Markets: A Rigorous Course

3.3 Overbetting and the shape of gg

Advanced about 10 min

Motivation

Kelly's growth curve is asymmetric in its consequences: underbetting by half costs a quarter of the growth; overbetting by double costs all of it. Traders who estimate their edge with error should know which side of f∗f^* is dangerous.

Where growth turns negative#

Proposition 3.4even money: 2f∗2f^* gives negative growth

For b=1b = 1 and p∈(12,34)p \in (\frac12, \frac34), so that 2f∗<12f^* < 1, g(2f∗)<0g(2f^*) < 0. Consequently the unique root f0∈(f∗,1)f_0 \in (f^*, 1) of gg satisfies f0<2f∗f_0 < 2f^*, and every f∈[2f∗,1)f \in [2f^*, 1) has g(f)<0g(f) < 0.

Proof

With b=1b = 1, f∗=p−q=:ef^* = p - q =: e and p=(1+e)/2p = (1+e)/2, q=(1−e)/2q = (1-e)/2. For ∣f∣<1|f| < 1,

g(f)=pln⁡(1+f)+qln⁡(1−f)=∑k≥1fkk[(−1)k+1p−q]=∑k odde fkk−∑k evenfkk,g(f) = p\ln(1+f) + q\ln(1-f) = \sum_{k\ge1}\frac{f^k}{k}\big[(-1)^{k+1}p - q\big] = \sum_{k\text{ odd}}\frac{e\,f^k}{k} - \sum_{k\text{ even}}\frac{f^k}{k},

because for odd kk the bracket is p−q=ep - q = e and for even kk it is −p−q=−1-p - q = -1. At f=2e<1f = 2e < 1, pair the odd term kk with the even term k+1k+1:

e(2e)kk−(2e)k+1k+1=(2e)k+1[12k−1k+1]=(2e)k+11−k2k(k+1).\frac{e(2e)^k}{k} - \frac{(2e)^{k+1}}{k+1} = (2e)^{k+1}\Big[\frac{1}{2k} - \frac{1}{k+1}\Big] = (2e)^{k+1}\frac{1-k}{2k(k+1)}.

For k=1k = 1 the pair is 0; for k=3,5,…k = 3, 5, \dots it is negative. The series converges absolutely, so g(2e)<0g(2e) < 0. Since g(0)=0g(0) = 0, gg is strictly concave and g(f∗)>0g(f^*) > 0, gg has exactly one root f0f_0 in (f∗,1)(f^*, 1), and g(2f∗)<0g(2f^*) < 0 places it below 2f∗2f^*. Concavity then gives g<0g < 0 on [2f∗,1)[2f^*, 1).∎

Remark 3.5 (the rule is not universal) For long-shot bets the root can lie above 2f∗2f^*. With p=0.02p = 0.02, b=100b = 100 (a 1-in-50 chance at 100:1), f∗=0.02−0.98/100=0.0102f^* = 0.02 - 0.98/100 = 0.0102 and g(2f∗)=0.02ln⁡(3.04)+0.98ln⁡(0.9796)=0.02224−0.02020=+0.0020>0g(2f^*) = 0.02\ln(3.04) + 0.98\ln(0.9796) = 0.02224 - 0.02020 = +0.0020 > 0. Positive skew moves the zero of gg to the right. The "2f∗2f^*" rule is exact in the continuous model (3.4) and true for even-money bets; for skewed payoffs compute gg directly.

The growth parabola#

Second-order picture Write m=E[X]m = E[X] and v=E[X2]v = E[X^2]. For small ff, g(f)=fm−12f2v+O(f3)g(f) = fm - \frac12 f^2v + O(f^3). This parabola peaks at f∗≈m/vf^* \approx m/v with g(f∗)≈m2/(2v)g(f^*) \approx m^2/(2v), crosses zero at 2m/v≈2f∗2m/v \approx 2f^*, and satisfies

g(cf∗)g(f∗)≈2c−c2.(3.7)\frac{g(cf^*)}{g(f^*)} \approx 2c - c^2. \tag{3.7}

Betting half Kelly (c=12c = \frac12) keeps 75% of the growth; double Kelly (c=2c = 2) keeps none. A fractional Kelly bettor gives up little growth for each unit of variance removed.

cc (multiple of Kelly) 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.5 2
Growth as share of max, 2c−c22c - c^2 44% 75% 94% 100% 75% 0%

Worked example 3.3.1

For p=0.55p = 0.55, b=1b = 1: f∗=0.10f^* = 0.10, the exact root is f0=0.1987<0.20f_0 = 0.1987 < 0.20, and g(0.20)=−0.00014g(0.20) = -0.00014 per bet. For the swing system (p=0.4p = 0.4, b=2.5b = 2.5): f∗=0.16f^* = 0.16, f0=0.331>0.32f_0 = 0.331 > 0.32, and g(0.32)=+0.0037g(0.32) = +0.0037: the positively skewed R distribution moves the root slightly beyond 2f∗2f^*, as Remark 3.5 predicts.

Create a free account

Reading is open to everyone. An account keeps your progress, answers, notes and code drafts, and gives you the study plan, the journals and the simulator. Running code needs an account approved for it.