|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "nkis22" <nkishor@xxxx> wrote:
> Fred,
> thanks a lot for the clarification.
>
> I found MDD column, but still can't see any thing
> that resembles CAR. Is is the same as RAR column in
> the optimazation report, or are u talking of some other
> report.
>
> tia
> nand
>
>
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Fred" <fctonetti@xxxx> wrote:
> > CAR = Cumulative Annual Return and is the same as annual system %
> > return in the AB Performance Report
> >
> > MDD = Maximum System % Drawdown and is in the AB Performance
Report
> >
> > MAR = CAR / MDD This does NOT show up in the backtest reports but
> can
> > be calculated easilly enough.
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "nkis22" <nkishor@xxxx> wrote:
> > > Dimitris,
> > > I want to learn some things about backtesting now. What is
> > > CAR? MAR? MDD? I don't see these columns when I optimize - just
> > > learnt how to run one. Is there a way to get this columns, the
> only
> > > one that I can see is RAR.
> > >
> > > tia
> > > nand
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Fred" <fctonetti@xxxx> wrote:
> > > > Dingo,
> > > >
> > > > I assume you addressed this to Chuck, but I'll give you my
own
> > take
> > > > on 1a of what you asked ...
> > > >
> > > > 1a. I have tried lots of combinations of things to optimize
on
> > and
> > > > have pretty much settled on what I and some others refer to
as
> > MAR
> > > > which is CAR / MDD. This has the advantage of finding
> parameters
> > > > that simultaneously elevate CAR while keeping down DD's.
There
> > are
> > > > other steps involved here to assure that the parameters
chosen
> > are
> > > as
> > > > robust as they can be and sometimes at the cost of a little
MAR
> > but
> > > > that's another topic. When writing systems and testing them
> for
> > > full
> > > > compounding whether that compounding takes the form of
> increased
> > > bet
> > > > size or increased number of simultaneous trades that can be
> made,
> > > the
> > > > equity curve should be as close as possible to a straight
line
> on
> > a
> > > > log scale. KRatio is an indication of the straightness of
the
> > > equity
> > > > curve but I also like to see it plotted. The other advantage
> to
> > > > looking at equity curves on a log scale is that for example a
> 10%
> > > DD
> > > > looks the same regardless of where on the chart it occurs.
If
> > you
> > > > plot the equity curve on an arithmetic scale the farther to
the
> > > right
> > > > the larger dd's occur the more insignificant (falsely) they
> > appear
> > > to
> > > > be.
> > > >
> > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "dingo" <dingo@xxxx> wrote:
> > > > > I can understand and appreciate why you use fixed trade
sizes
> > in
> > > > order
> > > > > to get the best parameters. But how do you get a reasonable
> > > measure
> > > > of
> > > > > drawdowns that way? Do you use some other technique to
> evaluate
> > > > > drawdowns?
> > > > >
> > > > > Re your param selection method: Do I understand the steps
> > > > correctly:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. You optimize for the best params
> > > > > a. Based on what column or calculation?
> > > > > b. What date ranges would you be using currently?
> > > > > c. What subset of stocks would you be optmizing on?
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. You set aside the the top 100.
> > > > > a. Do you set aside any at the bottom?
> > > > > b. How did you determine that the first set of
params
> > > would
> > > > be
> > > > > at the edge of the parameter space?
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. You reoptimize the resultant set from step 2 and those
are
> > the
> > > > ones
> > > > > you use.
> > > > >
> > > > > Given the size of your trading capital how do you decide
what
> > > > stocks to
> > > > > trade on a particular day?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not trying to pick a fight here I'm intensely curious
as
> > I've
> > > > been
> > > > > struggling with these questions for quite some time now.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for any comments you choose to make.
> > > > >
> > > > > d
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Chuck Rademacher [mailto:chuck_rademacher@x]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 6:58 AM
> > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [amibroker] To compound or not to compound... that
> is
> > the
> > > > > question
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Reply to Fred:
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes... and no.
> > > > >
> > > > > Absolutely, in real time trading I am compounding.
> > > > >
> > > > > To determine parameters via optimization.... not if my life
> > > > depended on
> > > > > it! And, I guess my life does depend on it, as I make my
> > living
> > > > > managing funds for others.
