Hello,

I believe that is called Bootstrapping. In Monte Carlo you have to first guess 
the distribution of trades - more assumptions. 

Best regards,

MK

--- In [email protected], "Mike" <sfclimb...@...> wrote:
>
> Books that you might be interested in:
> 
> Ralph Vince
> - The Handbook of Portfolio Mathematics: Formulas for Optimal Allocation & 
> Leverage (Wiley Trading 2007)
> 
> - The Leverage Space Trading Model: Reconciling Portfolio Management 
> Strategies and Economic Theory (Wiley Trading 2009)
> 
> Your comments on Monte Carlo are incomplete. Monte Carlo is not just changing 
> the the order of trades. Monte Carlo can also be used to treat existing 
> trades as a pool of trades from which a greater number of trades may be 
> sampled in order to project a longer term equity curve.
> 
> For example, if you have a collection of trades that you feel adequately 
> represent the range of trades that your system will generate, you can 
> randomly draw some number of trades (with replacement) from the pool to 
> generate thousands of equity curves (e.g. draw 100 trades from a pool of 30). 
> You may then analyze the resulting equity curves to get such information as 
> average performance, best performance, worst performance, etc.
> 
> Mike
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Matthias K." <meridian202@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Indeed this is a very interesting topic. Many thanks go to Howard Bandy,  
> > it is literally a must read when working with Amibroker. 
> > Iâ&#65533;&#65533;m curiously waiting for the new one.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Regarding System Design and Position Sizing:
> > 
> > Well, I believe that there are a lot of books out there, but different 
> > authors really do mix up terminology, so this is how I interpret it:
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Position sizing
> > 
> > Tells you how much, e.g. how many contracts or shares one should buy, 
> > Howard just mentioned 2 algos, fixed fraction and fixed ration. Ralph 
> > Vinceâ&#65533;&#65533;s book is a must read on this, however, 
> > itâ&#65533;&#65533;s not quite easy going. Furthermore, 
> > thereâ&#65533;&#65533;s martingale and antimartingale, whereas martingale 
> > pretty much means: the more you lose, the more you bet. I believe 
> > itâ&#65533;&#65533;s a sure-fire way to the poorhouse, 
> > thatâ&#65533;&#65533;s why I use ALWAYS anti-martingale. No black swans 
> > welcome in my trading.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Risk management
> > 
> > Obivously, thereâ&#65533;&#65533;s a clear overlap with position sizing, 
> > but still I believe itâ&#65533;&#65533;s meant to be a little different. 
> > Say you have a system with a plugged in position sizing algo. You backtest 
> > it and youâ&#65533;&#65533;ll have an estimate of the drawdown. Obviously, 
> > you will want to adjust position size so that you can stomach the drawdown. 
> > But as a safety measure, you might plug in another strategy. It might be an 
> > equity MA-Crossover, it might be something psychological (a divorce, an 
> > illness), it might also be a safety stop due to increased market volatility 
> > / markets crash.
> > 
> > Remember to always measure drawdown in percentage terms, e.g. Tradestation 
> > Strategy Report is pretty useless, because it only shows drawdown as an 
> > absolute figure so it requires Excel to actually calculate drawdown in 
> > percentage terms. Also CAR is calculated correctly in AB, 
> > Iâ&#65533;&#65533;ve seen other software, costing 2kâ&#65533;¬, still 
> > calculating CAR wrong (10 times 10% per annum is NOT 100%)
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Portfolio Management
> > 
> > Hahaa, I believe this is where a few gold bucks a buried. Portfolio in 
> > terms of which markets to trade has been discussed in the literature, still 
> > this is a very specialized topic already. There not many books found on 
> > this, thatâ&#65533;&#65533;s why I spend so much time thinking about it: 
> > Nothing to be found means a lot to be made and understanding it in great 
> > detail might give me/you a larger edge. Especially a scientific approach 
> > that is not based on gut-feel, is missing. This is what I am currently 
> > working on: Portfolio Management in terms of Trading Systems. So to say, 
> > have a trading systems farm, probably 3-5 systems on one underlying to have 
> > a very smooth equity curve. This includes diversification across a) 
> > methodology (Mean Reversion, Trendfollowing, Breakouts,etc.) and b) 
> > timeframe (day-trading, swing trading, position trading). Well, I have 
> > found 2-3 books on this topic, all of them sort of scratching the surface, 
> > mentioning the topic, but thatâ&#65533;&#65533;s it. So how can systems be 
> > combined wisely and when should systems be switched off, reoptimized, etc. 
> > If anybody knows some books on this, Iâ&#65533;&#65533;d be very happy to 
> > read up on it so if someone knows an author, please post! So far, having 
> > many systems with different logics is the direction Iâ&#65533;&#65533;m 
> > going right now.
> > 
> > Something thatâ&#65533;&#65533;s  worth having a look inside is this one:
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > http://www.amazon.de/Trading-Systems-Development-Portfolio-Optimisation/dp/1905641796
> > 
> > again, itâ&#65533;&#65533;s scratching the topic only.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > The way I develop systems is always the same (If anyone 
