Risk of Ruin - Psychology and Money Management | futures io social trading
futures io futures trading


Risk of Ruin
Updated: Views / Replies:32,375 / 124
Created: by Big Mike Attachments:41

Welcome to futures io.

Welcome, Guest!

This forum was established to help traders (especially futures traders) by openly sharing indicators, strategies, methods, trading journals and discussing the psychology of trading.

We are fundamentally different than most other trading forums:
  • We work extremely hard to keep things positive on our forums.
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendor advertising in posts.
  • We firmly believe in openness and encourage sharing. The holy grail is within you, it is not something tangible you can download.
  • We expect our members to participate and become a part of the community. Help yourself by helping others.


You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free and simple, and we will never resell your private information.

-- Big Mike

Reply
 41  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 

Risk of Ruin

  #61 (permalink)
Elite Member
Berlin, Europe
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker/Data: Interactive Brokers
Favorite Futures: Keyboard
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,569 since Mar 2010
Thanks: 4,218 given, 25,136 received


jonc View Post
Is it possible to calculate the approximate number (in range) of trades that would achieve the target account?

Yes, this is possible. The formula supposes fixed fractional betting, which typically leads to geometrical growth. What you need to calculate is the account growth g expected from a single bet. If the target account is 400% of the initial balance, the total growth factor would be t = 4. The number of required trades would then be

N = log t / log g

It is probably easier to understand this by following an example, so let us come back to the spreadsheet:

Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).


In the first example there is a win rate of 45% and multiple R of 2, the expected gain per contract traded is therefore

(0.45 * 18.2 points - 0.55 * 11.8 points) * $ 5 = $ 8.50

With 20 contracts traded the expected gain would be 20 * $ 8.50 = $ 170 for an initial balance of $ 50,000. The growth factor g is (50,000 + 170) / 50,000 = 1.0034 and the required number of trades would be

N = log 4 / log 1.0034 = 408.4

This is quite a large number of trades that are required. However, the edge (45% win rate with an R-multiple after slippage and commissions of 1.54) is not impressive. The risk adjusted Kelly factor is therefore small and it takes some patience to achieve the target account of 400%.

@TheTrend: If you wish you can include this calculation with your Excel sheet as expected number of trades to reach the target.

Reply With Quote
The following 9 users say Thank You to Fat Tails for this post:
 
  #62 (permalink)
Site Administrator
Manta, Ecuador
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: My own custom solution
Favorite Futures: E-mini ES S&P 500
 
Big Mike's Avatar
 
Posts: 45,883 since Jun 2009
Thanks: 29,108 given, 81,697 received

Thanks guys.

Could we get an updated spreadsheet?

Mike

Due to time constraints, please do not PM me if your question can be resolved or answered on the forum.

Need help?
1) Stop changing things. No new indicators, charts, or methods. Be consistent with what is in front of you first.
2) Start a journal and post to it daily with the trades you made to show your strengths and weaknesses.
3) Set goals for yourself to reach daily. Make them about how you trade, not how much money you make.
4) Accept responsibility for your actions. Stop looking elsewhere to explain away poor performance.
5) Where to start as a trader? Watch this webinar and read this thread for hundreds of questions and answers.
6)
Help using the forum? Watch this video to learn general tips on using the site.

If you want
to support our community, become an Elite Member.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Big Mike for this post:
 
  #63 (permalink)
Elite Member
Berlin, Europe
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker/Data: Interactive Brokers
Favorite Futures: Keyboard
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,569 since Mar 2010
Thanks: 4,218 given, 25,136 received



Big Mike View Post
Thanks guys.

Could we get an updated spreadsheet?

Mike

I will leave it to @TheTrend. It is his spreadsheet.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Fat Tails for this post:
 
  #64 (permalink)
Elite Member
Paris, France
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: Amibroker
Favorite Futures: Futures, Stocks
 
Posts: 96 since Jun 2011
Thanks: 118 given, 102 received

Sorry guys, I'm being incredibly busy right now.

I hope I'll be trading full time again in a few weeks and will be able to look into this.

By the way, I mainly swing trade stocks for the moment so I've built this spreadsheet mainly for the benefit of the group and to better understand the figures behind the formulas (and I encourage you to build it yourself if you intend to use it).

You can freely update and adapt this spreadsheet to your needs, there's no copyright on it

Reply With Quote
The following 5 users say Thank You to TheTrend for this post:
 
  #65 (permalink)
Elite Member
Berlin, Europe
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker/Data: Interactive Brokers
Favorite Futures: Keyboard
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,569 since Mar 2010
Thanks: 4,218 given, 25,136 received

As @TheTrend is busy, I have enhanced the spread sheet.

The left part of the spreadsheet is used to adjust Optimal F for the tolerated risk of ruin, when you start off with your trading strategy.