> > > > >
> > > > > I mentioned one trade (AOL) where my system made $1.5
million
> > on a
> > > > > $10,000 investment. That's not bragging... I'm sure you
> could
> > > come
> > > > up
> > > > > with a system that could achieve similar performance.
Since
> > the
> > > > > average trade generated a profit of $2,700 for every
$10,000
> > > > invested,
> > > > > the AOL trade could cover up lots of bad trades made using
> one
> > > > parameter
> > > > > set. Compounding that trade would exacerbate the
problem.
> A
> > > > minor
> > > > > tweak to the parameters could cut out the AOL trade, yet
that
> > > very
> > > > tweak
> > > > > could improve performance going forward.
> > > > >
> > > > > When choosing parameters, I want plain vanilla trades, each
> > > > standing on
> > > > > their own merit, with no compounding.
> > > > >
> > > > > We may have to agree to disagree. It's like absolute
gospel
> > to
> > > me
> > > > and
> > > > > I cannot see clear to do it any other way.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Fred [mailto:fctonetti@x...]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 3:16 AM
> > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [amibroker] FW: [aaft_ta] Re: TradingRecipes
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm sure you'd agree, wouldn't you ?, that one way or
another
> > you
> > > > > compound. If you are not compounding by increasing bet
size
> > then
> > > > you
> > > > > are compounding by increasing the number of stocks you'll
> > > > potentially
> > > > > take simultaneous positions in as equity grows, right ?
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Chuck Rademacher"
> > > > > <chuck_rademacher@x> wrote:
> > > > > > For what it is worth, I use fixed bet size for all
> > backtesting
> > > > > purposes. I
> > > > > > coudn't imagine backtesting/optimizing using any other
> > > approach.
> > > > I
> > > > > even go
> > > > > > a step further if I'm doing any optimizing. I recently
> > posted
> > > > an
> > > > > equity
> > > > > > curve showing something like $80 million in profit.
> Within
> > > that
> > > > > $80
> > > > > > million, the top 100 stocks (out of 13,500) generated $20
> > > million
> > > > in
> > > > > > profits. AOL, by itself, generated $1.5 million in
> profits.
> > > In
> > > > > each case,
> > > > > > the original trade was only $10,000.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I said, I go a step further than just using a fixed
bet
> > > size.
> > > > > After my
> > > > > > first pass at optimizing, I remove the top performing 100
> > > > stocks.
> > > > > I then
> > > > > > re-optimize without those stocks. Granted, I could end
up
> > with
> > > > > some new
> > > > > > "top" stocks. However, my objective is to remove the
> > extremely
> > > > > large
> > > > > > winners so that the profits from those stocks don't cause
> me
> > to
> > > > > select
> > > > > > parameters on the edge of the parameter space.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't bother removing the worst performers as the
largest
> > > loss
> > > > > might be
> > > > > > something like $16,000 (even though the original trade
was
> > only
> > > > > $10,000).
> > > > > > This can happen if a short trade goes against you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I said... for what it's worth...
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Bob Jagow [mailto:bjagow@x...]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 2:21 AM
> > > > > > To: Amibroker
> > > > > > Subject: [amibroker] FW: [aaft_ta] Re: TradingRecipes
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Re the "portfolio level testing" magic bullet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bob
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Palmer Wright [mailto:palmerw@x...]
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 8:27 PM
> > > > > > To: aaft_ta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [aaft_ta] Fwd: Re: Available Portfolio
> testing
> > > > > programs for
> > > > > > TS2000i
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since Michael forwarded the two messages (see below),
he
> > > added
> > > > > four
> > > > > > additional ones. The issue about whether a "basket
system"
> > like
> > > > > Aberration
> > > > > > is worth trading I will not discuss here (I still trade
> it).
