Re[2]: [amibroker] Re: Backtest - WF OptimizationExactly.

Best regards,
Tomasz Janeczko
amibroker.com
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Herman 
  To: a a 
  Cc: [email protected] 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:12 PM
  Subject: Re[2]: [amibroker] Re: Backtest - WF Optimization


  Why? I think we should respect their privacy.




  h







  Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 8:04:07 AM, you wrote:




        >
       For our benefit can you tell us who?



        Alternatively they could come forward and introduce themselves.



        I am sure we can all learn a lot from them.







        ----- Original Message ----

        From: Tomasz Janeczko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

        To: [email protected]

        Sent: Tuesday, September 9, 2008 4:38:21 PM

        Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Backtest - WF Optimization







        FYI: There are dozens of members on this list who work in fin 
institutions

        (fund managers, analysts, etc).




        Best regards,

        Tomasz Janeczko

        amibroker.com

        ----- Original Message ----- 

        From: "buandbe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] com>

        To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ps.com>

        Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 12:24 PM

        Subject: [amibroker] Re: Backtest - WF Optimization




        > 

        > It's good to know institutional model developers such as yourself are

        > participating in this forum.

        > Your experience may not be directly applicable to most of us since we

        > cannot hold a few hundred stocks in a portfolio.

        > Nonetheless, the fact that a person who used industrial strength

        > backtesting applications chose AmiBroker can be an endorsement of 
sort.

        > Looking forward to your input...

        > 

        > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ps.com, "sidhartha70" <sidhartha70@ ...> 
wrote:

        >>

        >> Well, over the years (12) I worked for various banks... different

        >> models, developed differently and different houses depending on the

        >> mandate. The ideas behind the model I was illustrating there started

        >> development at Merrill Lynch... and ultimately ended up being traded

        >> by Barclays Capital & then Nomura.

        >> 

        >> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ps.com, "buandbe" <buandbe@> wrote:

        >> >

        >> > 

        >> > Very interesting.

        >> > 

        >> > Would you care to name the investment Bank ?

        >> > 

        >> > TIA

        >> > 

        >> > 

        >> > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ps.com, "sidhartha70" <sidhartha70@ > 
wrote:

        >> > >

        >> > > Ara,

        >> > > 

        >> > > When I was working for an investment bank, the parameters (and

        >> > > universe) were optimized each month from the previous 6 months 
data

        >> > > backtest (rolled forward each month obviously). These parametere

        > were

        >> > > then used to trade live for the coming month. This is how all my

        >> > > backtesting was done (i.e. OOS) and all my live trading.

        >> > > 

        >> > > In this sense, the paramters were indeed 'adaptive'.

        >> > > 

        >> > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ps.com, "Ara Kaloustian" <ara1@> wrote:

        >> > > >

        >> > > > WF testing seems like a logical step to take in creating a 
trading

        >> > > system. While I am not suggesting that we don't do it, I'd like 
to

        >> > > clear my understanding.

        >> > > > 

        >> > > > It seems to me that we are looking to create a system with

        >> > > parameters that are valid "for all time". If a test is succesful 
in

        >> > > OOS period, then we can assume that we have found something that

        >> > > remains applicable for the future - at least in this one 
instance.

        >> > > > 

        >> > > > Given that the markets change all the time, the obvious 
conclusion

        >> > > for me is that we need indicators that are adaptive... and that 
any

        >> > > that do not adapt will simply not work in OOS.

        >> > > > 

        >> > > > The issue of providing feedback from equity curve seems valid

        > and it

        >> > > can provide a warning about system starting to not perform as

        > expected

        >> > > ... so regardless of type of indicators used, this kind of

        > feedback is

        >> > > good!.

        >> > > > 

        >> > > > The point I am making is that there has been very little said

        > about

        >> > > adaptive indicators ... 

        >> > > > 

        >> > > > maybe that is the holy grail ... and therefore untennable ...

        >> > > >

        >> > >

        >> >

        >>

        > 

        > 

        > 

        > ------------ --------- --------- ------

        > 

        > 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 NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:

        > http://www.amibroke r.com/devlog/

        > 

        > For other support material please check also:

        > http://www.amibroke r.com/support. html

        > Yahoo! Groups Links

        > 

        > 

        > 





       

   

Reply via email to