How do you build a Monte Carlo simulation for a marketing decision?
Monte Carlo propagates input distributions through a decision model. Quality depends less on draw count than on relevant distributions, dependencies and scenarios.
Direct answer
Estimate an outcome distribution and probability of crossing a threshold.
Monte Carlo propagates input distributions through a decision model. Quality depends less on draw count than on relevant distributions, dependencies and scenarios.
01
Direct answer
A Monte Carlo simulation propagates input distributions through a deterministic model. With 20,000 draws and seed 20260822, MSC-010 gives median incremental profit of €10,538.92 and 5.555% negative scenarios.
02
Scientific question
What distribution of a decision outcome follows from declared input assumptions, and what is the probability of crossing a threshold?
03
Population, unit and horizon
The unit is scenario × draw × period. Distributions describe uncertainty about one price-volume-margin decision, not 20,000 observed markets.
04
Statistical target
The target is the conditional distribution of ΔΠ=f(X), especially median, 5th/95th percentiles and Pr(ΔΠ<0), under fixed distributions and dependencies.
05
Required data
For every input declare distribution, parameters, unit, source, horizon and dependencies. MSC-010 has fixed price, correlated normal volume and elasticity at −0.20, triangular costs and fixed price change.
06
Assumptions
Assume distributions represent relevant uncertainty, linear correlation is adequate, the model remains valid over all draws, and truncations or constraints are explicit.
07
Model
For each draw s: P₁=P₀(1+d), Q₁=Q₀(1+d)^ε and ΔΠₛ=(P₁−VC)Q₁−(P₀−VC)Q₀−ΔFC.
08
Reproducible calculation
The script reads the base scenario, generates 20,000 draws with a fixed seed, imposes ρ=−0.20 using two normals, applies triangular distributions and sorts ΔΠ to calculate quantiles.
09
Results
Mean €10,437.88, median €10,538.92, P5 −€357.20, P95 €21,066.54 and Pr(ΔΠ<0)=5.555%.
| Mean | Median | P5 | P95 | Pr(ΔΠ<0) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| €10,437.88 | €10,538.92 | −€357.20 | €21,066.54 | 5.555% |
10
Monte Carlo error
For estimated risk p̂, MC_SE=√[p̂(1−p̂)/S]=0.1620 percentage point. This simulation error covers neither model error nor misspecified distributions.
11
Convergence and sensitivity
Repeat with more draws and multiple seeds, track median, quantiles and risk, then vary distributions, dependencies and parameters. Numerical convergence alone does not validate assumptions.
12
Diagnostics
Check impossible values, support, realised correlations, quantile stability, each input’s contribution, extreme scenarios and unit consistency.
13
Common errors
Common errors are confusing draws with observations, choosing convenient distributions, ignoring dependencies, reporting only the mean, hiding the seed or treating simulated probability as observed frequency.
14
Interpretation
Under MSC-010, the scenario is usually positive but its lower tail crosses zero. The 5.555% figure is risk conditional on distributions, not known real-world risk.
15
Supported decision
Compare threshold risk across consistently defined scenarios, target data collection and set a conditional escalation or test rule.
16
Unsupported decision
Do not claim an objective probability, guarantee profit, validate a distribution through numerical convergence or ignore unencoded structural uncertainty.
17
Implementation
The CC0 CSV documents distributions and dependencies; dependency-free MIT Python fixes scenario, seed and draw count and reports reference metrics.
CSV · CC0
msc-010-monte-carlo-inputs.csv ↓Python · MIT
msc-p034-reference.py ↓18
Expected deliverable
Deliver an assumption register, dependencies, seed, draws, code, quantiles, threshold risk, Monte Carlo error, convergence, sensitivity and supported/unsupported decision.
19
Scientific sources
Saltelli et al. support the Y=f(X) representation, variance decomposition and the need to examine interactions and computational cost. Their paper validates neither synthetic MSC-010 distributions nor the resulting risk figure.
- Saltelli et al. (2010) ↗Full text verified
Dataset · Tool
Method connections
