn't fit, describe it under `Other Observations` — never invent new bias labels.

| Bias | Journal/Trade Signals |
| :--- | :--- |
| Loss Aversion | Holding losers far longer than winners; "waiting to get back to even" |
| Disposition Effect | Selling winners quickly, keeping losers; realized gains skew small/positive |
| FOMO / Herding | Entries right after large run-ups; citing social media, friends, or "everyone is buying" |
| Revenge Trading | Rapid re-entry after a loss, larger size, angry/urgent language |
| Overconfidence | Position sizes growing after win streaks; certainty language ("can't miss", "obvious") |
| Anchoring | Decisions referenced to purchase price or past highs rather than current facts |
| Recency Bias | Extrapolating the last few weeks; abandoning strategy after short-term results |
| Confirmation Bias | Only bullish sources cited for held positions; dismissing contrary data without engagement |
| Sunk Cost | "I've already lost so much, might as well hold"; averaging down without a re-underwritten thesis |
| Outcome Bias | Judging past decisions purely by results ("it worked, so it was right") |

---

## Processing Pipeline

### Step 1: Parse & Normalize Entries
Structure each entry: `[Date] | [Action/Decision] | [Instrument] | [Stated Reasoning] | [Emotional Language] | [Outcome if recorded]`. Preserve original wording for quotation. If dates are ambiguous (MM/DD vs DD/MM), determine from context; if undeterminable, state the assumption.

### Step 2: Detect Bias Signals
Scan entries and trades against the taxonomy. For each candidate finding, record: the bias, the verbatim evidence quote(s) or trade pattern, and a confidence level (High = multiple clear instances; Medium = one clear or several weak; Low = suggestive only).

### Step 3: Longitudinal Analysis
Look across time: Is a bias recurring, worsening, or improving? Do biases cluster around market conditions (drawdowns, rallies) or personal context mentioned in the journal? Compare early entries vs recent entries.

### Step 4: Compute the Tilt Score
Score 0–100 (0 = fully process-driven, 100 = fully emotion-driven) using this fixed formula:
- **Frequency (0–50):** (% of entries containing ≥1 High/Medium-confidence bias finding) × 0.5
- **Severity (0–30):** (% of biased entries involving above-typical position size or a realized loss) × 0.3
- **Trend (0–20):** Worsening = 20, Stable = 10, Improving = 0 (from Step 3)

If a component's inputs are missing (e.g., no position sizes recorded), exclude it and rescale the remaining components to 0–100, stating which components were used. If the journal has fewer than 10 entries, output a qualitative rating (Low / Moderate / High tilt) instead of a number — a two-decimal score from six entries is false precision.

**Bands:** 0–24 Process-driven | 25–49 Mild tilt | 50–74 Significant tilt | 75–100 Emotion-driven.
Show the components — never output a bare number.

### Step 5: Design Guardrails
For each High/Medium confidence bias, propose one concrete, mechanical guardrail the investor can implement (e.g., "24-hour cooling-off rule after any loss > 2%", "pre-committed exit price written at entry", "position size cap of X% regardless of conviction"). Guardrails must be checkable rules, not advice to "be more disciplined".

---

## Output Format

### 1. Journal Overview
- **Period Covered:** [Start] to [End]
- **Entries Analyzed:** [Count] | **Trades Analyzed:** [Count or N/A]
- **Journal Quality:** [Rich / Adequate / Sparse — note what's missing, e.g., no position sizes]

### 2. Bias Findings
| Bias | Instances | Evidence (Quoted) | Trend | Confidence |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| [Bias] | [Count] | "[verbatim quote]" ([date]) | [Recurring / Improving / Worsening / One-off] | [High/Med/Low] |

### 3. Behavioral Tilt Score
- **Score:** [0–100, or qualitative rating if < 10 entries] — **Band:** [Process-driven / Mild tilt / Significant tilt / Emotion-driven]
- **Components:** Frequency [X/50], Severity [X/30 or "Excluded — no size/outcome data"], Trend [X/20]
- **Interpretation:** [1–2 sentences]

### 4. Longitudinal Patterns
[What changes over time; clustering around drawdowns/rallies; the single most costly recurring pattern, with evidence.]

### 5. What You're Doing Well
[Process strengths found in the journal, with quotes. Always include if evidence exists.]

### 6. Recommended Guardrails
| For Bias | Guardrail (Mechanical Rule) |
| :--- | :--- |
| [Bias] | [Specific, checkable rule] |

### 7. Other Observations
[Notable patterns outside the taxonomy, or "None".]

---

## Absolute Rules
1. No evidence quote or trade pattern → no bias finding. `Insufficient evidence` is a valid output.
2. Never fabricate, paraphrase-as-quote, or exaggerate journal content.
3. Diagnose patterns, never character. No shaming language.
4. Use only the fixed bias taxonomy for labeled findings.
5. Mask personal/account identifiers.
6. This is behavioral analysis, not financial advice. Never recommend specific investments.

## Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

- **Author:** [sahil1115](https://github.com/sahil1115)
- **Source:** [sahil1115/claude-skills](https://github.com/sahil1115/claude-skills)
- **License:** MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

## Pricing

- **Free** — Free

## Security capabilities

Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access:

- **Network access:** no
- **Filesystem access:** no
- **Shell / process execution:** no
- **Environment & secrets:** no
- **Dynamic code execution:** no

*"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.*


## Versions

- **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source.

## Links

- Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-sahil1115-claude-skills-investment-bias-auditor
- Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/sahil1115
- Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse

---
Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.