Thank you Paul for your contribution to this discussion. This example you have 
drawn is very valuable - to be honest until now I have been using discrete 
rates in all my calculations, which now seems to me as very tricky. Since - as 
far as I am concerned - AB calculates all performance metrics basing on 
arithmetic values, it would be advisable to prepere my own measures through CBT.

--- In [email protected], "paultsho" <paul.t...@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> There is also an article on your reference site on MaxDd 
> http://www.intelligenthedgefundinvesting.com/ch06.html. In fact, there were 
> other performance measures for you to consider. while I'll need sometime to 
> look at the AIRAP more closely. I think it is important to point out that it 
> is just as important to understand how different ways of applying your data 
> to generate statistical fitness can affect your final answer just as much as 
> choosing different fitness functions. For example, consider the follwoing 
> Rate of return calculation:
> Period :            Discrete Rate          Continuously compounded
> 1                   100%                   0.693 =log(1+1)
> 2                   -50%                  -0.693 =log(1-0.5)
> Avg                 0.25                   0
> As we can see the arithmetic average, or the mean of the discrete rates of 
> return, is plus 25% per period. Yet the investment has simply doubled and 
> then halved to return to its original value at time 0.
> 
> --- In [email protected], "tf28373" <tomfid@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Hello everyone
> > 
> > I have been working on the choose of fitness function following the
> > Howard Bundy's advices in his "Quantitative Trading Systems" and come
> > across M. Sharma's Alternative Investments Risk Adjusted Performance
> > (AIRAP).
> > 
> > The equation of it is as following:
> > 
> > AIRAP =  [ E pi*(1+TRi)(1-c) ] 1/(1-c) - 1,
> > 
> > where  TRi - ith period total fund return (in my opinon it can also be
> > ith trade net return), c - risk aversion parameter (author suggests to
> > set its value to c=4), i=1,...,N - number of periods (as for me it can
> > be number of trades),  pi - the probability of the ith period's total
> > return (according to the author it can be replaced with 1/N). (For
> > futher information please check this working paper:
> > http://www.intelligenthedgefundinvesting.com/pubs/rb-ms01.pdf
> > <http://www.intelligenthedgefundinvesting.com/pubs/rb-ms01.pdf> .)
> > 
> > M. Sharma argues that this measure captures all higher moments,
> > penalizes for higher volatility and leverage (downside risk is penalized
> > more) and has all merits of Sharp ratio, though without its limitations
> > and disadvantages. I have carried out some simulations on the artificial
> > returns of different distributions and indeed it makes some difference.
> > Nevertheless what I am suspicious about is the fact that it was the very
> > first time I found this objective function even though it was created by
> > Sharma about 5 years ago.  As for me it can mean that AIRAP is in fact
> > far from being effective or/and practical fitness measure at least for
> > trader like us and nobody use it (maybe I am wrong...). Another issue
> > that concerns me a bit is omission of MaxDrawDown in the equation, which
> > - at least for me - is a very important risk measure. According to many
> > experienced wise people writing on this forum (like ex Mr Bundy), an
> > effective fitness function shouls take Max DD or some comparable risk
> > measure into consideration in order to be really useful.
> > 
> > What do you think about AIRAP? Should I proceed with utilizing this
> > function?
> > 
> > I am looking forward to your response. Thank you in advance.
> > 
> > Tomasz
> >
>


Reply via email to