Power Law
Most people think about money the way they think about arithmetic — linearly. Save $100 a month for 10 years and you have $12,000. But money does not follow arithmetic. Left to compound, it follows an exponential curve, and exponential curves are almost unimaginably steep once enough time passes.
The underlying principle is a power law: repeated multiplication by a constant factor. The concept appears everywhere in nature — earthquake magnitudes, city populations, the frequency of words in a language. In finance, it takes a form you can personally exploit: compound interest.
#1 % a Day, Every Day
Start with the simplest possible question: what happens if you improve by 1 % each day for a full year?
If growth were linear, 1 % a day over 365 days would give you a 365 % return — you would end up with times what you started with. Decent, but nothing special.
Compounding works differently. Each day you multiply, not add:
Starting from , you end with nearly $38 — almost ten times what the linear version promises. Now run the arithmetic in reverse: what if you slip back by 1 % every day?
You are left with less than 3 cents on the dollar. The gap between 1 % better and 1 % worse is not 2 percentage points — it is the difference between 37.78× and 0.026×, a ratio of nearly 1 500 to 1.
+1% compounded
37.78×
(1 + 1%)^365
Simple (linear)
4.65×
1 + 1% × 365
Self-improvement and portfolio returns are not literally 1 % a day. But the intuition transfers directly: small, consistent gains, reinvested, compound into a curve that logic alone cannot picture.
#The Formula
The engine behind all of this is one equation:
| Symbol | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Final amount | |
| Principal (money you put in at the start) | |
| Annual interest rate (as a decimal, e.g. 0.07 for 7 %) | |
| Compounding periods per year (12 for monthly) | |
| Time in years |
const A = P * Math.pow(1 + r / n, n * t)
// P = 10_000, r = 0.07, n = 12, t = 10
// A ≈ 20_097
Sidenote: At 7 % annual return compounded monthly, $10,000 grows to roughly $20,097 in 10 years — without adding a single cent. The **doubling time** for any rate can be estimated with the Rule of 72: divide 72 by the annual rate to get the approximate years to double. At 7 % that is years.The exponent is what makes this equation violent. It grows with time — meaning the longer you wait, the faster the curve steepens. At year 1 the difference between investing and not investing is small. At year 30 it is a completely different life.
#Regular Contributions: The Multiplier
The formula above assumes a single lump sum. In reality, most people invest a fixed amount each month. A regular contribution is modelled as a future value of an annuity:
where is the monthly rate and is the monthly contribution.
const rm = r / 12
// future value of each monthly contribution
const fvContribs = C * ((Math.pow(1 + rm, n) - 1) / rm)
const total = P * Math.pow(1 + rm, n) + fvContribs
Sidenote: Monthly contributions matter more than the initial lump sum over a long horizon. At 7 % annual return, $500 a month for 30 years accumulates to roughly $567,000 — even if you start with $0. That same $0 starting principal cannot compete: consistency beats magnitude.Two insights follow from this formula:
- Start now, not when you earn more. Because of the exponent , years at the beginning of your timeline are worth more than years at the end. Every year you delay is a year lost at the steepest part of someone else's curve.
- Rate matters more than you think. Moving from 6 % to 8 % annual return does not grow your terminal balance by 33 %. Across 30 years it nearly doubles the gap between your final total and your contributions — the extra 2 % is compounded 360 times.
#Interest on Interest
The reason compounding feels counterintuitive is that you earn interest on your interest. In the first year, $10,000 at 7 % earns $700. In the second year, you earn 7 % on $10,700 — an extra $749. By year 20 you are earning almost $2,500 per year on a $10,000 original investment, without touching the principal.
#Time, Not Timing
A common mistake is waiting for the "right moment" to invest. But power law curves do not reward timing — they reward duration. Consider two investors:
- Early Ellie invests $5,000 a year from age 22 to 32 (10 years, $50,000 total) at 8 %, then stops.
- Late Louis invests $5,000 a year from age 32 to 62 (30 years, $150,000 total) at the same rate.
At 62, Ellie has roughly $602,000. Louis, who contributed three times as much for three times as long, has roughly $566,000 — still less. Ellie's decade of head start, compounded over 40 years, overpowers Louis's extra $100,000 and 20 extra years of contributions.
function ellieWealth() {
let a = 0
for (let y = 0; y < 10; y++) a = (a + 5000) * 1.08
for (let y = 0; y < 30; y++) a = a * 1.08
return a // ≈ 602,000
}
Sidenote: Ellie contributes for 10 years then lets it ride for 30 more.function louisWealth() {
let a = 0
for (let y = 0; y < 30; y++) a = (a + 5000) * 1.08
return a // ≈ 566,000
}
Sidenote: Louis contributes for 30 years starting a decade later.The mathematics are unambiguous: the best time to invest was yesterday. The second-best time is today.
#The Three Levers
Every compounding model has exactly three inputs you can control:
| Lever | Effect |
|---|---|
| Principal | Raises the baseline — a one-time lift |
| Rate | Reshapes the exponent — high leverage over long periods |
| Time | Sits in the exponent — the most powerful lever of all |
Principal is the least powerful. A $100,000 windfall is wonderful, but it is a single multiplication. Rate matters more because it is applied repeatedly. Time dominates everything because it is the exponent's exponent — each additional year does not add a fixed increment; it multiplies everything that came before.
Compound interest is often described as the eighth wonder of the world. What it actually is, more precisely, is a power law applied to money — patient, indifferent, and brutally consistent. The curve does not care how smart you are or how hard you work in any given year. It cares only about one thing: how long you let it run.