Back to knowledge
Risk management8 min read

Risk management

Position-sizing methods for algorithmic systems

Compare fixed lots, fixed cash risk, volatility sizing, and account-based sizing before selecting a rule your broker can support.

Sizing is a contract-specification problem

The desired cash risk must be translated through stop distance, tick size, tick value, volume step, and contract specifications. The same lot value cannot be assumed across brokers or symbol suffixes.

Round the result to a valid volume step and re-check the actual cash risk after rounding. Small accounts can be materially affected by a minimum lot that is larger than the calculated ideal size.

Common sizing families

Fixed-lot sizing is simple but changes in risk as volatility and stop distance change. Fixed-cash or percentage-of-equity sizing keeps risk more consistent when the contract calculation is correct. Volatility sizing adjusts exposure to a measured range, but it can increase size after quiet periods just before volatility expands.

  • Fixed lots: easy to audit, less adaptive.
  • Fixed cash risk: consistent when the stop and tick value are reliable.
  • Volatility sizing: adaptive but sensitive to the lookback and shock events.
  • Portfolio sizing: allocates risk across systems rather than one trade at a time.

Put hard limits around the formula

A sizing formula should have maximum volume, maximum cash risk, margin checks, and a safe response when symbol data is missing. If the calculated volume is invalid or unusually large, refusing the trade is safer than guessing.

Log the requested risk, calculated volume, rounded volume, stop distance, and broker values so a sizing issue can be diagnosed after the fact.

Discuss this article

Ask a setup question, share a backtest, or compare notes with other algorithmic traders. Use a display name; your email remains private.

Create an account or sign in above to join the conversation.

Loading discussion…