The right part of the spreadsheet allows to calculate the position size. Optimal F assumes that you follow a fixed fractional betting strategy to achieve optimal geometric growth. The number of contracts that should be traded thus depends on the risk parameter (last line of left part of spread sheet) and the current balance of your trading account. The spread sheet now also includes an estimate of the number of traders required until the target account is reached.

All orange fields are entry fields. The Kelly Factor requires manual adjustment, until the calculated risk of ruin matches the tolerated risk of ruin, as entered above.

Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).


The spreadsheet is attached below.

Attached Files
Register to download File Type: xlsx Risk Adjusted Optimal F.xlsx (12.2 KB, 312 views)
Reply With Quote
 
  #66 (permalink)
Elite Member
Canberra
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: MultiCharts
Favorite Futures: AUD/USD
 
Posts: 31 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 23 given, 22 received


Fat Tails View Post
The Kelly formula therefore suggests to bet 9.3% of my account with every single bet. However, it is likely that auch high bets would exceed my risk tolerance, as the associated risk of ruin might exceed the 1% threshold I am willing to tolerate.

Hi FT,

Harking back a couple of pages, it seems to me we need to define what is meant by risk tolerance in the context of this statement. If I understand correctly, the "risk" here is now something quite specific - it's the chance that your "Edge" assumption is not correct. Otherwise there would be no long-term risk if you size correctly - assuming the short-term performance is not too wild. I guess we now need a measure of strategy volatility

cheers,

BB

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to BenosBanderos for this post:
 
  #67 (permalink)
Elite Member
Berlin, Europe
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker/Data: Interactive Brokers
Favorite Futures: Keyboard
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,569 since Mar 2010
Thanks: 4,218 given, 25,136 received


BenosBanderos View Post
Hi FT,

Harking back a couple of pages, it seems to me we need to define what is meant by risk tolerance in the context of this statement. If I understand correctly, the "risk" here is now something quite specific - it's the chance that your "Edge" assumption is not correct. Otherwise there would be no long-term risk if you size correctly - assuming the short-term performance is not too wild. I guess we now need a measure of strategy volatility

cheers,

BB

@BenosBanderos: Thank you for putting up this question, as it is really the key to the problem.

The risk here is NOT the chance that the edge assumption is not correct.


The risk of ruin as defined per the Kelly criterion is the risk that you will lose money although your assumptions have been correct
.


To make that clear: In a card game there is a known probability depending on the number and values of the cards. Even if you have an edge in your card game - such as the Casino has, when distributing Black Jack cards or operating a Roulette table - there is a risk of ruin, which depends on your initial capital and the Kelly factor calculated from your bet size and your edge.


In particular these risks are NOT covered by the above approach:

The risk that you have made a false evaluation of your edge.
The risk that markets have changed and your edge is reduced or no longer there.
Operational risk (power failure, disrupture of data lines, failure/crash of exchange), which leads to an outcome which cannot not be described within the framework of the Bernoulli distribution.

The Bernoulli distribution, on which the model is based, is derived from two possible outcomes of your trades only. So if you have a bad fill, an overnight gap or anything which is beyond the model, it is not covered.

This means that the real risk is much higher, than the above calculated risk. Therefore a quarter Kelly approach as shown in the Excel table above, is the maximum risk that you may assume in accordance with your risk appetite. In view of the additional risk that is not covered you should further reduce your bet size and exposure below the model values suggested.

The point is that you cannot easily calculate a probability of a power failure, the evaporation of your assumed edge or technical errors committed during a backtest.


The calculation of the risk of ruin is therefore limited to the risks that can be evaluated.

It is a model risk, and its meaning is limited to the features of the model. Ask an economist what that means.

Reply With Quote
The following 13 users say Thank You to Fat Tails for this post:
 
  #68 (permalink)
Elite Member
Canberra
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: MultiCharts
Favorite Futures: AUD/USD
 
Posts: 31 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 23 given, 22 received

Hi FT,

I wanted to respond more in depth to this but I confess I need to go back to school and understand Kelly, Opt F from first principals before I can do so. But thanks for clarifying my guesswork there.

I guess as with any model it's important to know it's limitations, how to use it and how to interpret results. So perhaps that is the best question I can ask. How should we use this model/spreadsheet to inform our trading?

