Given your holding period and using 2 pairs I'd suggest around 3% (https://www.docdroid.net/ldv7Aiq/londontradersexporobertcarver.pdf.html#page=20) This is far below what any Kelly formula will produce based on the numbers you have given. They are based on Kelly calculations using realistic performance figures that are closer to what most traders achieve. All these arguments about the right Kelly are completely academic in the face of real trading records where we have a huge amount of uncertainty about what the real reward:risk profile is like. There is uncertainty about whether the historical performance is representative in a statistical sense (the less data, the more unreliable the track record). This at least is a known known; for example after 10 years of trading a trader with a sharpe ratio of 0.5 will have a 95% confidence that their true sharpe ratio (of which their track record is just a random sample) is between -0.1 and 1.1. The relevant Kelly criteria figures are 0% and 110%. There are also unknown unknowns: There is uncertainty about the future repeating like the past. With a human discretionary trader there is further uncertainty about performance repeatability. The problem is that the numbers you have given translate into very high reward:risk figures and thus a very high Kelly criteria. I personally think it's unrealistic and irresponsible to use such high figures. I'm not suggesting you are fudging the numbers, merely that you don't have an appreciation of the uncertainty involved in extrapolating into the future. GAT