We had 1000s of discussions here in our forum in regards to ROI (Return on Investment) but I believe we don't highlight the importance of ROT (Return on Time). In the world of smart betting, we often obsess over ROI, and rightly so. ROI tells us how efficiently we’re using our capital. But there’s another metric that’s just as critical, especially for solo operators and high-frequency traders like us. It is called ROT (Return of Time). I decided to write this article after a discussion I had with one of our members in regards to long term bets.
Let’s start with definitions:
ROI (Return on Investment) measures the profitability of an investment. It’s calculated by dividing the net profit by the initial investment cost, then multiplying by 100 to get a percentage. A higher ROI means greater financial return relative to the investment’s cost. It helps assess investment efficiency.
ROT (Return on Time) measures the value or benefit gained relative to the time invested in an activity. It helps assess how effectively time is used, especially in productivity or business contexts. A high ROT means more value was generated per unit of time, guiding better decisions about where to focus effort and energy.
To illustrate both terms, lets go to examples:
What’s ROI?
ROI = (Net Profit / Investment Cost) × 100
It’s the classic metric, how much money you made compared to how much money you put in. For example, if you invested €1,000 and made €100 profit, that’s a 10% ROI. High ROI means you’re deploying your bankroll effectively.
But here’s the catch: ROI says nothing about how long it took.
What’s ROT?
ROT = (Value Gained / Time Spent)
ROT flips the perspective. It asks: How much profit did you get for the time you invested? This is crucial when:
You’re doing many small trades/bets manually
You’re choosing between high-effort vs low-effort strategies
You’re automating part of your work and comparing outcomes
Imagine a bet that gives 20% ROI but takes 3 hours of effort vs. another with 5% ROI but takes 5 minutes. Which is better? From an ROT perspective, the second one might be a smarter use of your time.
Why ROT matters for the smart bettor (often called Arbuser too)
- Time is our most limited resource, bankrolls grow, hours don’t.
- Efficiency is key in high-frequency environments whether we’re manually placing bets or using tools like bots.
- It helps us scale. ROT-focused strategies are more automation-friendly and sustainable.
Conclusion
Don’t choose between ROI and ROT, but use both at the same time. The most successful bettors optimise for both capital efficiency and time efficiency.
Allow me to go my thinking one step further. Most of us guys have a surplus of funds. Not all of that capital needs to be in hyper-active use. Here's a simple approach:
Use your core bankroll with ROT in mind, keep it liquid, active, and focused on day to day action and fast-turn strategies.
Allocate surplus capital with an ROI mindset, use it for slower, long-term strategies where time isn’t the bottleneck.
In this way, no money sleeps, and every euro is working, even when we sleep.
What’s your take? How do you balance ROI and ROT in your business?
ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
-
arbusers
- Administrator
- Contact:
- Karma: 663
- casch
- Gaining experience
- Karma: 0
Post
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
Adding to this very important topic, I also use ROT in my automated trading. Here T is the time it takes for the trade to complete.
A +10% EV on a tennis match that is expected to complete in ~2h is very different from the same EV on a cricket test match that lasts for 5 days. An extreme example, but to prove the point.
Convert everything to ROI per day to rank trades. This kind of ROT is great in your bot, but perhaps a bit different from the ROT in the OP where T is your own time/effort.
A +10% EV on a tennis match that is expected to complete in ~2h is very different from the same EV on a cricket test match that lasts for 5 days. An extreme example, but to prove the point.
Convert everything to ROI per day to rank trades. This kind of ROT is great in your bot, but perhaps a bit different from the ROT in the OP where T is your own time/effort.
-
arb12
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 37
Post
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
@ Arbusers,
Thank you, Mr. Arbusers, for that nice Article!
