My original formula is overly simplified, and I was just taking the average of all three of the reinvestment success probability projections and I used that average number of 41.67%..
Actually, if you look at the formulas in my Google Sheets, you see that I take the average as well.
It looks to me the first difference between our sheets is in cell X89, in your spreadsheet.
My value computation is pretty simple:
BTC
previous period-Rake BTC
previous period+Rake BTC
previous period*Reinvestment success avg
OR
10-2+2*0,4167
I might have misunderstood some of your explanations if I cannot reconcile the first step in your spreadsheet.
It does seem more accurate to use each of the increments rather than the average, so I am o.k going with that, if that might be what might resolve the differences in our numbers.
I don't know what is accurate; these just work Hypotheses, once we agree o. those, we can start figuring out the rest.