| name | expected-value |
| description | Use when making decisions under uncertainty with quantifiable outcomes, comparing risky options (investments, product bets, strategic choices), prioritizing projects by expected return, assessing whether to take a gamble, or when user mentions expected value, EV calculation, risk-adjusted return, probability-weighted outcomes, decision tree, or needs to choose between uncertain alternatives. |
Expected Value
Table of Contents
Purpose
Expected Value (EV) provides a framework for making rational decisions under uncertainty by calculating the probability-weighted average of all possible outcomes. This skill guides you through identifying scenarios, estimating probabilities and payoffs, computing expected values, and interpreting results while accounting for risk preferences and real-world constraints.
When to Use
Use this skill when:
- Investment decisions: Should we invest in project A (high risk, high return) or project B (low risk, low return)?
- Product bets: Launch feature X (uncertain adoption) or focus on feature Y (safer bet)?
- Resource allocation: Which initiatives have highest expected return given limited budget?
- Go/no-go decisions: Is expected value of launching positive after accounting for probabilities of success/failure?
- Pricing & negotiation: What's expected value of accepting vs. rejecting an offer?
- Insurance & hedging: Should we buy insurance (guaranteed small loss) vs. risk large loss?
- A/B test interpretation: Which variant has higher expected conversion rate accounting for uncertainty?
- Portfolio optimization: Diversify to maximize expected return for given risk tolerance?
Trigger phrases: "expected value", "EV calculation", "risk-adjusted return", "probability-weighted outcomes", "decision tree", "should I take this gamble", "compare risky options"
What Is It?
Expected Value (EV) = Σ (Probability of outcome × Value of outcome)
For each possible outcome, multiply its probability by its value (payoff), then sum across all outcomes.
Core formula:
EV = (p₁ × v₁) + (p₂ × v₂) + ... + (pₙ × vₙ)
where:
- p₁, p₂, ..., pₙ are probabilities of each outcome (must sum to 1.0)
- v₁, v₂, ..., vₙ are values (payoffs) of each outcome
Quick example:
Scenario: Launch new product feature. Estimate 60% chance of success ($100k revenue), 40% chance of failure (-$20k sunk cost).
Calculation:
- EV = (0.6 × $100k) + (0.4 × -$20k)
- EV = $60k - $8k = $52k
Interpretation: On average, launching this feature yields $52k. Positive EV → launch is rational choice (if risk tolerance allows).
Core benefits:
- Quantitative comparison: Compare disparate options on same scale (expected return)
- Explicit uncertainty: Forces estimation of probabilities instead of gut feel
- Repeatable framework: Same method applies to investments, products, hiring, etc.
- Risk-adjusted: Weights outcomes by likelihood, not just best/worst case
- Portfolio thinking: Optimal long-term strategy is maximize expected value over many decisions
Workflow
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Expected Value Analysis Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Define decision and alternatives
- [ ] Step 2: Identify possible outcomes
- [ ] Step 3: Estimate probabilities
- [ ] Step 4: Estimate payoffs (values)
- [ ] Step 5: Calculate expected values
- [ ] Step 6: Interpret and adjust for risk preferences
Step 1: Define decision and alternatives
What decision are you making? What are the mutually exclusive options? See resources/template.md.
Step 2: Identify possible outcomes
For each alternative, what could happen? List scenarios from best case to worst case. See resources/template.md.
Step 3: Estimate probabilities
What's the probability of each outcome? Use base rates, reference classes, expert judgment, data. See resources/methodology.md.
Step 4: Estimate payoffs (values)
What's the value (gain or loss) of each outcome? Quantify in dollars, time, utility. See resources/methodology.md.
Step 5: Calculate expected values
Multiply probabilities by payoffs, sum across outcomes for each alternative. See resources/template.md.
Step 6: Interpret and adjust for risk preferences
Choose option with highest EV? Or adjust for risk aversion, non-monetary factors, strategic value. See resources/methodology.md.
Validate using resources/evaluators/rubric_expected_value.json. Minimum standard: Average score ≥ 3.5.
Common Patterns
Pattern 1: Investment Decision (Discrete Outcomes)
- Structure: Go/no-go choice with 3-5 discrete scenarios (best, base, worst case)
- Use case: Product launch, hire vs. not hire, accept investment offer, buy vs. lease
- Pros: Simple, intuitive, easy to communicate (decision tree visualization)
- Cons: Oversimplifies continuous distributions, binary framing may miss nuance
- Example: Launch product feature (60% success $100k, 40% fail -$20k) → EV = $52k
Pattern 2: Portfolio Allocation (Multiple Options)
- Structure: Allocate budget across N projects, each with own EV and risk profile
- Use case: Venture portfolio, R&D budget, marketing spend allocation, team capacity
- Pros: Diversification reduces variance, can optimize for risk/return tradeoff
- Cons: Requires estimates for many variables, correlations matter (not independent)
- Example: Invest in 3 startups ($50k each), EVs = [$20k, $15k, -$10k]. Total EV = $25k. Diversified portfolio reduces risk vs. single $150k bet.
Pattern 3: Sequential Decision (Decision Tree)
- Structure: Series of decisions over time, outcomes of early decisions affect later options
- Use case: Clinical trials (Phase I → II → III), staged investment, explore then exploit
- Pros: Captures optionality (can stop if early results bad), fold-back induction finds optimal strategy
- Cons: Tree grows exponentially, need probabilities for all branches
- Example: Phase I drug trial (70% pass, $1M cost) → if pass, Phase II (50% pass, $5M) → if pass, Phase III (40% approve, $50M revenue). Calculate EV working backwards.
