NexusFi: Find Your Edge


Home Menu

 





Risk of Ruin


Discussion in Psychology and Money Management

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one Fat Tails with 33 posts (301 thanks)
    2. looks_two Big Mike with 17 posts (81 thanks)
    3. looks_3 vvhg with 17 posts (43 thanks)
    4. looks_4 stephenszpak with 9 posts (10 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one Fat Tails with 9.1 thanks per post
    2. looks_two TheTrend with 7 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 Big Mike with 4.8 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 vvhg with 2.5 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 95,443 views
    2. thumb_up 652 thanks given
    3. group 89 followers
    1. forum 147 posts
    2. attach_file 43 attachments




 
Search this Thread

Risk of Ruin

  #91 (permalink)
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 Fat Tails 
Berlin, Europe
Market Wizard
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker: Interactive Brokers
Trading: Keyboard
Posts: 9,888 since Mar 2010
Thanks Given: 4,242
Thanks Received: 27,102


rosariod View Post
First of all thanks for your help and for your time.

For sure a Monte Carlo Analysis is a good approach to determine the probability of reaching a fraction/multiple of your initial bankroll and I’ve already done it but I would like to find a formula and then, generalizing, apply it to different trading system on the same bankroll.
If I trade k different trading system on the same bankroll with k different f(i)I would like to have a function P(X,n) that give the probability that the bankroll is X fraction after n iterations.
Is it possible to have such function or I have to use Monte Carlo Analysis.

The problems of any model / closed formula are the model assumptions. The great economists have always failed, because they have applied their models without taking into account model limitations.

I have much more confidence in an empirical approach such as the Monte Carlo Analysis, compared to a theoretical approach such as the Kelly formula. If you are interested in applying the Kelly formula to your problems, I suggest that you work through the papers and books below.....


Links to papers on the Kelly Criterion:

https://edwardothorp.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/Column23understandingthekellycriterion.doc
https://edwardothorp.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/Good_Bad_Paper.pdf
https://edwardothorp.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/KellyCriterion2007.pdf
http://edwardothorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/KellySimulationsNew.pdf
https://www.efmaefm.org/0EFMAMEETINGS/EFMA%20ANNUAL%20MEETINGS/2011-Braga/papers/0103.pdf

Further get some elementary knowledge by reading these books ......

Amazon.com: The Doctrine of Chances: Probabilistic Aspects of Gambling (Probability and Its Applications) (9783540787822): Stewart N. Ethier: Books
Amazon.com: The Kelly Capital Growth Investment Criterion: Theory and Practice (World Scientific Handbook in Financial Economic) (9789814293495): Leonard C. MacLean, Edward O. Thorp, William T. Ziemba: Books
Amazon.com: Scenarios for Risk Management and Global Investment Strategies (The Wiley Finance Series) (9780470319246): Rachel E. S. Ziemba, William T. Ziemba: Books


If you think that this is complicated stuff, then you should consider a Monte Carlo Analysis instead.

Reply With Quote

Can you help answer these questions
from other members on NexusFi?
ZombieSqueeze
Platforms and Indicators
Exit Strategy
NinjaTrader
Online prop firm The Funded Trader (TFT) going under?
Traders Hideout
Deepmoney LLM
Elite Quantitative GenAI/LLM
My NT8 Volume Profile Split by Asian/Euro/Open
NinjaTrader
 
Best Threads (Most Thanked)
in the last 7 days on NexusFi
Get funded firms 2023/2024 - Any recommendations or word …
60 thanks
Funded Trader platforms
37 thanks
NexusFi site changelog and issues/problem reporting
24 thanks
GFIs1 1 DAX trade per day journal
22 thanks
The Program
19 thanks
  #92 (permalink)
 
Big Mike's Avatar
 Big Mike 
Manta, Ecuador
Site Administrator
Developer
Swing Trader
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Custom solution
Broker: IBKR
Trading: Stocks & Futures
Frequency: Every few days
Duration: Weeks
Posts: 50,399 since Jun 2009
Thanks Given: 33,175
Thanks Received: 101,541

A few months off, but Ernie Chan will be doing a webinar on nexusfi.com (formerly BMT) in January that focuses on Capital Allocation and Risk management using Kelly:



Mike

We're here to help: just ask the community or contact our Help Desk

Quick Links: Change your Username or Register as a Vendor
Searching for trading reviews? Review this list
Lifetime Elite Membership: Sign-up for only $149 USD
Exclusive money saving offers from our Site Sponsors: Browse Offers
Report problems with the site: Using the NexusFi changelog thread
Follow me on Twitter Visit my NexusFi Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #93 (permalink)
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 Fat Tails 
Berlin, Europe
Market Wizard
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker: Interactive Brokers
Trading: Keyboard
Posts: 9,888 since Mar 2010
Thanks Given: 4,242
Thanks Received: 27,102



OxfordStrat View Post
P. Kaufman offers different formulas in different books. Since the source is the Ralph Vince's book "Portfolio Management Formulas", I consider Vince's formula the correct one (attachment).

