What risk percentage should I use per trade?

Systematic strategies commonly risk 0.25%–1% of equity per position; 2% is an aggressive upper bound for discretionary trading. Choose the number by asking how deep a drawdown your longest historical losing streak would produce, then confirm it against the backtest rather than against intuition.

Does this calculator work for futures and leveraged positions?

Yes. The output is a quantity of the base asset and the notional value it represents. On a leveraged venue, compare implied leverage against the maximum your account tier allows, and check the liquidation price separately — a stop is only meaningful if liquidation sits further away than the stop.

Should fees and slippage be included in the risk amount?

They should be budgeted alongside it. Round-trip taker fees plus realistic slippage often add 0.1%–0.3% of notional, which is material when the stop distance is small. A practical approach is to size on the stop, then verify that fees plus slippage remain a small fraction of the risk amount; if they do not, the trade is too tightly stopped to be viable.

What if my stop is so tight that implied leverage exceeds the exchange limit?

That is the calculator telling you the setup is not fundable at this risk budget. The two valid responses are to widen the stop to a level the structure justifies and accept a smaller size, or to lower the risk percent. Keeping the size and moving the stop closer converts a sizing problem into a liquidation problem.

Risk-first sizing

Position Size Calculator

Size the trade from the stop, not from the balance. The leverage is an output, never an input.

Updated 2026-08-18

A position size calculator converts a fixed risk budget into an order size: divide the amount you are willing to lose (equity × risk %) by the distance between entry and stop, and the result is the quantity to buy or sell. Sizing this way means the loss is decided before the trade opens, and leverage becomes a consequence of the stop distance rather than a number you pick. A 1% risk on $10,000 with a 4% stop is $100 ÷ $2,600 = 0.0385 BTC — a $2,500 notional, or 0.25× leverage.

Trade parameters

Account equity (USDT)

Risk per trade (%)

Typically 0.25%–2% for systematic strategies

Entry price (USDT)

Stop-loss price (USDT)

Where the idea is proven wrong — not where the loss feels tolerable

Runs entirely in your browser. No inputs are transmitted or stored.

Sizing output

Position size: —
Notional value: —
Amount at risk: —
Stop distance: —
Implied leverage: —

If implied leverage comes out higher than your venue allows, the stop is too tight for this risk budget — widen the stop and re-size, or reduce risk percent. Do not keep the size and move the stop closer.

The formula

Risk amount      = Equity × Risk %
Stop distance    = |Entry − Stop|
Position size    = Risk amount ÷ Stop distance
Notional value   = Position size × Entry
Implied leverage = Notional value ÷ Equity

1 Enter your account equity — the capital the strategy is actually allowed to use, not your total net worth.
2 Set risk per trade as a percentage. Start from your strategy’s worst historical losing streak, not from a round number.
3 Enter the intended entry price and the stop-loss price where the trade idea is invalidated.
4 Read the position size, then check implied leverage against your venue’s limit before placing the order.

Why the stop determines the size

Most losing accounts are not destroyed by bad entries; they are destroyed by identical position sizes applied to trades with very different stop distances. A fixed 0.1 BTC order risks $260 on a 4% stop and $1,300 on a 20% stop — the same "size" carries five times the loss. Fixed-fractional sizing inverts the arithmetic: you fix the loss, and the quantity floats. Every trade then contributes the same amount of damage when it fails, which is the precondition for any statistical edge to show up over a series.

What risk percent to use

The honest answer depends on how many losses in a row your strategy produces, not on how confident you feel. A strategy with a 45% win rate will, over a few hundred trades, reliably deliver a run of eight or more consecutive losses. At 2% risk that run costs roughly 15% of the account; at 5% it costs 34%, and the recovery arithmetic turns hostile. Systematic desks typically sit between 0.25% and 1% precisely so that a normal losing streak stays inside normal drawdown.

Leverage is an output, not a setting

Choosing "10×" first and then hunting for a stop that fits is backwards, and it is the mechanism behind most liquidations. When size comes from the stop, leverage is simply notional ÷ equity — a number you read afterwards. If it lands above what the venue permits, the constraint is real information: the stop distance and the risk budget are incompatible, and one of them has to change before the order is sent.

Sources

Futures margin calculation rules — OKX
ESMA agrees to prohibit binary options and restrict CFDs to protect retail investors — European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)
PS19/18: Restricting contract for difference products sold to retail clients — Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Educational calculator. Outputs describe arithmetic under the assumptions you enter — they are not a forecast, a recommendation, or investment advice. Quantitative trading can lose money.

Frequently asked

Short answers, with the assumptions stated.

What risk percentage should I use per trade?: Systematic strategies commonly risk 0.25%–1% of equity per position; 2% is an aggressive upper bound for discretionary trading. Choose the number by asking how deep a drawdown your longest historical losing streak would produce, then confirm it against the backtest rather than against intuition.
Does this calculator work for futures and leveraged positions?: Yes. The output is a quantity of the base asset and the notional value it represents. On a leveraged venue, compare implied leverage against the maximum your account tier allows, and check the liquidation price separately — a stop is only meaningful if liquidation sits further away than the stop.
Should fees and slippage be included in the risk amount?: They should be budgeted alongside it. Round-trip taker fees plus realistic slippage often add 0.1%–0.3% of notional, which is material when the stop distance is small. A practical approach is to size on the stop, then verify that fees plus slippage remain a small fraction of the risk amount; if they do not, the trade is too tightly stopped to be viable.
What if my stop is so tight that implied leverage exceeds the exchange limit?: That is the calculator telling you the setup is not fundable at this risk budget. The two valid responses are to widen the stop to a level the structure justifies and accept a smaller size, or to lower the risk percent. Keeping the size and moving the stop closer converts a sizing problem into a liquidation problem.

Take the number into a terminal that enforces it

Position caps, drawdown stops, and liquidation distance are limits QANTERION applies while a strategy runs — not figures you re-check by hand.

Start on paper — free See pricing