Control losses, Limit losses, Avoid losses... Eliminate losses
My average monthly return is 10%, in the first month I earned 120%, in the second -100%. Ending capital = ₹0.
My average monthly return is 100%, in the first month I earned 200%, in the second -100%. Ending capital = ₹0.
My average monthly return is ∞%, in the first month I earned ∞%, in the second -100%. Ending capital = ₹0.
When stated like this, average monthly return means nothing, big losses mean everything. Or, monthly average return is more meaningful than average monthly return.
D Did i confuse u on this one?). Better still, state the compounded rate of return.
Take 0% average monthly return, with initial capital of ₹100.
Case 0: In the first month I got 0%, in the second 0%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹100, at the end of month 2 ₹100. Net change 0%.
Case 10: In the first month I got 10%, in the second -10%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹110, at the end of month 2 ₹99. Net change -1%.
Case 25: In the first month I got 25%, in the second -25%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹125, at the end of month 2 ₹93.75. Net change -6.25%.
Case 50: In the first month I got 50%, in the second -50%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹150, at the end of month 2 ₹75. Net change -25%.
Except in case where u lose 100% and have no more dough, the result is the same if the order of return is changed.
For example, reverse case 50: In the first month I got -50%, in the second 50%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹50, at the end of month 2 ₹75. Net change remains same at -25%.
I have taken 2 months... but as per my maths teacher, same logic applies even if there are more months than my fingers.
And my moral science teacher tells me the following morals from this story:
1. Eliminate big losses.
2. Bank deposits are a relatively risk free, always +ve return system. But get a rate that can trump inflation.
My average monthly return is 10%, in the first month I earned 120%, in the second -100%. Ending capital = ₹0.
My average monthly return is 100%, in the first month I earned 200%, in the second -100%. Ending capital = ₹0.
My average monthly return is ∞%, in the first month I earned ∞%, in the second -100%. Ending capital = ₹0.
When stated like this, average monthly return means nothing, big losses mean everything. Or, monthly average return is more meaningful than average monthly return.
Take 0% average monthly return, with initial capital of ₹100.
Case 0: In the first month I got 0%, in the second 0%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹100, at the end of month 2 ₹100. Net change 0%.
Case 10: In the first month I got 10%, in the second -10%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹110, at the end of month 2 ₹99. Net change -1%.
Case 25: In the first month I got 25%, in the second -25%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹125, at the end of month 2 ₹93.75. Net change -6.25%.
Case 50: In the first month I got 50%, in the second -50%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹150, at the end of month 2 ₹75. Net change -25%.
Except in case where u lose 100% and have no more dough, the result is the same if the order of return is changed.
For example, reverse case 50: In the first month I got -50%, in the second 50%. Capital at the end of month 1 was ₹50, at the end of month 2 ₹75. Net change remains same at -25%.
I have taken 2 months... but as per my maths teacher, same logic applies even if there are more months than my fingers.
And my moral science teacher tells me the following morals from this story:
1. Eliminate big losses.
2. Bank deposits are a relatively risk free, always +ve return system. But get a rate that can trump inflation.