Quant Memo
Core

Weighted Averages and Mixture Shortcuts

Fast mental techniques for blending two numbers with different weights — portfolio blends, mixture problems, and 'alligation' shortcuts that skip the algebra.

Prerequisites: Converting Fractions, Decimals and Percentages

A portfolio is 30% in an asset returning 8% and 70% in an asset returning 2%. What's the blended return? You could set up 0.3×8+0.7×20.3 \times 8 + 0.7 \times 2 and multiply it out, but there's a faster route that also builds intuition: think in terms of distance from the weighted-average point, the way a see-saw balances around a fulcrum. The weighted average always lands closer to whichever side has more weight — and you can often read off roughly where without multiplying anything.

The see-saw picture

A weighted average of two values aa and bb with weights waw_a and wbw_b (summing to 1) is:

xˉ=waa+wbb.\bar{x} = w_a a + w_b b .

In plain English: xˉ\bar{x} sits on the number line between aa and bb, splitting the gap in the inverse ratio of the weights — the heavier side pulls the average closer to itself. This is the "alligation" trick: instead of multiplying and adding, find the gap between aa and bb, then split that gap in ratio wb:waw_b : w_a (weights swapped) starting from aa.

Worked example 1: the portfolio blend

a=8%a = 8\% (weight 0.3), b=2%b = 2\% (weight 0.7). The gap is 82=68 - 2 = 6 points. Split it in ratio wb:wa=0.7:0.3w_b : w_a = 0.7 : 0.3, i.e. 7:37:3, starting from a=8a=8 moving toward bb: the average sits 710\frac{7}{10} of the way from aa to bb, which is 80.7×6=84.2=3.8%8 - 0.7 \times 6 = 8 - 4.2 = 3.8\%. Check directly: 0.3(8)+0.7(2)=2.4+1.4=3.80.3(8) + 0.7(2) = 2.4 + 1.4 = 3.8. Matches — and notice the answer sits much closer to 2% than to 8%, exactly because 70% of the weight sits on that side.

Worked example 2: mixing two portfolios to hit a target

You hold cash yielding 1% and a fund yielding 9%, and want a blended return of exactly 5%. What weight goes in the fund? Alligation again: the gap from 1 to 9 is 8. The target 5 is 51=45 - 1 = 4 above the low end, which is exactly half the total gap — so the weights split 50/50. In general, the weight on the higher-return asset equals (target − low) / (high − low): here 5191=48=0.5\frac{5-1}{9-1} = \frac{4}{8} = 0.5, confirming a 50% allocation to the 9% fund.

2% (w=0.7) 8% (w=0.3) 3.8% (average)
The weighted average sits closer to the heavier-weighted value (2%, weight 0.7) than to the lighter one — the see-saw picture behind alligation.

What this means in practice

This shortcut is exactly what you use when a portfolio manager asks you to eyeball a blended yield, a blended win rate across strategies, or how much of a new allocation is needed to shift a fund's overall risk profile toward a target. The gap-splitting method is faster than multiplying decimals under pressure and, more importantly, gives you a built-in sanity check: if your answer isn't closer to the heavier-weighted side, you've made an arithmetic error.

A weighted average splits the gap between two values in the inverse ratio of their weights. To find a mixing weight that hits a target, use (target − low) / (high − low) for the weight on the high-value side.

Before computing anything, ask which side has more weight — the answer must land closer to that side. If your final number doesn't, recheck your arithmetic.

Related concepts

Practice in interviews

Further reading

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