Unequal outcome

I am trying to prove my loss of chance in respect of my financial settlement.
I asked for a contested hearing but my barrister advised that if I had a contested hearing “there was a risk you might only receive a 46% share of the joint matrimonial assets.” I brought into the marriage 90% of these assets. My ex ring-fenced his assets (pension, inheritance)and I also had to give him a property I was a beneficiary of.
Does anybody have any knowledge of under what circumstances the judge would have only awarded me 46% as I cannot find any precedents regarding this matter? This was a needs case as I am unable to work.

Your barrister must have based their advice with the benefit of knowing all the facts and figures.

Did you ask them?

Yes have asked countless times and she will not answer. She did deny she said this for the last three years but has now changed her mind. She states "Judge would have concluded that you were entitled to no more than 46%" but I am looking for the legal reasoning.
Although two mistakes have come to light in that she misread property values and misread length of marriage.
Should a barrister be able to confirm with figures how the settlement met my needs rather than just keep saying "in my view it was fair"?

Financial settlement on divorce is not an exact science. It is very hard to predict exactly what a judge would decide having heard the facts of the case. Having said that, the FDR often gives quite a good steer. What did the judge say at your FDR?

You say it was a needs case. Without knowing the details of the assets and more about your circumstances it is hard to say whether 46% would have been within the spectrum of fairness. Generally speaking though the court would want to see you both housed adequately and with an income now and in the future if possible.

Hadenoughnow

Had an ineffective FDR. The court had lost my application for a joint medical expert but eventually found it and that was the only matter discussed.

I have posted all my details previously and sought advice from several different solicitors and all state grossly unfair. I understand it was unfair, but that's life, so really looking for advice of under what circumstances can fairness be ignored by judge.
I did not receive enough to rehouse myself so had to spend my pre marital savings. No income was awarded or future income although there were substantial assets.
I think I may have to accept her advice was negligent, but just wanted to check there was not something I am missing regarding fairness.