Jump to content
  • 0

PRT enhancement request - test templates


Stef

Question

Something that I believe is missing and would add a huge benefit to PRT WRT testing/backtesting, is a test template(s).

 

In order to do an apples-to-apples comparison of strategies, the following parameters have to be the same:

- test period (start and end date)

- initial capital

- order fee (if applicable; incl. min and max if applicable)

- spread (if applicable)

 

Because you have to specify (and can change it) for each strategy, it is difficult to compare different strategies easily. Also, if you choose earliest and real-time for starting and ending dates, you really have no idea what you are comparing. For example, if you record the results on a notepad or in Excel, over time, none of the results would be comparable.

 

Sure you can set all these options to be the same for each strategy, but it takes a long time to do - if you have multiple strategies - and introduces the possibility of making mistakes.

 

An easy way to solve this, would be the functionality to create test templates, where all of these parameters are specified once. I say test 'templates,' because you would probably want to create different templates for different groups of strategies and/or different types of instruments (some may use spreads, for example, while others will have commissions).

 

If anyone else sees value in this, please leave a comment.

 

Regards

Stef

 

 

Link to post

1 answer to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Hi,

 

Another thought... This can be an option on the test templates, or even a quick implementation before getting to (implementing) test templates...

 

Again, this has to do with doing things quicker and easier. As an alternative to specifying start and end dates, I believe there should be an option to simply choose the backtest period; such as 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, maximum, etc.

 

Having these as options on a dropdown would make it a lot simpler if you would like to backest your strategy on say the last 6 months', year's, etc. data.

 

Regards

Stef

 

 

Link to post

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • General Statistics

    • Total Topics
      13,694
    • Total Posts
      68,372
    • Total Members
      57,268
    • Most Online
      5,137
      14/01/21 09:51

    Newest Member
    MajorRon
    Joined 20/01/21 21:04
  • Posts

    • hahaha, and now ... Dylan Davidson @dyl_davidson Holy ****, on the day Biden is sworn in, WHO advises laboratories around the world to reduce the cycle count in PCR Covid testing, which will result in fewer positives!!  WHO Information Notice for IVD Users 2020/05   If you have been reading the thread you will know the high cycle threshold in use for the PCR was a major cause of the very high ratio of false positives (50 - 80%) (if you haven't already have a listen to the 16 min podcast (linked in quoted post) where Harvard Prof explains the different uses for the PCR and the Lateral Flow tests and why we should be using the quick and cheap LFT).
    • I seem to remember reading somewhere that over a certain limit the buying and selling fees are no longer a flat fee and become a percentage of the sale/purchase. Is this true and if so what are the limits and how does one buy or sell above a certain value? I'm talking specifically about equities.  Couldn't find any information on this so any guidance would be welcome. Thanks!
    • I really trade! Here is a trade from this week - The Market is an ETF of the Nasdaq100 Index provided by ishares - CNX1 This was a 2 day Swing trade If you've read the above posts then this is a clear DOUBLE BOTTOM following all the rules mentioned in the posts above ENTRY - Entry was actually set for the high of the Inside bar but the market gapped up and opened at the GREEN horizontal line! which was fine As you can see the DB caused a classic W shape if fulfilled - 2RSI in the <25% Oversold zone = 1 high probability trade potential with target of the swing high of the long leg of the W - as you can see price hit that level this afternoon for a healthy return - This provided a 2R return, "IF" (and we have no control over this) I'd of been triggered in at the high of the Inside bar as planned rather than the gapped entry, the R:R was 4R if stop placed at the swing low or 11R if entry was high of the narrow range IB and stop was at the low of it! - Now in this trade - the intention was the 11R trade but the Gap caused a change of plan THIS IS WHY I TRADE BECAUSE OFTEN THESE TRADES COME OFF INTENDED AS PLANNED - this one didn't but it was still a half decent trade To prove the position - I won't be doing this ever again - very NEARLY got the high! You can SCAN the market EVERY DAY for NARROW RANGE bars - and then when they conform to trading method you employ they offer an ultra high probability trading opportunity with ultra high returns   
×
×
  • Create New...