Hi Tim
Your ladder appears to be "stepped" to fixed percentages matched to various pricing levels. There is another way to put the pricing levels into a more real world context mathematically, so the broad ranges on the ladder can be narrowed down and the cash reserve values could be matched to the pricing levels using an alternate to the fixed percentages.
There are three primary Ladder styles.
1) Linear step as per the one I published in my last post
2) Proportional step is where fixed percentage steps are used e.g. 100, 110, 121 for 10% steps.
3) Self defined which your text describes.
With Ladder the most difficult part is defining the Top and Bottom points at which you're reasonably comfortable being 100% cash and 100% cash respectively.
Once that's been decided however then the partitioning of the range between bottom and top can be any of the above three styles. You might for instance opt to set levels (steps) at or around support/resistance levels. Equally the trade timing can be via TA signals or just on a time diversified (fixed intervals).
The narrower the range between top and bottom the larger the trade sizes (greater volatility capture), but the higher the risk of breaching 100% all-in or all-out levels.
Generally I prefer the simpler approach and set reasonably wide bottom/top price ranges and use fixed interval reviews.
I would suggest a third method based upon the actual market pricing values. Those values are unique to each tradeable, thus using a broad valuation measure would not be necessary.
Any suggestions as to how to calculate such measures?
Regards. Clive.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
