Calculator
13.00%
Calculate educational maximum drawdown from a peak and trough equity value. Use it to review paper-trading workflows and agent behavior.
13.00%
Maximum drawdown is the drop from a peak to a later trough, divided by the peak. It is one way to review how much pain a paper workflow creates before recovery.
This is an educational calculation. It does not predict future drawdown or define a safe live-trading limit.
Maximum drawdown is a stress signal for a paper-trading workflow. It shows how far the simulated equity curve fell from a previous high before reaching a trough. That number is useful because it forces a trader to look beyond win rate and ask whether the process creates losses that are too deep for the intended rule set.
In a paper-agent workflow, drawdown should be compared with the limit that existed before the test. If an agent was allowed a 10 percent simulated drawdown and the paper sample produced 18 percent, the review should not focus only on whether the agent later recovered. It should ask which behavior created the breach: oversized positions, too many correlated trades, late exits, poor invalidation, or a market regime the rule was never designed to handle.
Drawdown also needs sample context. A small drawdown over five paper trades may not mean much, and a large drawdown during a noisy test may still be useful if it exposes a clear flaw. Trading Boy connects this calculator to risk review and post-trade review so the number becomes part of the workflow record instead of an isolated statistic.
For SEO and user trust, the boundary is important: maximum drawdown is educational. It does not predict the worst future loss, reproduce live fills, include every fee or slippage condition, or make a strategy safe. It is one metric for reviewing paper behavior with more discipline.
Inputs: A paper account reaches a peak value of 10,000 and later falls to 8,700. The calculator shows a 13.00 percent maximum drawdown.
Review: The agent's written limit was 10 percent, so the issue is not simply that the paper account declined. The issue is that the workflow crossed its own boundary. The journal shows three similar trades were open at the same time, which points to correlated exposure rather than one isolated mistake.
Next action: The trader adds a rule that caps related exposure and continues the paper test with a new sample tag. The drawdown number becomes evidence for a specific control change.
Pair drawdown review with the position size calculator. Deep paper drawdown often starts with a size rule that was too loose or not enforced.
If many trades fire close together, the agent may create more exposure than the rule intended. Review frequency, correlation, and skip conditions together.
A common mistake is reviewing drawdown only after a paper account recovers. Recovery can make the decline feel less important, but the workflow still crossed a stress level that needs to be understood. The maximum drawdown remains part of the record.
Another mistake is comparing drawdown across workflows with different trade frequency or position size. A slow agent with five paper trades and a fast agent with fifty paper trades need different review context. Use the calculator result with sample size, exposure, and setup type.
Finally, do not treat low drawdown as proof that a rule is ready. The sample may be too small, the market may have been unusually calm, or the paper model may not include live frictions. Drawdown review should support better questions, not final certainty.
When drawdown breaches the written limit, preserve the old sample and start a new one after the rule change. Mixing both samples can hide whether the new control actually reduced stress in the paper workflow.
When drawdown stays inside the limit, still review the path. A smooth equity curve created by too few trades may not provide enough evidence to trust the rule even in paper mode.
It is the percentage drop from a peak equity value to a later trough, used to review how much a paper workflow declined before recovery or reset.
Compare drawdown with the limit written before the test, then use the review to inspect sizing, frequency, correlation, and exit behavior.
No. A paper sample can miss future risk and does not reproduce every live-market friction. Treat drawdown as one review metric.