Should you be monogamous or polygnous?

http://www.fool.com/personal-finance/general/2007/11/23/invest-differently-live-longer.aspx

The article explores the benefits and costs of different investment strategies. The author compares the mating habits of birds and cites a study that finds that birds who are monogamous do not live as long as there "adulterous" friends. Of course, this article is based on the premise that the fundamental objective is too live longer and that the 100 days of life is valued at the same percentage as say a lifetime of "deep conversations with many people."

The article cited an article by Barber and Odean which cited overconfidence as a major factor. In an article in the American Economic Review, Odean explained that:
The more overconfident an investor, the more he trades and the lower his expected utility. ... Overconfident investors ... have unrealistic beliefs about their expected trading profits ... at the worst, overconfident investors believe they have useful information when in fact they have no information.

So, now on that note, it is an interesting comparison since a fundamental objective of our stock portfolio might also have different weights for different people. What happens for instance if you knew that you were 70% likely only to live until 60 because of new genetic testing models. You might assign different weights to different attributes of a portfolio to maximize your return by age 40. How would you see the utility of your portfolio with this new information?

So what does the article tell you to do:

You should should seek companies with:

Powerful brands and other strong competitive advantages.
Healthy balance sheets.
Talented management.
Rising revenue and earnings.
Falling debt.

I say boring! Yes, we might have more 'perfect information' for these companies but whoever won from marrying the class president - I saw American Beauty -did you?