To calculate the maximum amount of loss that you can afford while maintaining a cybersecurity return on investment (ROI) of 1, we can use the formula for ROI, which is:
\[ \text{ROI} = \frac{\text{Gain from Investment} - \text{Cost of Investment}}{\text{Cost of Investment}} \]
For an ROI of 1, this simplifies to:
\[ \text{Gain from Investment} - \text{Cost of Investment} = \text{Cost of Investment} \]
This means:
\[ \text{Gain from Investment} = 2 \times \text{Cost of Investment} \]
Now let's denote:
- \(\text{Cost of Investment} = C\)
- \(\text{Gain from Investment} = G\)
We are looking at this in the context of the potential losses you can sustain before your investments in cybersecurity do not yield a return, hence:
\[ G = 40,000,000 , \text{(gross sales)} - \text{maximum loss} \]
Setting this up for an ROI of 1, we get:
\[ 40,000,000 - \text{maximum loss} = 2C \]
Where \(C\) can also be seen as the maximum loss we can afford before returning one unit of ROI, leading to:
- Setting the loss (L), where \(L = \text{maximum loss}\). Rearranging gives:
\[ \text{maximum loss} = 40,000,000 - 2C \]
To find a value for \(C\) we need another piece of information, specifically that \(C\) represents the legitimate investment in cybersecurity. Since you want the calculations based on the options given and \(C\) is a traditional investment in cybersecurity, between the values given, we intuitively align it with:
- For \(L\):
- If we assume each of the given loss options \(L\) would impact overall gross sales between the ranges of \(300,000\), \(50,000\), \(328,000\), \(400,000\) within acceptable losses to be negated by cybersecurity improvements.
Evaluating gives us the following:
- Evaluating $300,000: If this becomes unachievable, gross sales of 39,700,000, versus an ROI variant seems sustainable as it allows checks and balances for improved checks in the value of investments.
- Likewise with $328,000 being conservatively in the same range could push return checks.
- However, the highest intensity here would signify negating returns will lead towards more losses at likely a high threshold with $400,000 stretched during negotiations.
Given the strategic necessity for balancing cybersecurity with gross sales loss tolerances, it would appear smallest-value would overall be unaffordable – hence,
Given the potential for maximum affordability, assume $328,000 enables sufficiently more security checks while drawing close to the end investments on the loss potential before triggering risk mitigation to eventuate on the overall gross sales point.
Answer: $328,000
1 answer