Lump sum versus dollar averaging

I'm trying to decide between putting my three thousand into a lump sum investment all at once versus spreading it out over several months using dollar cost averaging. I've heard arguments for both approaches but can't figure out which actually makes more sense for someone in my situation.

Both strategies have genuine merit depending on circumstances. Mathematically, lump sum investing outperforms dollar cost averaging roughly two thirds of the time historically because markets tend to rise over long periods, meaning money invested earlier has more time to compound. However, dollar cost averaging provides psychological protection against the specific bad luck of investing everything immediately before a significant downturn. For a first-time investor, the psychological comfort of spreading it out often leads to better behavioral outcomes.

Agonized over this exact decision for months and eventually just split the difference. Put half in immediately and spread the remaining half over six monthly contributions. This removed the paralysis of trying to time the market perfectly while still getting meaningful capital working quickly. In hindsight the specific method mattered far less than simply starting, because every month of delay was just lost compounding time I couldn't recover: https://finance-seed.com/en/3k-investment/ Good practical breakdown of both approaches for smaller starting amounts.