I would not consider Kaufman as a reference for the risk of ruin. Ralph Vince certainly is.

The formula that you have attached looks nice, but I believe that it is incorrect. Here are the reasons. If you have a winning percentage, an average winning and average losing trade, this tells you nothing about the dispersion of the trades.

Example: Let us assume that your winning percentage is 60% and that both your average winning and losing trades are 2% of your initial capital.

Scenario 1: all winning trades yield +2.0%, all losing trades yield -2.0%
Scenario 2: 50% of winning trades yield +0.50%, the other 50% of winning trades yield +3.52%, 50% of losing trades yield -0.50%, the other 50% yield - 3.48%

For both scenarios you would have identical input variables for the model put forward by Ralph Vince, so they will both show the same risk of ruin. However, the second scenario produces a higher risk of ruin than the first one. The reason is that the dispersion of the trades around the mean is larger than for the first scenario. The model by Ralph Vince does not take into account the variance of the average winning and losing trade, but only uses the arithmetic mean. I therefore believe that both the models of Perry Kaufman and Ralph Vince are inherently flawed. Unfortunately I am not capable to come up with something better, but for further research I would rather rely on Edward O. Thorpe than Ralph Vincent.

Reply With Quote
  #94 (permalink)
 
VinceVirgil's Avatar
 VinceVirgil 
Toronto, Canada
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: NT
Broker: TD Ameritrade, Dorman/Zenfire
Trading: CL,ES
Posts: 1,752 since Aug 2011
Thanks Given: 2,144
Thanks Received: 9,223


OxfordStrat View Post
With unknown distribution of trades, all formulas are misleading. Plus all the above formulas ignore the dynamic leverage. An example (attachment) is the portfolio of 25 futures markets -- this whale shaped "thing" starts to crack around Risk = 6% (fixed fractional sizing). When you increase the number of markets in portfolio, the "crack" shifts towards left, and when you reduce the number of markets in portfolio, it shifts towards right. I am sure you are aware of this fact, but I am always astonished how many traders have some canned answers like "never risk xx% of portfolio".

I have to admit, I am having a little difficulty understanding this.

Is there a simpler explanation? Or is it simplified as much as possible.

I had a real hard time in calculas for engineers. The instructor spoke with a thick Polish accent, so it was like learning 2 languages simlutaneously.

Do you have an explanation for art majors?

Follow me on Twitter Visit my NexusFi Trade Journal Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #95 (permalink)
 
serac's Avatar
 serac 
Arizona, USA
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker: MB Trading
Trading: Cello
Posts: 116 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 321
Thanks Received: 138


Fat Tails View Post
The model by Ralph Vince does not take into account the variance of the average winning and losing trade, but only uses the arithmetic mean. I therefore believe that both the models of Perry Kaufman and Ralph Vince are inherently flawed.

Agreed. Introducing the influence of the variances is conceptually not difficult. I suppose there are several ways do do it.

If I take the PDF document above, and substitute the equations, I get a nice formula for the risk of ruin (RR) as a function of probability of a winning trade, average loss, and average gain. This gives the RR as a function of the mean inputs. We are interested in this, as well as the deviation from the mean due to variance of the inputs. Let's call this the sensitivity of the risk of ruin, or delta-RR.

The value of delta-RR is the sum of the sensitivities of RR due to the variances of each input. The sensitivity of RR due to one input is the standard deviation of that input times the change in RR with respect to that input. As you may know, the "the change in RR with respect to that input" is jsut another way of saying "the derivative of RR with respect to that input" [the vector containing each of the derivatives with respect to each input is a Jacobian, of sorts].

Unfortunately, doing all the math yields fairly lengthy equations. Let me summarize:

Reproducing the first figure for a profit factor of 2, and assuming a standard deviation of 5% for pWin, Lavg%, and profit factor, I get a much different picture. Without taking the 5% standard deviations into account, I calculate a RR of 16% for a Lavg% of 5%. However, assuming the standard deviations, I get a worst-case RR of 68%.

