Gamestudio Links
Zorro Links
Newest Posts
Blobsculptor tools and objects download here
by NeoDumont. 03/28/24 03:01
Issue with Multi-Core WFO Training
by aliswee. 03/24/24 20:20
Why Zorro supports up to 72 cores?
by Edgar_Herrera. 03/23/24 21:41
Zorro Trader GPT
by TipmyPip. 03/06/24 09:27
VSCode instead of SED
by 3run. 03/01/24 19:06
AUM Magazine
Latest Screens
The Bible Game
A psychological thriller game
SHADOW (2014)
DEAD TASTE
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (opm), 778 guests, and 4 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
sakolin, rajesh7827, juergen_wue, NITRO_FOREVER, jack0roses
19043 Registered Users
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: DdlV] #467597
08/15/17 18:06
08/15/17 18:06
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,977
Frankfurt
jcl Offline

Chief Engineer
jcl  Offline

Chief Engineer

Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,977
Frankfurt
MatPed is correct. Adding funds to an account is equivalent to freshly starting a new account with the added funds.

It is not so that the drawdowns in year 10 of a trading system are bigger than the drawdowns in year 1. The drawdowns grow not automatically any year, but their probability grows with the duration of trading. That is a subtle difference. You can freshly start a new account after 10 years trading the system and need not fear immediately a worst case drawdown, since it's more likely that it already happened in one of the years before.

Admittedly this is a bit tricky, but I hope it makes sense.

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: jcl] #467599
08/16/17 00:45
08/16/17 00:45
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
D
DdlV Offline OP
Serious User
DdlV  Offline OP
Serious User
D

Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
Thanks jcl. Yes, it is tricky! laugh

What probability exactly increases over time? Probability of a drawdown happening? Probability of a greater drawdown? Probability of more frequent drawdowns accumulating to a larger total drawdown? It seems it must be one or a combination of some or all of these (& maybe more) to account for the need to keep square root rule capital on the account...

Similarly, let's take a closer look at the 2 $500 accounts that each now have a balance of $650 - the 1st after 9 years and the 2nd after 1 year. If there is some greater probability of larger drawdown that grows with the duration of trading, then I don't understand why I can take the same $80 out of each account. Since they've been trading for different lengths of time, their probabilities must be different, right? And so I can either take more out of the 1 year account or have to take less out of the 9 year account?

Thanks.

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: DdlV] #467600
08/16/17 05:43
08/16/17 05:43
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,977
Frankfurt
jcl Offline

Chief Engineer
jcl  Offline

Chief Engineer

Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,977
Frankfurt
The probability of a bad drawdown DURING ITS LIFETIME is 3 times higher on account 1 than on account 2. But the probability of a bad drawdown in the same year is of course exactly the same.

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: DdlV] #467604
08/16/17 07:39
08/16/17 07:39
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
M
MatPed Offline
User
MatPed  Offline
User
M

Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
Originally Posted By: DdlV

...
Similarly, let's take a closer look at the 2 $500 accounts that each now have a balance of $650 - the 1st after 9 years and the 2nd after 1 year. If there is some greater probability of larger drawdown that grows with the duration of trading, then I don't understand why I can take the same $80 out of each account. Since they've been trading for different lengths of time, their probabilities must be different, right? And so I can either take more out of the 1 year account or have to take less out of the 9 year account?

Thanks.


I guess that the answer is purely mathematical. Somewhere in the discovery process of the square root rule the time variable have been eliminated. Too much time is passed from university, but it seams realistic to me. The objective of the research that brought out the square root was to find the optimal re-investing rule for a long term profitable investment, so the scientist was looking for a time independent rule.

my 2 cents

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: MatPed] #467607
08/16/17 11:28
08/16/17 11:28
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
D
DdlV Offline OP
Serious User
DdlV  Offline OP
Serious User
D

Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
Thanks jcl, MatPed.

MatPed, you definitely win the prize for being a better student than me! laugh

jcl, thanks for the last clarification! It helps, & I now remember it from years ago... laugh

But now, as then, I struggle with how to transition from blue sky theory to what to do here in the real world. Specifically, how do these 2 reconcile:

1) If in every year the probability is the same for the 2 accounts, then in every year they should be treated the same in terms of withdrawal vs. funds left.

2) But, if in every year they are treated the same, since in each individual year the probability is identical, then because of the lifetime probability difference the older account is more likely to blow up, isn't it? Don't the accounts have to be treated differently somehow to prevent this?

Thanks.

