# MMC Payouts Adjustment Proposal

**URL:** <https://forum.numer.ai/t/mmc-payouts-adjustment-proposal/614>\
**Category:** Data Science\
**Created:** [July 6, 2020, 1:54am UTC](https://forum.numer.ai/t/mmc-payouts-adjustment-proposal/614 "2020-07-06T01:54:00Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 26

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![alfa137](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/54ee81/32.png) [@alfa137](https://forum.numer.ai/u/alfa137)\
**Post date:** [July 25, 2020, 4:03pm UTC](https://forum.numer.ai/t/mmc-payouts-adjustment-proposal/614/26 "2020-07-25T16:03:39Z")

</div>

It is an improvement compared to the previous situation. In particular, it is more fear with the best MMC user.  
However, I think it is not enough incentive for users to focus on MMC rather than CORR. You will see it in a couple of months.

> [@Another proposal to merge CORR & MMC: A Dynamic Payout Scheme](http://forum.numer.ai/t/another-proposal-to-merge-corr-mmc-a-dynamic-payout-scheme/630):
>
> Motivation: If models with MMC\>0 have Mean(CORR)=0.0318 and Mean(MMC)=0.015 and you demand models with high MMC, the multiplier of MMC should be at least twice the multiplier of CORR. That is to say: Payout = w CORR + (2-w) MMC ; such that w\<0.667 Why? Because improving CORR by +2d is easier than improving MMC by +d. This is in average terms, in marginal terms it can change a little bit. Proposal: 1.- Start with this initial scheme: Payout = w CORR + (2-w) MMC ; such that w=0.65 …

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.numer.ai/t/mmc-payouts-adjustment-proposal/614)._