|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I completely agree that actual results are far better than any
theoretical backtest, but 3 years isn't long enough to really know
anything, IMO. It would take at least a couple of full bull/bear
cycles (8+ years in the stock market, for example) to really know
whether a method is valid.
The only exception would be (also IMO) if a trader/investor understood
why the method worked. FWIW.
Luck,
Sebastian
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "matrix10014" <allansn@xxx> wrote:
>
> No offense Sebastian,but if we are looking for validity as a
> valuable trading tool,I'll take a 3 year track record over an honest
> backtest every day of the week and twice on Sunday....
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "sebastiandanconia"
> <sebastiandanconia@> wrote:
> >
> > "Who is to say that angles are or are not a useful tool?..."
> >
> > AB's brilliant back-tester?
> >
> > No offense to anyone, truly, I was just trying to help screen-out
> > unpromising lines of research.:) If any posters here routinely use
> > angles as a significant part of their method and have run an honest
> > back-test to prove their validity as a valuable trading tool, I'll
> > gladly eat my words and humbly beg forgiveness.:)
> >
> >
> > Luck to all,
> >
> > Sebastian
> >
>
|