> > doesnâ&#65533;&#65533;t agree with this approach, Iâ&#65533;&#65533;d like 
> > to know why)
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 1 contract, share, etc.
> > 
> > Commissions excluded
> > 
> > 3-5 (5max!) input parameters, such as indicators, maâ&#65533;&#65533;s: 
> > itâ&#65533;&#65533;ll result in a raw system with in-built exits and 
> > entries but no stops.
> > 
> > Optimize the inputs for STABILITY, a profitable set of parameters with a 
> > stable surrounding region
> > 
> > Plug-In Commissions
> > 
> > Add filters
> > 
> > Add stops/targets according to Sweeneyâ&#65533;&#65533;s MAE MFE
> > 
> > Plug-in the position sizing algo, â&#65533;&#65533;the 
> > compounderâ&#65533;&#65533;
> > 
> > Test out of sample
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Works fine for me.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > After this, I pretty much try to combine systems. Currently this is a bit 
> > troublesome in Ami, but I shall let you know when I have done enough 
> > research, unfortunately I believe itâ&#65533;&#65533;s gonna take me some 
> > months.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > What I believe to be very controversial is the topic 
> > â&#65533;&#65533;adding noiseâ&#65533;&#65533; to data. I 
> > donâ&#65533;&#65533;t think it reflects human emotion anymore. Same as 
> > dealing with a random sequence: a coin toss, e.g., can be displayed as a 
> > graph too, but itâ&#65533;&#65533;s still a normal distribution. So: When 
> > doing quant-trading and believing in it, you make one big assumption: 
> > Markets behave logically, sometimes. I found out that markets contain a 
> > large amount of noise, random behavior. But there are occasions when people 
> > get hit on the wrong spot and start buying or selling aggressively . 
> > Thatâ&#65533;&#65533;s the time when my systems jump in and make the kill  
> > - then Iâ&#65533;&#65533;m out. This behavior cannot be found in a random, 
> > probably noisy set of data. 
> > 
> > Monte Carlo pretty much changes the trade sequence only, right now I cannot 
> > really see why some people think itâ&#65533;&#65533;s so useful. It might 
> > give you a better estimate of a historic drawdown, but I achieve the same 
> > by multiplying my non-monte-carlo-drawdown with say 1.5â&#65533;¦
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Greetings from Germany,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Matthias
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
> > Behalf Of Howard B
> > Sent: Montag, 26. Juli 2010 16:33
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [amibroker] Trading Systems, Position Sizing and Monte Carlo 
> > Analysis
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > Hi Sohamdas --
> > 
> > In my opinion, this is definitely a topic that deserves discussion in the 
> > AmiBroker forum.
> > 
> > What position sizing should be used during backtests?
> > 
> > If you will be evaluating each trade for its characteristics -- entry 
> > efficiency, exit efficiency, and so forth, then each trade should be the 
> > same size.  For stocks and ETFs that means the same dollar amount.  For 
> > futures that means the same number of contracts.
> > 
> > If you will be comparing equity growth over a period of time to other 
> > alternatives, then you will want position sizing and / or compounding to 
> > some degree.  For example, if you want to compare the results of a trading 
> > system to buy and hold, you will want to take the same size position at the 
> > beginning if the test period for each alternative, then compare equity 
> > smoothness, growth, drawdown, etc.
> > 
> > If you are planning to use aggressive position sizing, there are several 
> > things to consider.
> > 1.  I cannot state it too often -- your system must have a positive 
> > expectancy measured on strictly out-of-sample results.  You absolutely 
> > cannot use in-sample results to estimate the likely future performance of a 
> > trading system in any event.  And if aggressive position sizing is based on 
> > in-sample results, you will go bankrupt.
> > 2.  Traders should have a business plan in place.  They should know when to 
> > quit -- either when they have enough that they no longer need to trade, or 
> > when they have lost so much that they can no longer trade or realize that 
> > they should pick another profession. 
> > 3.  Aggressive position sizing depends on having:
> > A.  Positive expectancy.
> > B.  Understanding of risk.  Both the risk that is acceptable for each trade 
> > from the account, and the risk associated with the trading system.  Most 
> > trading systems have higher risk per trade than the account risk allows, so 
> > even taking a position that is everything you can afford to buy is 
> > aggressive.  
> > C.  The ability to use leverage.  Brokers allow use of margin, and some 
> > ETFs have leverage.  By using these, it is possible to get 12 to 20 times 
> > leverage trading stocks and ETFs in an ordinary brokerage account.  
> > D.  Frequent trading, because that provides frequent compounding.  For most 
> > trading systems, the final equity of an account is a multiple of the 
> > initial equity that can be computed from:
> > terminal_equity = (1 + expectancy) ^ number_of_trades
> > where expectancy is the average percentage gain per trade.
> > 
> > There are two general schemes for aggressive position sizing.  As you dig 
