|
"Who has studied this?"
I have studied this and these are results of hundreds of my
own tests of various systems I have done in the past.
But I can agree that you may have different
opinions/experiences and you may want to test redunant signals.
And this is perfectly doable as I have shown using either
rotational trading (for some cases) and/or
custom backtest procedure (for all remaining cases). I even
wrote sample formula for you.
See this post:
(I have reposted this sample to the knowledge base know for
your convenience):
Also as suggested, I may consider adding an "easy" switch in
some future releases.
Best
regards,
Tomasz Janeczko
amibroker.com
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 8:11
AM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Why portfolio
backtester does not consider all buy signals?
> There are other reasons such as the fact that practice
shows that delayed signals are very often very poor performer so it is better to skip trade instead of entering it too
late.
> This may be true to many systems. But
certainly not all of them. My most profitable system happens to do better
with later signals. It buys dips and later signals are
> more likely to > bounce back. IMO, a
backtest software should be neutral to trading systems (i.e. not
to prefer a particular kind of practice)
Who says delayed signals are poor performers. Who has
studied this? I am certain that redundant signals can be used
succesfully in portfolio type systems. So my request is again to get a
simple example of how to do this on a portfolio level. There are examples on a
single symbol level but on a portfolio level is what is
interesting.
rgds, Ed
Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
For other support material please check also:
http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|