Hello everybody,

a long time ago I posted something about a requested upgrade of AB including 
something other competitors have already included for ages which is usually 
called "Use Look-Inside-Bar Back-testing" which automatically check the 
chronological order of prices using the lowest granularity (tick-by-tick if 
available) without the need to use the cumbersome CBT.

btw I suspect CBT is still the only way to go.

Paolo

--- In [email protected], "ang_60" <ima_c...@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], Howard B <howardbandy@> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings --
> > 
> > You may need to use bars with finer resolution.
> > 
> > Any assumptions of the order of any prices other than Open and Close are
> > unreliable.  
> 
> 
> Hi Howard,
> 
> thanks to drop by, I'm eagerly execting your next book.
> 
> This question has been raised several times in this list, and I feel it 
> deserves an answer not dictated by "the correct way to test on bar data"
> 
> In my 2cents opinion, the question should be read as a "programming one":
> " Granted that any assumption about the chronological order of the bar 
> (notice I used the word "bar", not "daily bar") could be wrong (*) and I will 
> take full responsability of the consequences of this fact on my trading, is 
> Amibroker able to do what the starter of this thread is asking?".
> 
> My answer is: "Not without some complicated code in the CBT. In my tests, the 
> use of "SetBacktestMode( backtestRegularRawMulti)" as advised in this thread 
> doesn't solve this problem. Can anyone confirm my findings?
> 
> 
> Greetings,
> Angelo.  
> 
> 
> (*) by the way, any test based on bar data in unreliable, because one is 
> implicitly assuming se/she could get a trade for every tick of the bar.... 
> and that's could be wrong too. So, if one really wants to be accurate, should 
> only test on tick data....... but this is really out of the subject.
>


Reply via email to