[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

re: Ralph Vince's R6 Risk of Ruin (Andrew Peskin)


  • To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: re: Ralph Vince's R6 Risk of Ruin (Andrew Peskin)
  • From: Mark Johnson <janitor@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 19:48:14 -0800
  • In-reply-to: <200003071643.IAA18587@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

Andrew Peskin writes:
>
>With the following inputs:
>
>    OptimalF = 0.5
>    WinPercent = 0.35
>    MaxLoss = -3
>    AvgWin = 4
>    AvgLoss = -1
>    Depletion = 0.75
>
>I arrive at:    R6 = 0.0898289
>
>Which seems a little low.
>Any and all help would be appreciated.
>

Your *inputs* don't seem self-consistent.  Refer to the
very same book (_Portfolio_Management_Formulas_), page
number 83.  There is a formula in a section called KELLEY,
for the "optimal f" when winners and losers are not all
the same size.  Using your notation above, the formula
is:

((1 + abs(AvgWin/AvgLoss)) * WinPercent) - 1
---------------------------------------------  =  OptimalF
     abs(AvgWin/AvgLoss)


But plugging in your numerical values,

((1 + abs(4/-1)) * 0.35) - 1
-----------------------------   = OptimalF
    abs(4/-1)

Therefore

(5 * 0.35) - 1
----------------  =  OptimalF
        4

which means that 0.1875 = OptimalF.


Yet you specified that OptimalF = 0.5 .  Since 0.1875
isn't equal to 0.5 (not even close!), there seems to
be a discrepancy between your inputs
    (AvgWin , AvgLoss, WinPercent)
and your input
    (OptimalF)

You might want to check this.


--
   Mark Johnson     Silicon Valley, California     mark@xxxxxxxxxxxx

   "... The world will little note, nor long remember, what we
    say here..."   -Abraham Lincoln, "The Gettysburg Address"