I think it's a natural assumption!
you have impact on coins. You can't go arbitrarily big.
At some point you have to split off some of your capital.
Conversation
Having impact on coins has nothing to do with the pots having heterogenous investment opportunities, right?
You could still have each subpot just make the exact same bets the macro portfolio would make, but scaled down.
1
1
If bets have an effect on the market, then sure, the subportfolio manager would find it useful to know how large the total portfolio is (to know how much capital is following the same strategy).
But it will still be maximizing its own log wealth IN THAT CONTEXT.
2
1
ok fine how about your future earning potential?
that's not something you can turn into ETH easily but it is something which should be inside the log
1
or locked coins you have, or your house, or any number of other things that aren't ETH
1
Uh sure but have we resolved the math thing? Was I right about the math?
1
1
uh you were right that it depends on the assumptions you make, sorry about that!
in order for your actualy claim to be right you need to make batshit crazy assumptions
Quote Tweet
2
er sorry about this, that was way too mean
there was no reason for me to phrase it that way
(I get kind of triggered by people misunderstanding Kelly)
3
4
Appreciate it. I probably shouldn't have said blown the fuck out yesterday (I was worried it wouldn't be provocative enough. Lol)
But in retrospect, I wasn't misunderstanding Kelly here, right? Kelly applies equally if you divide a portfolio into pots.
2
2
(if the pots are/can be all identical)
I’m not gonna lie it’s a technicality but I’ll take it
1
2
Show replies