__REAL ACCOUNT__
So since I started journaling here I made an analysis of my trades based on the kelly criterion. Here are the results (last trade not counted yet)

View attachment 225026
There are 34 trades of which 19 winners and 15 losers making my win probability 55,8 %

I made 1436,88 € on winners and lost 761,57 € on the losers making my win loss ratio 1,88

So my Kelly % = W – [(1 – W) / R] = 0,558 - ((1 - 0,558) / 1,88) = 0,323

(exact numbers are in the excel sheet)

So that's pretty good I've been told. It means that I can keep adding up to WINNING positions until 32% of my portfolio is risked as far as I understand it.

Great to see you keeping up the documentation! Documentation for me has been really helpful too. Well done!!

I read through your post above and am thinking that there are some misunderstandings in there, so thought I share my thoughts. (I have used Kelly a fair bit in the past).

The win ratio should not be calculated on the total amounts but on your average trades. Hence:

Average Win = 1437/19 = 75.60

Average Loss = 762/15 = -50.80

Thus your average win:loss ratio is 1.49

Then, multiply the average amounts by their probabilities

75.60 x 19/34 = 42.26

-50.80 x 15/34 = -22.41

Adding these two amounts together comes to 19.85

Dividing this number of 19.85 by your average loss figure of 50.80 gives a percentage of 39%. You should then divide that 39% by 1.49 (your RR ratio) - this gives a figure of 26.17.

Using full Kelly this implies that you should wager 26.17% of your bankroll on every trade. [A more conservative approach would be to use fractional Kelly, such as half-Kelly, quarter-Kelly etc]. Kelly is not about the idea of adding to winning positions - it's about determining the size of your original bet/trade.

The reason you are getting such a high figure is because your trading results imply a really high edge (39%) - as a comparison, getting an ace as a first card in a hand of blackjack gives you a 52% edge. This is most likely because you have only a small sample size of trades (34) on which you are performing these calculations.

My suggested answers here are quite different to what you have written above. I am not sure whether that makes sense to you. And of course, if I am giving you wrong answers, then I'd of course be happy for others to point out errors I might have made.

As a sidenote, I used the above approach to calculate statistics for my own trades (I have quite a few examples of that on my trading blog, here's one specific one

riskmoney-management-introduction/, but then switched to using a "return on amount risked" approach - I found this more useful in order to provide for break-even trades in the sample as they seemed to distort my way for doing the Kelly calculations.

Again, it's really great that you are so diligent with the documentation and logging!! Please let me know if you want to discuss any of the above info in more detail. Once you get your head around these calculations, they can be very useful for helping in your trading business!