I believe that such ideas are in the Mind of anyone who runs a well-balanced and predictable business, I mean using a mature business model over time, and relatively predictable revenues whose:
(1) Well-chosen statistical averages are not greatly distorted over the very long time frames (LTF) as well as the external market risks are relatively controllable in that time frame;
(2) Most of the internal sub-timeframes (ISTF) within the main selected LTF must have relatively close earnings within each ISTF as well as the external risks for most ISTFs are even smaller than those general LTF risk factors;
(3) Warning, it is obvious that some ISTFs will generate quite different risk ratios and the associated EMAs will be quite different, so the preliminary analysis should calculate the most accurate forecasts possible and the errors should be minimized, as well as predict the exact ISTFs when the largest discrepancies will occur and their overall impact on the closer ISTFs and, of course, on the LTF as a whole (black swans are not impossible);
(4) Etc, etc...
Here are some potential drawbacks of the blind use of ROT at every cost of inexperienced managers: when circumstances tend to change (for example, one's early forecast shows you exceeding a predetermined percentage probability of {market damage, losses, one-time negative effects, etc, etc.} in the next time interval, and the process manager ignores these early signals, hoping to hit the fixed revenue rate for some reason, or just neglect the dynamics of SWOT(specifically the external circumstances) and so on, and so forth.
That's why I stress that the wise ROT appliance is a personal characteristic, and let me suggest that your ROT parameter be expressed by the following formula: ROT={ROTx+(ΔROT1)+(ΔROT2) + ... + (ΔROTn)}, where Deltas should absorb the energy of forecasted negative effects, and the overall optimization task on your side should involve minimizing the number of the Deltas and optimizing the Modulus of every Delta inside the abovementioned formula (i.e. your buffer frozen capital, which will protect you in the event of a negative effect associated with that Delta), but full eliminating of Deltas will expose us to some market swans and so on.
Addendum: Obvi, the Delta components are often inherently negative from an income perspective and positive from a capital protection perspective, which is why I mention optimizing every modulus of the Deltas...
Obviously, the pseudo optimization strives for ROT to be as close to your calculated ROTx component as possible, but in my view, that's very dangerous in the long run - I think the lack of reasonably calculated insurance/buffer ∈{ΔROT1,ΔROTn} will ruin the business in cases of crisis, such as in 2008 and 2020, as well as the suboptimal ΔROTn would be a hidden capital outflow in a calm business environment, thus the exact frequency of your own dynamic SWOT analysis is an additional prerequisite in my view.
In other words, I think your terminology of "core bankroll linked to ROT" is correct and I suggest that core size associated with ROT be much more dynamic than usual when we use time-related metrics, via the in-depth dynamic management of the size and market interventions of the adjusted core capital in each ISTF.
@ Casch,
From a bot-maker perspective, you're right. Even the British/Aussie Horse Races with good liquidity are much more frequent within an hour and so on, so by your criteria of event frequency and liquidity, it's probably better than even tennis.
But there is another possibility - no Bot/AI is better than the creative Human Mind and when a dedicated Observer works hard through her/his brainstorming, plenty of specific combinations of pre-selected plus rare market points will be spotted by the Human and not by the Machine, so the Cricket markets are much better for humans working this way. Also, the longer time of Cricket matches just multiplies some effects and when they are summarized over Time, the long-term effects might appear earlier in the timeline, provided that risk management is optimal.
Thank you, Mr. Arbusers, for that nice Article!
I believe that such ideas are in the Mind of anyone who runs a well-balanced and predictable business, I mean using a mature business model over time, and relatively predictable revenues whose:
(1) Well-chosen statistical averages are not greatly distorted over the very long time frames (LTF) as well as the external market risks are relatively controllable in that time frame;
(2) Most of the internal sub-timeframes (ISTF) within the main selected LTF must have relatively close earnings within each ISTF as well as the external risks for most ISTFs are even smaller than those general LTF risk factors;
(3) Warning, it is obvious that some ISTFs will generate quite different risk ratios and the associated EMAs will be quite different, so the preliminary analysis should calculate the most accurate forecasts possible and the errors should be minimized, as well as predict the exact ISTFs when the largest discrepancies will occur and their overall impact on the closer ISTFs and, of course, on the LTF as a whole (black swans are not impossible);
(4) Etc, etc...