Pattern 4: Continuous Distribution (Monte Carlo)
- Structure: Outcomes are continuous (revenue could be $0-$1M), use probability distributions
- Use case: Financial modeling, project timelines, resource planning, sensitivity analysis
- Pros: Captures full uncertainty, avoids discrete scenario bias, provides confidence intervals
- Cons: Requires distributional assumptions, computationally intensive, harder to communicate
- Example: Revenue ~ Normal($500k, $100k std dev). Run 10,000 simulations → mean = $510k, 90% CI = [$350k, $670k].
Pattern 5: Competitive Game (Payoff Matrix)
- Structure: Your outcome depends on competitor's choice, create payoff matrix
- Use case: Pricing strategy, product launch timing, negotiation, auction bidding
- Pros: Incorporates strategic interaction, finds Nash equilibrium
- Cons: Requires estimating competitor's probabilities and payoffs, game-theoretic complexity
- Example: Price high vs. low, competitor prices high vs. low → 2×2 matrix. Calculate EV for each strategy given beliefs about competitor.
Guardrails
Critical requirements:
Probabilities must sum to 1.0: If you list outcomes, their probabilities must be exhaustive (cover all possibilities) and mutually exclusive (no overlap). Check: p₁ + p₂ + ... + pₙ = 1.0.
Don't use EV for one-shot, high-stakes decisions without risk adjustment: EV is long-run average. For rare, irreversible decisions (bet life savings, critical surgery), consider risk aversion. A 1% chance of $1B (EV = $10M) doesn't mean you should bet your house.
Quantify uncertainty, don't hide it: Probabilities and payoffs are estimates, often uncertain. Use ranges (optimistic/pessimistic), sensitivity analysis, or distributions. Don't pretend false precision.
Consider non-monetary value: EV in dollars is convenient, but some outcomes have utility not captured by money (reputation, learning, optionality, morale). Convert to common scale or use multi-attribute utility.
Probabilities must be calibrated: Don't use gut-feel probabilities without grounding. Use base rates, reference classes, data, expert forecasts. Test: are your "70% confident" predictions right 70% of the time?
Account for correlated outcomes: If outcomes aren't independent (economic downturn affects all portfolio companies), correlation reduces diversification benefit. Model dependencies.
Time value of money: Payoffs at different times aren't equivalent. Discount future cash flows to present value (NPV = Σ CF_t / (1+r)^t). EV should use NPV, not nominal values.
Stopping rules and option value: In sequential decisions, fold-back induction finds optimal strategy. Don't ignore option to stop early, pivot, or wait for more information.
Common pitfalls:
- ❌ Ignoring risk aversion: EV($100k, 50/50) = EV($50k, certain) but most prefer certain $50k. Use utility functions for risk-averse agents.
- ❌ Anchor on single scenario: "Best case is $1M!" → but probability is 5%. Focus on EV, not cherry-picked scenarios.
- ❌ False precision: "Probability = 67.3%" when you're guessing. Use ranges, express uncertainty.
- ❌ Sunk cost fallacy: Past costs are sunk, don't include in forward-looking EV. Only future costs/benefits matter.
- ❌ Ignoring tail risk: Low-probability, high-impact events (0.1% chance of -$10M) can dominate EV. Don't round to zero.
- ❌ Static analysis: Assume you can't update beliefs or change course. Real decisions allow learning and pivoting.
Quick Reference
Key formulas:
Expected Value: EV = Σ (pᵢ × vᵢ) where p = probability, v = value
Expected Utility (for risk aversion): EU = Σ (pᵢ × U(vᵢ)) where U = utility function
- Risk-neutral: U(x) = x (EV = EU)
- Risk-averse: U(x) = √x or U(x) = log(x) (concave)
- Risk-seeking: U(x) = x² (convex)
Net Present Value: NPV = Σ (CF_t / (1+r)^t) where CF = cash flow, r = discount rate, t = time period
Variance (risk measure): Var = Σ (pᵢ × (vᵢ - EV)²)
Standard Deviation: σ = √Var
Coefficient of Variation (risk/return ratio): CV = σ / EV (lower = better risk-adjusted return)
Breakeven probability: p* where EV = 0. Solve: p* × v_success + (1-p*) × v_failure = 0.
Decision rules:
- Maximize EV: Choose option with highest EV (risk-neutral, repeated decisions)
- Maximize EU: Choose option with highest expected utility (risk-averse, incorporates preferences)
- Minimax regret: Minimize maximum regret across scenarios (conservative, avoid worst mistake)
- Satisficing: Choose first option above threshold EV (bounded rationality)
Sensitivity analysis questions:
- How much do probabilities need to change to flip decision?
- What's EV in best case? Worst case? Which variables have most impact?
- At what probability does EV break even (EV = 0)?
Key resources:
- resources/template.md: Decision framing, outcome identification, EV calculation templates, sensitivity analysis
- resources/methodology.md: Probability estimation, payoff quantification, decision tree analysis, utility functions
- resources/evaluators/rubric_expected_value.json: Quality criteria (scenario completeness, probability calibration, payoff quantification, EV interpretation)
Inputs required:
- Decision: What are you choosing between? (2+ mutually exclusive alternatives)
- Outcomes: For each alternative, what could happen? (3-5 scenarios typical)
- Probabilities: How likely is each outcome? (sum to 1.0)
- Payoffs: What's the value (gain/loss) of each outcome? (dollars, time, utility)
Outputs produced:
expected-value-analysis.md: Decision framing, outcome scenarios with probabilities and payoffs, EV calculations, sensitivity analysis, recommendation with risk considerations