Hi Mubashar,
I am pretty certain that you have had a better math
education than moi.
I am surprized that you didn't answer the question
for the benefit of the forum yourself.
On a case by case basis your
frequency distribution is probably not normal.
However cumulative
distribution is asymptotic and so if you reference the CD, for any trading
system, it will give you the prob of receiving any particular value on your next
trade.
(This assumes that the market is stationary).
It is very
hard to find any firm footing, anywhere, in system evaluation but the CD is one
place were we can start to approach something akin to certainty (as N -->
oo)
oo infinity
In fact my .xl file on BiSim, posted at the
Zboard) relies on this principle to do a quite good job of predicting the
distribution of equity outcomes for a trading system with a non-N dist of the
trades.
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com,
"Mubashar Virk" <mvirk67@xxx> wrote:
>
> Sorry to barge
in, if I make 100 points on a system after oosing and aasing, what is the
probability that I will make 100 points in actual real life trade?
>
>
> From: Howard B
> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 5:45
PM
> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
> Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Expectancy - and
related--specifically K-rato
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Keith, and all --
>
> Exactly my point.
>
> Thanks,
> Howard
>
>
>
>
> On
Fri, May 8, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Keith McCombs <kmccombs@xx.>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I've been told that no
question is a "dumb question". So here goes:
> If I have a system with
good OOS performance, why should I care what the IS performance is? And
similarly, why should I care what the OOS/IS ratio is?
>
> Couldn't
it be more important that I have a high OOS/BH (buy and hold) ratio, so that I
don't "confuse brains with a bull market"? Or at least something that gives me
confidence that I haven't just accidentally stumbled on a once in a lifetime
event, that, of coarse, will disappear the minute I start trading real money?
Does OOS/IS ratio somehow help?
> -- Keith
>
>
>
> brian_z111 wrote:
> > I also create a t-test of the ave
returns.
>
> How do you do that?
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com,
Rajiv Arya <rajivarya87@> wrote:
> >
> >
>
> I also create a t-test of the ave returns.
> >
> > The
in-sample is almost always significant
> >
> > And try to
have the out of sample t-test greater than 1.64, which happens for about 50% for
the out-of sample results.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com
>
> From: dloyer123@
> > Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 03:03:16 +0000
>
> Subject: [amibroker] Re: Expectancy - and related--specifically
K-rato
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxps.com,
Rajiv Arya <rajivarya87@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I like to compute a ratio of the out-sample metric and divide
it by the in-sample metric.
> > >
> > > And I like to
look for multiple runs of out-sample/in-sample ratio to be above 0.5 and
with little fluctuation.
> > >
> >
> > That is
similar to Pardo's WFE (Walk forward efficiency), or a measure of how much curve
fitting inflated test results. Pardo suggests taking the concatenated out of
sample returns and divide by the result treating the entire combined data set as
in sample. Anything below 0.65 will probably not trade well live. The higher,
the better.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
__________________________________________________________
>
> Hotmail® has a new way to see what's up with your friends.
> > http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/WhatsNew?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_WhatsNew1_052009
>
>
>