Qm
Core

Approximating Exponential Growth

The Rule of 70 and its relatives turn 'how long to double at rate r' into a one-line mental calculation, using the small-rate approximation that underlies compound growth.

Prerequisites: Estimating Logs and Powers of Two

An investment grows 7% a year. Roughly how many years to double? You could set up 1.07n=21.07^n = 2 and solve with logs, but there's a shortcut that skips the calculator entirely and gets within a fraction of a year: the Rule of 70.

Where the rule comes from

Growth at rate rr (as a decimal) for nn years multiplies your value by (1+r)n(1+r)^n. For small rr, ln(1+r)r\ln(1+r) \approx r, a standard small-number approximation. Doubling means (1+r)n=2(1+r)^n = 2, i.e. nln(1+r)=ln20.693n\ln(1+r) = \ln 2 \approx 0.693. Substituting the approximation:

n0.693r.n \approx \frac{0.693}{r} .

In plain English: the number of periods to double is roughly a fixed constant (about 0.693, or 69.3%) divided by the growth rate, and using 70 instead of 69.3 as the constant makes the arithmetic even easier while staying accurate for typical interview rates (roughly 1% to 20%).

Worked example 1: doubling at 7%

n707=10 years.n \approx \frac{70}{7} = 10 \text{ years} .

Check against the exact answer: 1.07101.9671.07^{10} \approx 1.967, close to 2, the Rule of 70 slightly underestimates here but lands within a few percent, well inside what's needed for a mental estimate. The approximation gets slightly worse as rr grows larger, since the underlying ln(1+r)r\ln(1+r)\approx r step is only exact in the limit as r0r\to0.

Worked example 2: doubling at 2% vs 20%

At 2%: n70/2=35n \approx 70/2 = 35 years. At 20%: n70/20=3.5n \approx 70/20 = 3.5 years. Notice the relationship is inversely proportional, not linear, going from 2% to 20% (a 10x increase in rate) cuts the doubling time by 10x too (35 down to 3.5), a direct consequence of the n70/rn \approx 70/r form. This inverse relationship is worth internalizing on its own: doubling the growth rate roughly halves the time to double, and it's exactly this pattern that makes compounding at even modestly higher rates dramatically more powerful over decades.

growth rate (%) 7% → ~10 yrs
Doubling time falls off sharply as the growth rate rises, the 70/r relationship is a hyperbola, not a straight line.

What this means in practice

The Rule of 70 (and its cousins, Rule of 72 for rates that divide nicely by whole numbers, like 6% or 8%) is a workhorse for any quick compounding estimate: how long until a fund doubles, how fast a liability grows, or roughly how many compounding periods a strategy needs to reach a target. It's built on the same small-rate log approximation that underlies continuous compounding more generally, so understanding why it works (not just the number 70) transfers directly to other exponential-growth mental-math questions.

Doubling time at rate r%r\% is approximately 70/r70/r years, derived from ln(1+r)r\ln(1+r)\approx r for small rr and ln20.693\ln 2\approx0.693. The relationship is inverse: doubling the rate roughly halves the doubling time.

Use 72 instead of 70 when rr divides evenly into it (6, 8, 9, 12), the extra divisibility makes the arithmetic even cleaner with negligible loss of accuracy for typical rates.

Discussion

Sign in to join the discussion · reading is open to everyone

💡 Discussion rules

  1. Ask and answer about this concept. Off-topic gets removed.
  2. No homework dumps. Show what you tried first.
  3. Corrections are welcome. Cite a source when you claim an error.

Loading discussion…

Related concepts

Practice in interviews

Further reading

  • Common quant interview prep guides (mental math drills)
ShareTwitterLinkedIn