<p>When the share price has fallen 90% from some price P, the current price is P $\cdot$ 10%.</p>

<p>When it has fallen 95% from some price P, the current price is P $\cdot$ 5%..</p>

<p>P $\cdot$ 5% is half of P $\cdot$ 10%.</p>

<p>As the share price falls from P, it will first pass through P $\cdot$ 10% before reaching P $\cdot$ 5%. So if we obsere the time period from when the price was P until it was P $\cdot$ 5%, it has hallen 95%. But if we observe the time period from when the price was P $\cdot$ 10% until it was P $\cdot$ 5% the share price has fallen by half.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-30T18:38:04.327Z
2017-01-30T18:38:04.327Z
Giskard
<p>"a share that has fallen by 95 per cent has fallen by half since it has fallen by 90 per cent"</p>

<p>Can you explain the logic behind that? </p>

<stock-market>
I do not quite get a phrase that I read in the Financial Times today.
The Finansoconomist
# I do not quite get a phrase that I read in the Financial Times today.

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-01-30)

"a share that has fallen by 95 per cent has fallen by half since it has fallen by 90 per cent"

Can you explain the logic behind that?

**Tags:** stock-market

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-01-30. Score: 5

When the share price has fallen 90% from some price P, the current price is P $\cdot$ 10%.

When it has fallen 95% from some price P, the current price is P $\cdot$ 5%..

P $\cdot$ 5% is half of P $\cdot$ 10%.

As the share price falls from P, it will first pass through P $\cdot$ 10% before reaching P $\cdot$ 5%. So if we obsere the time period from when the price was P until it was P $\cdot$ 5%, it has hallen 95%. But if we observe the time period from when the price was P $\cdot$ 10% until it was P $\cdot$ 5% the share price has fallen by half.


---