In the figure below, the red line is the same line as the Wavg%/Lavg% = 2.00 line in t he first figure of the pdf. The Blue line is based on the red line calculation, but including 5% standard deviation for pWin, Lavg%, and Wavg%. Note that is with with pWin, Lavg%, and Wavg% all hitting their low mark at the same time. This analysis does not account for the probability that you are unlucky with three statistics simultaneously.

Reply With Quote
  #96 (permalink)
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 Fat Tails 
Berlin, Europe
Market Wizard
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker: Interactive Brokers
Trading: Keyboard
Posts: 9,888 since Mar 2010
Thanks Given: 4,242
Thanks Received: 27,102


serac View Post
Agreed. Introducing the influence of the variances is conceptually not difficult. I suppose there are several ways do do it.

If I take the PDF document above, and substitute the equations, I get a nice formula for the risk of ruin (RR) as a function of probability of a winning trade, average loss, and average gain. This gives the RR as a function of the mean inputs. We are interested in this, as well as the deviation from the mean due to variance of the inputs. Let's call this the sensitivity of the risk of ruin, or delta-RR.

The value of delta-RR is the sum of the sensitivities of RR due to the variances of each input. The sensitivity of RR due to one input is the standard deviation of that input times the change in RR with respect to that input. As you may know, the "the change in RR with respect to that input" is jsut another way of saying "the derivative of RR with respect to that input" [the vector containing each of the derivatives with respect to each input is a Jacobian, of sorts].

Unfortunately, doing all the math yields fairly lengthy equations.

Don't hesitate to attach a document with your equations.

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #97 (permalink)
 
serac's Avatar
 serac 
Arizona, USA
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker: MB Trading
Trading: Cello
Posts: 116 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 321
Thanks Received: 138


Fat Tails View Post
Don't hesitate to attach a document with your equations.

Well, then. Here you go.

The PDF has my (fairly roough) derivation in Mathematica.

The txt file has the Mathematica output in C. A few minutes of massaging will make it work in C# (I am not at NinjaTrader now, else I would do it).

Attached Thumbnails
Risk of Ruin-deltarr.pdf  
Attached Files
Elite Membership required to download: deltaRRcode.txt
Reply With Quote
  #98 (permalink)
Inol
Paris / France
 
Posts: 6 since Dec 2012
Thanks Given: 0
Thanks Received: 3

sometimes i thought you speak chinese

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #99 (permalink)
bancor
euroland
 
Posts: 5 since May 2012
Thanks Given: 1
Thanks Received: 3

Great thread.
I think there are two way to get an approximate estimates of risk of ruin, starting from history of past trades: i) using bootstrap, if you think future return/variance space shall be sample of past, ii) using a known PDF, closest to past trades PDF.
I remember an old paper about kelly criterion applied to t-student PDF (R. Osorio, 2008): stock returns PDF seem (?!) close to a 4.5 df t-student.
I have made some attempts using Johnson PDF (it accepts first four stat moments as inputs) but my preference is about bootstrap.
happy new year

Reply With Quote
  #100 (permalink)
 leinster 
Brussels / Dublin
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: ninjatrader
Trading: Stdev + 2
Posts: 468 since Jun 2010
Thanks Given: 844
Thanks Received: 595


So here is one of my strategies and i removed the number of contracts performing scale in and scale out to see what percentage i receive from a base state (of 1 contract). As you can see the numbers are high enough (trend following). It suggests to put 37% of capital at full force however ed thorp suggests when he was doing trend following he would perform at around 1/10 | 1/20 of kelly. If we suggest that the figures are right this would mean 37% / 20 = 1.85% risk per trade at 1/20 .

I'm wondering would it be interesting to segregate an account and throw 10K at it and see what happens.

Anyone using it explicitly in there trading ?

Its more difficult to use in futures due to the leveraged nature but i wonder using spread options maybe a lot better.



Some interesting reading:

http://math.uchicago.edu/~cfm/Chicago_Kelly.ppt

Reply With Quote




Last Updated on October 14, 2023


© 2024 NexusFi™, s.a., All Rights Reserved.
Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama City, Panama, Ph: +507 833-9432 (Panama and Intl), +1 888-312-3001 (USA and Canada)
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice. There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
About Us - Contact Us - Site Rules, Acceptable Use, and Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy - Downloads - Top
no new posts