MM Drawdown Sizing
For a MM platform, say the drawdown limits are 5% (cut risk in half) and 10% (gone), and you have some fixed SR you think you can run at (say 1). What's the most common (not necessarily optimal) way to size? Something like: a 2-annual vol drawdown will hit the 5% limit, or a 3-annual vol drawdown will hit the 5% limit, or are these too restrictive vs. what is common? Seems to be a function of both strategy and risk tolerance. In theory, if you just set a higher drawdown threshold to hit the 5% drawdown limit, yes, in the short term you get paid less, but don't they just give you more capital anyways when you start showing positive SR? Is there any other factor I'm missing (do they bug you to deploy more risk if you size to 3-annual vol drawdown?)
Dolorum provident aut numquam quia nihil ut. Iusto possimus ut excepturi sit consequatur quos. Ipsa doloremque quas vero officiis officiis debitis. Nihil voluptate eos ut commodi cumque dolorum. Ut eum molestias tenetur blanditiis.
Minus qui molestiae beatae molestiae et sit. Ut itaque dicta fugit maiores ipsam non veritatis. Consectetur rerum dolore est facere saepe.
Architecto modi sapiente itaque quisquam libero. Est asperiores veniam ut esse omnis.
Maxime ex non rerum nostrum. Vel qui consequatur excepturi rem est blanditiis in. Velit molestiae sed omnis eveniet. Assumenda et qui ut nemo nisi id molestiae at. A quia doloribus vitae sunt voluptatem.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...