I mean generally you would never use anything with Sharpe 0.5 so the capital allocated would be… zero The point is you have MANY, some are 1.5 some are 2 some are 1.3 some are 0.5 some are 3.2… then you split between them. Also when looking at decreasing drawdown it would be wise to look at the Sortino ratio more than Sharpe.
I agree and not using algorithms as we do to hedge against the failures of HODL and also outperforming by trading - thats where the majority of money comes from for funds and individuals alike.
I am not sure you truly understand or appreciate what Kelly is and how to use it. You shouldn't change your bet size while trading if you practice Kelly. If you have a method that after enough statistics, is proven to have a positive expectancy and the win rate, R:R are determined. Kelly give you max return and low risk of ruin. The challenge for us trader is win rate and R:R for our method changes over time and over different instruments so a max return Kelly often is over the cliff and results in ruin. That is why Thorp usually used 1/4 Kelly to ensure he stayed on the left side even with the uncertainty.
Small accounts can bet more than Kelly to turbo boost the account equity. If you blowup, recharge the account from income. When your account has grown, then drop down below Kelly. Because it is only a matter of time till your luck runs out and you hit a nasty losing streak.
In a nutshell: @TrAndy2022 did not provide enough details. @SOFEX's OP is about right. It's about time @wxytrader upgrades his 2008 Lambo to a 2024 model.
Another conclusion is how important position sizing really is to the overall performance of any strat (or portfolio of strats), aside from the risk management basics of getting out when thingz aren't going well. The psychological angle is also important, because if you can't handle the volatility of your account when running the optimum positoin size, it may be time for counseling! There was even a "trading tribe" for exactly this purpose, years ago.....