由原文自动翻译 · 阅读原文 (English)
我早期在 Kalshi 上的错误是把它当作传统期权，并根据潜在赔付来确定头寸大小。例如，如果一份预测某个经济报告结果的合约有 10% 的机会以“是”到期并支付 10 倍，我会将其视为小额的冷门。我本应该根据我对事件的实际评估概率来确定头寸大小，这可能与市场隐含概率不同，并据此调整赌注，而不是根据市场价格。结果错失了一些高概率冷门的不错赔付，并过度投入到低概率合约中，因为赔付看起来很诱人。边做边学吧。
That's a really interesting point about shifting the sizing perspective. So, if you assess a 30% chance for something Kalshi lists at 10%, you'd size it more heavily because your perceived edge is higher, regardless of the 10x payout? I'm still trying to wrap my head around the best way to approach these.
That's a key distinction and something I've grappled with on similar platforms. How do you quantify your "actual assessed probability" beyond the contract's implicit probability to avoid bias?
That's a key distinction and a solid lesson learned. Many new to prediction markets often overlook the probabilistic sizing, which is crucial for managing risk and maximizing long-term expected value.
Traderforum · 简体中文