Hi bh --

It was suggestions such as the one you made earlier in this thread that
prompted me to write the posting on portfolio construction.

You wrote:
"---------------------------
Out of curiosity ... are you finding it easy to come up with noncorrelated
systems?

Perhaps not "easy" but possible. Without going into too many details, the 3
systems I currently trade do the following.

System A - a long/short mean-reversion system that trades the S&P (ES or
SPY) using short-term overbought/oversold levels. Average hold time is 3-5
days, buys and sells the close.

System B - a long only mean-reversion system that trades the entire stock
market universe with a minimum price and liquidity requirements. It
essentially buys short-term weakness on longer-term high relative strength
stocks. Average hold time is 3-5 days, buys and sells the open.

System C - a short only system that trades the entire stock market universe
with a minimum price and liquidity requirements. I am very protective of
this one because a short-only system that has an edge over the past 20 years
through any market climate is rare but this system buys the open and sells
the close of the same day.

I need a longer-term system (2-3 week hold times) that buys strength rather
than weakness to try and fill in the under-performance gaps during
significant market rallies like what we are having now. I have found this
extremely challenging to do quantitatively.
----------------------"

The intent of my posting was to point out that there are several complex
issues that should be considered when creating a portfolio of trading
systems.

They begin with analysis of the individual systems, asking questions such
as:

What are the optimum lengths of the in-sample periods for the three systems
you are describing?
Will the portfolio be created (the portfolio weights determined, and so
forth) by re-selecting the parameter values for those systems as part of a
portfolio?
Or, by using the trade results that were obtained by running each
separately?
Are the results that were obtained by running each separately in-sample or
out-of-sample?
And so forth.

Best wishes on the project (no sarcasm intended) -- let us all know how it
turns out.

Thanks,
Howard


On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 12:53 PM, bh.hicks <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> Graham,
> Let me think about specifically what my needs are regarding this over the
> next few weeks and I may contact you. I am a little reluctant to pursue a
> "custom" solution as I think there are others on this board way more capable
> of designing a better and more robust solution than I but it may make sense.
> Thank you.
>
>
> --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>, Graham
> <kavemanpe...@...> wrote:
> >
> > It is possible to do, you just need to write this into the advanced
> > backtest coding, low level coding is advisable. Takes a bit of work
> > and ability to balance balls like a juggler.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Graham Kav
> > AFL Writing Service
> > http://www.aflwriting.com
> >
> >
> >
> > 2009/5/6 bh.hicks <bh.hi...@...>:
> > > Ang,
> > > Ah yes, I had gathered as much but thank you for your candor.  I have
> owned AB for over a year now but have just recently began using it for more
> than a general market scanner due to some limitations I ran into with
> Traders Studio and a general frustration with the development cycle on that
> platform.  Other than a few issues I have run into (like this one), I have
> been very pleased with AB and also see myself moving away from Traders
> Studio for 'most' things.
> > >
> > > This would certainly be an amazing addition to AB.  Of course, the
> feature would probably be lost on 90% of users so I understand the
> reluctance to go down that path but I would certainly be willing to pay as
> much if not more than I paid for AB itself for a robust plugin that was able
> to do this well.  I suspect many others would as well.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "ang_60" <ima_cons@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "bh.hicks" <bh.hicks@> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > I am basically looking for a way to have AmiBroker run multiple
> systems concurrently in order to examine how trading multiple non-correlated
> strategies affect drawdowns.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> As you are migrating from another software I happen to know a bit, the
> short answer: as of today, Amibroker is not capable of "built in multiple
> systems testing" as TraderStudio's trading plan approach.
> > >>
> > >> This matter was raised long ago by myself and others: if you are a
> registered user, you can check suggestion #406 in the feedback center, dated
> 16 August 2006.
> > >>
> > >> In this list you can find very good programmers, claiming they are
> able to get the multisystem/multimarket approach to work programming it by
> scratch, but - to my knowledge - I've never seen a public (that is.... free)
> code able to do what I think is needed (and that's includes the two links
> provided in this discussion).
> > >>
> > >> Just for clarity, this doesn't want to sound as a critic: I own
> TraderStudio too, but by now the software I most use for testing is - by far
> - Amibroker.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > **** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
> > > This group is for the discussion between users only.
> > > This is *NOT* technical support channel.
> > >
> > > TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
> > > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
> > >
> > > TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
> > > http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
> > > (submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
> > >
> > > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> > > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>  
>

Reply via email to