Regarding the rule "His work is greater than his friend's" in recovering a loss

In the Book of 32, we learn that his work is more than his friend's work from "Eps, because there will be no needy person in you," meaning that the permission is so that he will not be needy. Therefore, it seems to me that if he is not actually engaged in the work at a high cost, he does not have permission to get rid of the return. This is in contrast to an old man and is not according to his dignity in unloading and returning a lost thing, where the rule is (Shulchan Aruch, 63): Likewise, if there was an old man who had no way to unload and claim, since it was not according to his dignity, he is exempt. This is the rule, if it were his, he would unload and claim, the rabbi is obliged to claim and unload on behalf of his companion; and if he was a Hasid and had previously acted according to the law, even if he was the great Nasai and saw his companion's animal lying under a load of straw or reeds and the like, he unloads and claims on his behalf. (And there are those who disagree with this, as explained above, end of section 3) (column 69 in the name of the Rosh). That is, the criterion is whether he was doing it for himself. But as mentioned, this is only said regarding an old man, and it is not according to his dignity and not within the framework of the law that his work is greater than that of his friend (which does indeed appear in the same place in the Gemara). I also don't think it has anything to do with the difference between profit avoidance and loss avoidance. In your case, he neither avoids profit nor loses.