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: DdlV] #467608
08/16/17 11:49
08/16/17 11:49
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
M
MatPed Offline
User
MatPed  Offline
User
M

Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
Thank you DdlV,
I will forward you my details where to ship the prize I just won laugh

I do not get you. The probability to blow out an account is not linked to the square root theory. The square root rules is linked on how much to re-invest a profitable TS correctly funded.
To be more clear if you start a TS under-capitalized with 500$ that has 1000$ of capital requirement, you may be profitable for a certain period, the square root will show the amount of money you can withdraw, but likely you will face a margin call. OptimalF can not save you.
At the TS will stop working because the inefficiency of the market is gone the square root can do little.

What I do not understand?
A fellow student.

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: MatPed] #467619
08/17/17 13:15
08/17/17 13:15
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
D
DdlV Offline OP
Serious User
DdlV  Offline OP
Serious User
D

Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
Thanks MatPed. I could certainly be not understanding, but my understanding is that the probability to blow out an account IS linked to the square root theory. In fact, it's purpose is to prevent blowing up...

Specifically:

I started an account 9 years ago with $500 per the Test CR (i.e., not under-capitalized). Its balance today is $650. The square root theory says if I withdraw <=$80 I am not in danger of blowing up the account - it is still properly capitalized. If I withdraw >$80 then I have under-capitalized the account and it is in danger of blowing up. Is that not correct?

Then Part 2 is account #2 started 1 year ago also with $500 per the Test CR, so also not under-capitalized. It is also now at $650. And I'm still confused (not at all unusual frown ) by how to reconcile the questions above...

Thanks.

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: DdlV] #467623
08/17/17 17:16
08/17/17 17:16
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
M
MatPed Offline
User
MatPed  Offline
User
M

Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
Ok, probably I am not able to write it in proper english, but the square root protect you from a Margin call maximizing profit, due to an increased probability of severe drawdown in a PROFITABLE TS. It does not protect you from a drawdown caused because your TS expire.

My perception is that you can not reconcile the 2 aspect because are 2 different things.
Just think at a TS that make 1000 trades in 5 years and no profit and no loss: even, flat . The probability of severe drawdown increases for sure, but you have the same capital, you can not apply the square root, because you have no capital to reinvest. The square root apply only if your TS is profitable and you want a proper money management.
Hope this helps. I do not think I can not tell you more on this matter laugh
Ciao

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: MatPed] #467638
08/18/17 12:37
08/18/17 12:37
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
D
DdlV Offline OP
Serious User
DdlV  Offline OP
Serious User
D

Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,609
Thanks MatPed! So far it seems your English & understanding are better than mine! laugh

I think what you've said helps. But please let me clarify to be sure:

First, strategy expiration is not a part of this, unless I'm missing something like an unstated assumption. I'm assuming whatever strategy we're talking about is still good; otherwise the expiration more than likely overrides everything else.

Then, using your example of a flat account so that the square root rule is not a part of this: The account started at the beginning of year 1 with a certain risk of severe drawdown. To be explicit, x% chance of a drawdown triggering Margin Call.

There seems to be 2 parts to this: "risk" and "severe".

"risk": At the end of year 5 my risk is now (x+y)%. I suspect from what you've written that there's nothing I can do about this - this risk grows continuously as long as I keep trading - right? Is there some other formula/rule that describes this risk growth?

"severe": I also suspect that "severe" has in reality increased also, right? In other words, not only is there a larger % risk of an event; there's also larger risk that the event will be bigger & cause Margin Call even if I've added funds to the account?

To get to the bottom line of all this: What do I need to do (add how much more funds to the account?) at the beginning of year 6 so that I maintain the same x% risk of a drawdown big enough to trigger Margin Call?

Thanks.

Re: Square Root Rule & Additional Investment [Re: DdlV] #467641
08/18/17 15:00
08/18/17 15:00
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
M
MatPed Offline
User
MatPed  Offline
User
M

Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 652
Milano, Italy
Hi Ddlv the answer is in the manual:

"When modeling drawdown depth mathematically with a diffusion model, the maximum drawdown of a break-even system is proportional to the square root of the number of trades, and therefore also to the square root of the trading time. This also means that drawdowns have no limit. A trading system will suffer a drawdown of any depth when you wait long enough."

But, if you have a beak even system, why are you trading it? Stop it, and forget the square root rule. The point is what to do if you have a profitable system and want to keep it running and profitable (and remaining profitable), reinvesting the capital or withdraw some of the money. This is where the square rool plays its role.

Ciao

Last edited by MatPed; 08/18/17 15:11.
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Petra 

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1