Here are some potential drawbacks of the blind use of ROT at every cost of inexperienced managers: when circumstances tend to change (for example, one's early forecast shows you exceeding a predetermined percentage probability of {market damage, losses, one-time negative effects, etc, etc.} in the next time interval, and the process manager ignores these early signals, hoping to hit the fixed revenue rate for some reason, or just neglect the dynamics of SWOT(specifically the external circumstances) and so on, and so forth.
That's why I stress that the wise ROT appliance is a personal characteristic, and let me suggest that your ROT parameter be expressed by the following formula: ROT={ROTx+(ΔROT1)+(ΔROT2) + ... + (ΔROTn)}, where Deltas should absorb the energy of forecasted negative effects, and the overall optimization task on your side should involve minimizing the number of the Deltas and optimizing the Modulus of every Delta inside the abovementioned formula (i.e. your buffer frozen capital, which will protect you in the event of a negative effect associated with that Delta), but full eliminating of Deltas will expose us to some market swans and so on.
Addendum: Obvi, the Delta components are often inherently negative from an income perspective and positive from a capital protection perspective, which is why I mention optimizing every modulus of the Deltas...
Obviously, the pseudo optimization strives for ROT to be as close to your calculated ROTx component as possible, but in my view, that's very dangerous in the long run - I think the lack of reasonably calculated insurance/buffer ∈{ΔROT1,ΔROTn} will ruin the business in cases of crisis, such as in 2008 and 2020, as well as the suboptimal ΔROTn would be a hidden capital outflow in a calm business environment, thus the exact frequency of your own dynamic SWOT analysis is an additional prerequisite in my view.
In other words, I think your terminology of "core bankroll linked to ROT" is correct and I suggest that core size associated with ROT be much more dynamic than usual when we use time-related metrics, via the in-depth dynamic management of the size and market interventions of the adjusted core capital in each ISTF.
@ Casch,
From a bot-maker perspective, you're right. Even the British/Aussie Horse Races with good liquidity are much more frequent within an hour and so on, so by your criteria of event frequency and liquidity, it's probably better than even tennis.
But there is another possibility - no Bot/AI is better than the creative Human Mind and when a dedicated Observer works hard through her/his brainstorming, plenty of specific combinations of pre-selected plus rare market points will be spotted by the Human and not by the Machine, so the Cricket markets are much better for humans working this way. Also, the longer time of Cricket matches just multiplies some effects and when they are summarized over Time, the long-term effects might appear earlier in the timeline, provided that risk management is optimal.
-
arbusers
- Administrator
- Contact:
- Karma: 663
Post
Allow me to expand. There is a type of player that is willing to sacrifice the day to day action and profits, for the shake of a long term (more or less) stable income. I hugely respect this and I have no words against this type of player. He leaves a lot to others who are willing to take the sh.t out of their as. and he focuses on something else. A different and more mature lifestyle indeed.
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
Allow me to expand. There is a type of player that is willing to sacrifice the day to day action and profits, for the shake of a long term (more or less) stable income. I hugely respect this and I have no words against this type of player. He leaves a lot to others who are willing to take the sh.t out of their as. and he focuses on something else. A different and more mature lifestyle indeed.
- casch
- Gaining experience
- Karma: 0
Post
For me, no trades are placed by the human, removing many of the psychological difficulties of variance, transforming them into mathematical difficulties, which are more easily managed. Perhaps more importantly, the human can change their level of thought. Rather than thinking about individual trades, the thoughts are at the level of strategies. Yes, limited to strategies that can be automated and therefore lack the inspiration available to the human trader. And this is where the ROT comes in again. All human time/effort gets transformed into machine time/computation, releasing time for more strategic thinking. It also makes available time for walking the dog.
