IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/entthe/v46y2022i4p1054-1091.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

It’s a Peoples Game, Isn’t It?! A Comparison Between the Investment Returns of Business Angels and Machine Learning Algorithms

Author

Listed:
  • Ivo Blohm
  • Torben Antretter
  • Charlotta Sirén
  • Dietmar Grichnik
  • Joakim Wincent

Abstract

Investors increasingly use machine learning (ML) algorithms to support their early stage investment decisions. However, it remains unclear if algorithms can make better investment decisions and if so, why. Building on behavioral decision theory, our study compares the investment returns of an algorithm with those of 255 business angels (BAs) investing via an angel investment platform. We explore the influence of human biases and experience on BAs’ returns and find that investors only outperformed the algorithm when they had extensive investment experience and managed to suppress their cognitive biases. These results offer novel insights into the role of cognitive limitations, experience, and the use of algorithms in early stage investing.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivo Blohm & Torben Antretter & Charlotta Sirén & Dietmar Grichnik & Joakim Wincent, 2022. "It’s a Peoples Game, Isn’t It?! A Comparison Between the Investment Returns of Business Angels and Machine Learning Algorithms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(4), pages 1054-1091, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:entthe:v:46:y:2022:i:4:p:1054-1091
    DOI: 10.1177/1042258720945206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1042258720945206
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1042258720945206?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:entthe:v:46:y:2022:i:4:p:1054-1091. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.