One thing that stood out to me by playing with the numbers, is that there seems to be a stronger inverse relationship than I thought between Win Loss ratio and Avg Win vs Avg Loss. For example if you are trading a 1:1 RR you need MUCH better than 60% Win ratio to be profitable - perhaps difficult to achieve. This again emphasised the importance of reducing the number of losing trades and maximising profits on winning ones.

cheers,

BB

Reply With Quote
The following 3 users say Thank You to BenosBanderos for this post:
 
  #69 (permalink)
Elite Member
Berlin, Europe
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker/Data: Interactive Brokers
Favorite Futures: Keyboard
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,569 since Mar 2010
Thanks: 4,218 given, 25,136 received


BenosBanderos View Post
Hi FT,

I wanted to respond more in depth to this but I confess I need to go back to school and understand Kelly, Opt F from first principals before I can do so. But thanks for clarifying my guesswork there.

I guess as with any model it's important to know it's limitations, how to use it and how to interpret results. So perhaps that is the best question I can ask. How should we use this model/spreadsheet to inform our trading?

BB

Absolutely. The main limitation of the model in its current shape is

- that it only applies to Bernoulli distributions, that is trade setups where you either win X or you lose Y
- that some of the risks that cannot be quantified (changing markets, false evaluation of edge, operational risk, gaps)


BenosBanderos View Post

One thing that stood out to me by playing with the numbers, is that there seems to be a stronger inverse relationship than I thought between Win Loss ratio and Avg Win vs Avg Loss. For example if you are trading a 1:1 RR you need MUCH better than 60% Win ratio to be profitable - perhaps difficult to achieve. This again emphasised the importance of reducing the number of losing trades and maximising profits on winning ones.

The much better than 60% win ratio is needed to overcome slippage and commissions. The case shown above refers to a win/loss ratio of 2:1. After accounting for slippage and commissions, this win/loss ratio becomes 1.54:1, which is a significant deterioration. This suggests that with a retail account you should go for more than 10 or 20 points. However, most retail traders are undercapitalized and prefer to trade with a narrow stop loss. If you are a scalper, a small edge is easily converted into no edge by slippage and commissions.

Contrary to what most people think, I believe that the win/loss ratio is more important than the R multiple. The key to understanding this is the standard deviation of returns. A low standard deviation of returns reduces the risk of ruin and allows you to increase leverage. Now if you compare

(1) trading a system with a high R multiple, where the average winning bet is much larger than the average losing bet, but a low win/loss ratio with less than 50% of successful trades (just as the example which I had selected above)

(2) trading a system with a low R multiple, that is an average winning bet similar or equal to the average losing bet, but a high win/loss ratio with something like 75% of successful trades

you will probably find that the latter system has a lower standard deviation of returns. This implies that the drawdowns are not as large, which in turn has a favourable impact on the risk of ruin.

In the end you might be able to trade (2) with a higher leverage, if you specify the same risk of ruin. This might lead to the conclusion that systems which generate regular small returns are preferable to systems that generate an occasional home run. I am saying "might", because I have not yet shown it mathematically. Any comments would be appreciated.


Last edited by Fat Tails; April 12th, 2012 at 08:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
The following 14 users say Thank You to Fat Tails for this post:
 
  #70 (permalink)
Elite Member
Milan (I)
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: Ninjatrader
Broker/Data: Kinetick
Favorite Futures: FDAX,6E,CL,YM,NQ,ES
 
redratsal's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,653 since Oct 2010
Thanks: 1,217 given, 2,059 received


How Bankers define risk of capital. Funny a Swiss Bank using Swiss Chees Model to explain risk of capital. Some points might be interesting for retail traders and automated systems.

Attached Thumbnails
Risk of Ruin-csfb-operational-risk-capital.pdf  
Reply With Quote
The following 6 users say Thank You to redratsal for this post:

Reply



futures io > > > Risk of Ruin

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Upcoming Webinars and Events (4:30PM ET unless noted)

FIO Journal Challenge featuring NinjaTrader ($2,000+ of prizes)

May
 

EasyLanguage ABC's: Mastering TradeStation Programming w/Chris Kaiser

Elite only
 

Prototyping Python Strategies (part 2: Backtesting) w/Ran Aroussi

Elite only
 

Portfolio Diversification w/Brendon Delate @ Diversify Portfolio

Elite only

An Afternoon with FIO member Softsoap (being rescheduled)

Elite only
     

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
More Contracts = Less Risk hondo69 Psychology and Money Management 27 October 25th, 2014 11:07 AM
Risk/Reward Calculator baruchs NinjaTrader 5 December 10th, 2013 05:56 AM
Even the Fed Canít Value Financialsí Risk Quick Summary News and Current Events 0 November 14th, 2011 03:30 PM
ZN low risk JTrain Bonds and Interest Rates Trading 9 January 11th, 2011 05:11 PM
Effective risk sefstrat Psychology and Money Management 5 October 17th, 2009 11:37 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:43 PM.

Copyright © 2017 by futures io, s.a. Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, +507 833-9432, info@futures.io
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.
no new posts
Page generated 2017-05-22 in 0.17 seconds with 20 queries on phoenix via your IP 54.162.96.103