I am very interested in exploring cricket trading strategies someday. Tennis is currently my sweet spot, but there will be time to explore more since the machine is now running unassisted. For context: I've been active for less than a year and for the first 6 months went through the classic matched betting, arbing, soft book value betting path, finally limited to zero. Now it's exchanges only. The soft books don't favour using the machine.
I believe the inspiration and experience niche is a highly valuable one, but it is unlikely I'll end up in it. It is a matter of strengths and weaknesses. My niche is with the machine and time will tell how much value there is.
Thank you for the thoughtful responses. This forum has been a source of much wisdom to this newbie for many months.
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
This is currently beyond my level but I agree conceptually. The machine will not capture and exploit the inspiration available to the experienced human. However in terms of ROT (here with T referring to the time and effort of the human), harnessing the machine provides its own opportunities.But there is another possibility - no Bot/AI is better than the creative Human Mind and when a dedicated Observer works hard through her/his brainstorming, plenty of specific combinations of pre-selected plus rare market points will be spotted by the Human and not by the Machine, so the Cricket markets are much better for humans working this way. Also, the longer time of Cricket matches just multiplies some effects and when they are summarized over Time, the long-term effects might appear earlier in the timeline, provided that risk management is optimal.
For me, no trades are placed by the human, removing many of the psychological difficulties of variance, transforming them into mathematical difficulties, which are more easily managed. Perhaps more importantly, the human can change their level of thought. Rather than thinking about individual trades, the thoughts are at the level of strategies. Yes, limited to strategies that can be automated and therefore lack the inspiration available to the human trader. And this is where the ROT comes in again. All human time/effort gets transformed into machine time/computation, releasing time for more strategic thinking. It also makes available time for walking the dog.
I am very interested in exploring cricket trading strategies someday. Tennis is currently my sweet spot, but there will be time to explore more since the machine is now running unassisted. For context: I've been active for less than a year and for the first 6 months went through the classic matched betting, arbing, soft book value betting path, finally limited to zero. Now it's exchanges only. The soft books don't favour using the machine.
I believe the inspiration and experience niche is a highly valuable one, but it is unlikely I'll end up in it. It is a matter of strengths and weaknesses. My niche is with the machine and time will tell how much value there is.
Thank you for the thoughtful responses. This forum has been a source of much wisdom to this newbie for many months.
- Martina N
- Gaining experience
- Karma: 0
Post
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
I find it very difficult to follow and understand the discussion in this thread, even though I understand that something very important is discussed. Could you guys speak like talking to a 12 year old?
Thank you!
Thank you!
-
arbusers
- Administrator
- Contact:
- Karma: 663
Post
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
@Martina N, as far as it concerns my texts, I could break it down to the following:
1. If you have surplus of time but not surplus of funds, it is better to be:
- Active only in short time horizon if you wish to maximise your profits at the expense of your time.
2. If you have surplus of funds but not surplus of time it is better to be:
- Active only in mid/long time horizons if you wish to maximise your time at the expense of your profits.
3. If you have surplus of time and surplus of funds, it is better to be:
- Active in both short and mid/long time horizons if you wish to maximise your profits at the expense of your time.
- Active only in mid/long time horizons if you wish to maximise your free time at the expense of your profits.
4. If you have no surplus of time and no surplus of funds:…
1. If you have surplus of time but not surplus of funds, it is better to be:
- Active only in short time horizon if you wish to maximise your profits at the expense of your time.
2. If you have surplus of funds but not surplus of time it is better to be:
- Active only in mid/long time horizons if you wish to maximise your time at the expense of your profits.
3. If you have surplus of time and surplus of funds, it is better to be:
- Active in both short and mid/long time horizons if you wish to maximise your profits at the expense of your time.
- Active only in mid/long time horizons if you wish to maximise your free time at the expense of your profits.
4. If you have no surplus of time and no surplus of funds:…
-
arb12
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 37
Post
Hello Ms Martina N,
My posting was about some of my very simplified ideas for personally managing market entries/loads and results over time, bearing in mind optimizing the size of required capital buffers and extremely good forecasting of risk factors.
