Calculator
Compare a one-time access payment with 2 and 20 fees
Compare a one-time 6.7% access payment with a 2% management and 20% performance fee over 1 to 10 years using the same assumed gross returns. This compares fee structures, not the full cost of investing: broker costs and taxes are excluded.
One-time access payment
6.7% once, at the start
$1,160,801
final value after $33,500 in fees
2 and 20 fund
2% and 20%, every year
$945,936
final value after $209,852 in fees
management $78,695 · performance $131,158
Same assumed gross path. Final-value differences include fees and their effect on compounding; fees shown are amounts charged.
Assumptions
Read the fee explanation- The management fee is charged on year-end value.
- The performance fee is charged on gains above the high-water mark, before deducting that year's management fee. The high-water mark updates to the highest after-fee year-end value.
- The one-time fee is paid before trading and its cost compounds as foregone capital.
- Broker costs (spreads, commissions, swaps, slippage) and taxes are excluded from both structures.
- BlackRidge's access payment is 6.7% of the trading level and nonrefundable.
- The comparison is arithmetic about costs, not a claim about any manager's skill. Past or assumed returns do not predict results.
Reading the comparison
Capital is the starting balance in this simplified fee model. Both structures use the same assumed gross return path. The one-time payment reduces the starting balance before compounding, while recurring fees reduce the balance year by year. The final-value gap includes the returns forgone on fees already paid, so it is not the same number as the difference between the amounts charged.
In losing years the management fee can still be charged, while the performance fee applies only to gains above the model's high-water mark. The mixed scenario shows a sequence of gains and losses over five years. These paths are illustrations, not probabilities, forecasts or evidence that one strategy will outperform another.
Trading level is not the deposit
This calculator is not a notional-funding projection and does not model leverage, margin calls or liquidation. For an actual allocation, the access payment is based on the agreed trading level, not the smaller amount deposited at the broker. The existing example is a $100,000 trading level with a $25,000 deposit and a separate $6,700 nonrefundable access payment: $31,700 of initial cash outlay before broker costs. That outlay is not a guaranteed loss limit.
Depending on the broker's legal entity, written terms, jurisdiction, client classification and applicable negative balance protection, losses can exceed the deposit. Forced liquidation can fail during a market gap. Read the notional-funding explanation and risk disclosure before treating a funding ratio as a risk boundary.
Related
Numbers are a starting point.
Discuss the assumptions, trading level and full costs before making a decision.
Next: Start here