Ok, I was talking abour another problem.
What does mean in the chart the lines Buy&Hold IS and Buy&HoldOOS?
For I have the same amount of dollars in OOS equity and Buy&Hold
equity.. And the usual behaviour for just Buy and hold is to be less
than a good system..
there's something I  misunderstand..

bye

--- In [email protected], Thomas Ludwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> > Thanks Thomas. Very good collection of parameters.
> > I see my system falls from CAR 64 in sample, to CAR 30 out-of-sample.
> > But I think something must be wrong: The result of the buy and hold
> > is exactly the same that the OS result.
> > Do you have this problem?
> 
> That OOS results are worse than IS results is normal. You should also 
> bear in mind that the concatenated IS period is not identical to the
OOS 
> period. That's why IS and OOS CARs are not directly comparable.
Example: 
> If you start your walk-forward optimization on 01/01/2000 with a, say, 
> 2-year IS period it's obvious that both CARs are very different. That's 
> why in my code Walk-forward Efficiency (WFE) is NOT calculated as OOS-
> CAR/IS-CAR (as Robert Pardo suggests) but rather as  RELATIVE IS-
> CAR/RELATIVE OOS-CAR (where Relative CAR is IS-CAR or OOS-CAR
divided by 
> the benchmark CAR for the respective period). This makes more sense, 
> IMHO.
> 
> > And, I had already seen the gfx code in the Amibroker page. It's
> > fine, but it does not show DD, and total CAR.. although I didn't test
> > the trick of changing the code to see OS equity line..very good..
> 
> I think you should use both my and TJ's code - they save different 
> purposes. MaxDD as a percentage is shown for IS and OOS in my code. And 
> if you right-click the pane and open the parameters window you can also 
> plot DD and MaxDD as absolute figures both for IS and OOS. But I
strongly 
> suggest that you plot it only for, e.g., OOS (and disable all the IS 
> plots - or vice versa!) - otherwise the pane becomes too cluttered. 
> Particularly if you also plot IS and OOS Relative Performance ... ;-)
> 
> Greetings, 
> 

Reply via email to