> > > The
> > > > > other main
> > > > > > issue is about the effect of compounding when testing
with
> TR
> > > > > (Trading
> > > > > > Recipes), and I comment here on that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Traders buy TR because it can test portfolios of
systems
> > and
> > > > > markets using
> > > > > > position sizing. A position-sizing strategy such as fixed-
> > > > > fractional money
> > > > > > management brings two advantages: it normalizes markets
> (eg.,
> > > > > calculating
> > > > > > many contracts for corn, but few for natural gas), and
> limits
> > > > entry
> > > > > risk for
> > > > > > each position to a fixed- fraction of current equity--
thus
> > > > > preventing
> > > > > > overtrading. If you do not use TR, I do not know how you
> can
> > > get
> > > > > the large
> > > > > > returns that compounding multiple markets can bring.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Leslie Walko points to the potential danger of curve
> > fitting
> > > > > caused by
> > > > > > compounding. I agree, and have been concerned for years
> about
> > > how
> > > > > one market
> > > > > > in a portfolio (commodity X) by being dramatically
> profitable
> > > in
> > > > a
> > > > > single
> > > > > > year can misleadingly bias the results of the whole
> portfolio.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > During a multi-year test in TR, starting equity is low,
> > > perhaps
> > > > > $100,000,
> > > > > > but compounding raises equity to many million in later
> years.
> > > The
> > > > > one-year
> > > > > > outperformance of commodity X cand produce two kinds of
> curve-
> > > > > fitting bias:
> > > > > > early-years bias and end-years bias. Mark Johnson's
message
> > > > > describes the
> > > > > > first, where X gives "a big turbocharged boost" to the
> > > > portfolio's
> > > > > equity,
> > > > > > which then gives a head-start boost to the number of
trades
> > in
> > > > all
> > > > > the
> > > > > > commodities traded. The second occurs when X's monster
> trades
> > > > occur
> > > > > in the
> > > > > > final years of the simulated time period when the large
> > number
> > > of
> > > > > contracts
> > > > > > makes X's profit far larger than if its big year came
> early.
> > > Here
> > > > > the
> > > > > > profits contributed by X dwarf what they were in the
first
> > case.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As the message from M points out, we can avoid such
> biases
> > by
> > > > > normalizing
> > > > > > with a fixed-dollar bet size in testing to remove the
> > galloping
> > > > > equity
> > > > > > effect. I proposed this method in 1999, and still use it
to
> > > > compare
> > > > > with the
> > > > > > compounded performance. I confess, however, that my
testing
> > has
> > > > > failed to
> > > > > > find as much performance bias as I suspected I would
find.
> > The
> > > > > method is
> > > > > > most important when selecting markets for a portfolio.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Palmer Wright
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: Michael Guess
> > > > > > To: aaft_ta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2003 9:14 AM
> > > > > > Subject: [aaft_ta] Fwd: Re: Available Portfolio
testing
> > > > > programs for
> > > > > > TS2000i
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is for Pat Mazur & Palmer Wright. Others are
> invited
> > > to
> > > > > comment. I
> > > > > > forwarded these two messages from another list because we
> > have
> > > > > discussed
> > > > > > these issues in the past. It appears one of the posts is
> > saying
> > > > > Trading
> > > > > > Recipes is in error in the way it calculates. In fact,
that
> > it
> > > > > curve fits
> > > > > > data in a particular case. Comments are invited.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Michael
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms
> of
> > > > > Service.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxx
> > > > > > Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxx
> > > > > > -----------------------------------------
> > > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to:
> > > amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > (Web page:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> > > > > > --------------------------------------------
> > > > > > Check group FAQ at:
> > > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms
> of
> > > > > Service.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxx
> > > > > Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxx
> > > > > -----------------------------------------
> > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to:
> > amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > (Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> > > > > --------------------------------------------
> > > > > Check group FAQ at:
> > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service
> > > > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=249982.3179269.4495679.1728375/D=egroupweb/S=17
> > > > 05
> > > > > 632198:HM/A=1524963/R=0/*http://hits.411web.com/cgi-
> > bin/autoredir?
> > > > camp=5
> > > > > 56&lineid=3179269&prop=egroupweb&pos=HM>
> > > > >
> > > > > <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?
> > > > M=249982.3179269.4495679.1728375/D=egrou
> > > > > pmail/S=:HM/A=1524963/rand=443673454>
> > > > >
> > > > > Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxx
> > > > > Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxx
> > > > > -----------------------------------------
> > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to:
> > amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > (Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> > > > > --------------------------------------------
> > > > > Check group FAQ at:
> > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service
> > > > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get a FREE REFINANCE QUOTE - click here!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2CXtTB/ca0FAA/i5gGAA/GHeqlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----------------------------------------
Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
--------------------------------------------
Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|