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
Hello Ms Martina N,
My posting was about some of my very simplified ideas for personally managing market entries/loads and results over time, bearing in mind optimizing the size of required capital buffers and extremely good forecasting of risk factors.
-
arb12
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 37
Post
Re: ROI vs ROT: What matters more for the smart bettor?
@ Casch,
A quick glance at the events on the pitch could generate your probabilities and your next move in seconds, as long as you know the subject very well, here I mean the 10.000-hour rule.
Of course, there are very difficult cases where this is not possible and the person has to create some things and think for a long time about the next optimal move. Here I don't know whether the quickest algo would be better for sure if the algo is loaded by a limited set of things, while the Person will brainstorm the case for a longer time, but creatively.
The main target in manual live value placing is striving to compensate for the negative zones of the curves and optimizing the positive zones. Obvi, that's an ideal case and far from reality, but the specialization in some areas combined with no-time brainstorming hypothetically would be better than average algo, coded about a limited/known set of occasions. Or maybe that's more convenient for me.
Everyone could start that even if she/he is walking/going out with the dog, even during a midnight party, or while calmly reading a book. It only takes a few moments and a terminal/screen available in most cases, provided that you know very well your object.
You are welcome to the dedicated Cricket thread in that Forum if you wish. Maybe there are some genuine ideas hinted at there, that will be useful for your purposes, who knows? Your ideas and opinions there will also be appreciated.
Maybe someday I'll post some Graphics in the Cricket Thread, but I need to edit them in detail, to simplify these ones and remove my invented Indicators/Moving Averages/Candlesticks etc before posting some Graphs, in order to protect my business.
This is not true, don't underestimate yourself! Anyone can do it if they want to. You've just specialized in automation, which gives you much greater working and day-to-day comfort.
casch wrote: ↑Sun Jun 15, 2025 8:25 pm...
For me, no trades are placed by the human, removing many of the psychological difficulties of variance, transforming them into mathematical difficulties, which are more easily managed. Perhaps more importantly, the human can change their level of thought. Rather than thinking about individual trades, the thoughts are at the level of strategies. Yes, limited to strategies that can be automated and therefore lack the inspiration available to the human trader. And this is where the ROT comes in again. All human time/effort gets transformed into machine time/computation, releasing time for more strategic thinking.
...
A quick glance at the events on the pitch could generate your probabilities and your next move in seconds, as long as you know the subject very well, here I mean the 10.000-hour rule.
Of course, there are very difficult cases where this is not possible and the person has to create some things and think for a long time about the next optimal move. Here I don't know whether the quickest algo would be better for sure if the algo is loaded by a limited set of things, while the Person will brainstorm the case for a longer time, but creatively.
The main target in manual live value placing is striving to compensate for the negative zones of the curves and optimizing the positive zones. Obvi, that's an ideal case and far from reality, but the specialization in some areas combined with no-time brainstorming hypothetically would be better than average algo, coded about a limited/known set of occasions. Or maybe that's more convenient for me.
Everyone could start that even if she/he is walking/going out with the dog, even during a midnight party, or while calmly reading a book. It only takes a few moments and a terminal/screen available in most cases, provided that you know very well your object.
You are welcome to the dedicated Cricket thread in that Forum if you wish. Maybe there are some genuine ideas hinted at there, that will be useful for your purposes, who knows? Your ideas and opinions there will also be appreciated.
Maybe someday I'll post some Graphics in the Cricket Thread, but I need to edit them in detail, to simplify these ones and remove my invented Indicators/Moving Averages/Candlesticks etc before posting some Graphs, in order to protect my business.
You know better what is best for you, I wish you market success.
You're most welcome, and thanks for the intelligent discussion. Everyone will salute your contribution here (of course, you must protect your know-how before posting here, no one wants you to publish the core of your ideas).
-