> > into the math, you will see that they are closely related.
> > The first is fixed fraction, popularized by Ralph Vince.
> > The second is fixed ratio, popularized by Ryan Jones.
> > Both men have written books and papers describing their methods, and you 
> > can do an Internet search on each phrase and get a lot of information.
> > 
> > The essence of both methods is to increase position size when the system is 
> > operating profitably.  In gambling terminology, you are "betting the run of 
> > the table".  When winning, increase; when losing, pull back.  Both of these 
> > are betting schemes called anti-martingale.  
> > 
> > Ralph Vince has also popularized the notion of "optimal f" -- that fixed 
> > fraction that should be bet on each play to maximize the terminal equity.  
> > The fraction of the account used for each play is determined by the largest 
> > anticipated drawdown or trade loss.  He, and everyone else who is working 
> > with real money, shows that the fraction bet on each play Must be less than 
> > optimal f if the account is to remain solvent.  In fact, the fraction must 
> > be much less than optimal f if the account is avoid large drawdowns.  
> > Trading at optimal f essentially guarantees drawdowns in the 80 percent 
> > range.  
> > 
> > Ryan Jones essentially creates two sub-accounts.  One is the original 
> > stake, say $100,000.  The other is the profits from trading.  Ryan waits 
> > until there are some profits, then uses a high percentage of the profits 
> > for each trade.
> > 
> > The two methods converge mathematically.  Some traders prefer to begin 
> > using one method, then switch to the other as profits accumulate. 
> > 
> > Before you consider using an aggressive position sizing scheme, and buying 
> > all the stock you can afford is aggressive, please read my other comments 
> > in both this forum and Aussie Stock Forums related to trading system 
> > development and position sizing.  And read both Vince's and Ryan's books, 
> > and other material you can find on the Internet.
> > 
> > The input to the simulators that model either fixed fraction or fixed ratio 
> > need is a list of closed trade results.  These are individual trades, each 
> > the same size.
> > 
> > Monte Carlo Analysis is used to rearrange the sequence of trades many 
> > times.  The position sizing rules are applied to each sequence and the 
> > equity curve computed and drawn.  Typically many sequences are used -- 1000 
> > or more -- each of many trades -- 100 or more.  After all 1000 runs, all of 
> > the equity curves are draw on a single chart and statistics computed that 
> > will allow you to estimate the final equity and probability of both going 
> > broke and retiring wealthy.  The plot looks like a straw broom with the 
> > straws angled upward to the right.  
> > 
> > There are two good programs for testing position sizing.
> > Equity Monaco. A free position size calculator / simulator published by 
> > TickQuest. It accepts a file, in ASCII format, of closed trade results, and 
> > performs Monte Carlo analysis of reordering the closed trades. Highly 
> > recommended.
> > http://www.tickquest.com/?page_id=70
> > Market Systems Analyzer. Costs about US$350, but sometimes available for a 
> > little less. Published by Adaptrade. Does everything Equity Monaco does, 
> > plus tests aggressive position sizing methods. I highly recommend this 
> > program -- provided you understand trading system development, trading 
> > system validation, account risk, trade risk, and aggressive position 
> > sizing, and you are not a novice trader. Again -- using aggressive position 
> > sizing with a trading system that has not passed tests of statistical 
> > validation will result in a swift trip to bankruptcy.
> > http://www.adaptrade.com/
> > 
> > To use either of these programs, run your backtest using the parameters and 
> > settings that will be used during trading and that represent the 
> > out-of-sample runs from walk forward testing.  Export the trade list to a 
> > csv file.  Strip everything unnecessary out of the file and save it in the 
> > format the position sizing program needs.  Then run the position sizing 
> > simulator.
> > 
> > ----------------
> > 
> > There are two other areas where Monte Carlo Analysis is useful.
> > 
> > One is adding noise to the input data.  This can easily be done in 
> > AmiBroker now and is explained in my book Quantitative Trading Systems.
> > 
> > The second is testing the sensitivity of parameter values.  This can be 
> > also be done now, but requires some careful thought and planning to 
> > determine which parameters should be tested and over what range.
> > 
> > -------------
> > 
> > Thanks for listening,
> > Howard
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 11:33 PM, sohamdas <sohamdas@> wrote:
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > Hi Folks,
> > 
> > Though, not exactly, Amibroker related but I guessed it might be a great 
> > place to ask. 
> > 
> > Can anybody of you, who have ample experience designing trading systems, 
> > can comment that when I am designing a trading system, say, entries and 
> > exits are to the extent possible frozen, what is the position sizing I 
> > should use to run my preliminary backtests.
> > 
> > And what are the inputs I should pass onto the Monte Carlo routine.
> > 
> > Is it possible to conduct MC Analysis in Amibroker?
> > 
> > Soham
> > 
> > P.S: Thoughts of Dr. Bandy will be much more than welcome
> >
>


Reply via email to