losing faith in walk-forward analysis - Psychology and Money Management | futures io social day trading
futures io futures trading


losing faith in walk-forward analysis
Updated: Views / Replies:1,393 / 7
Created: by pintope Attachments:0

Welcome to futures io.

(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)

futures io is the largest futures trading community on the planet, with over 90,000 members. At futures io, our goal has always been and always will be to create a friendly, positive, forward-thinking community where members can openly share and discuss everything the world of trading has to offer. The community is one of the friendliest you will find on any subject, with members going out of their way to help others. Some of the primary differences between futures io and other trading sites revolve around the standards of our community. Those standards include a code of conduct for our members, as well as extremely high standards that govern which partners we do business with, and which products or services we recommend to our members.

At futures io, our focus is on quality education. No hype, gimmicks, or secret sauce. The truth is: trading is hard. To succeed, you need to surround yourself with the right support system, educational content, and trading mentors – all of which you can find on futures io, utilizing our social trading environment.

With futures io, you can find honest trading reviews on brokers, trading rooms, indicator packages, trading strategies, and much more. Our trading review process is highly moderated to ensure that only genuine users are allowed, so you don’t need to worry about fake reviews.

We are fundamentally different than most other trading sites:
  • We are here to help. Just let us know what you need.
  • We work extremely hard to keep things positive in our community.
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts.
  • We firmly believe in and encourage sharing. The holy grail is within you, we can help you find it.
  • We expect our members to participate and become a part of the community. Help yourself by helping others.

You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community.  It's free and simple.

-- Big Mike, Site Administrator

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 

losing faith in walk-forward analysis

  #1 (permalink)
Elite Member
Seville, Spain
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: NinjaTrader + Dendric
Broker/Data: IB/Kinetick
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
pintope's Avatar
 
Posts: 17 since May 2014
Thanks: 5 given, 9 received

losing faith in walk-forward analysis

I think this topic makes sense in "psychology".

I’m losing faith in walk-forward analysis. I have done literally thousands. With enough computing power you can always find combinations which performs well over ten years of historical data, doing hundreds of trades, with minimum drawdown. Always testing out-of-sample.

I don’t know how many walk-forward analysis follower are in this forum but I would bet most of traders earn a living without worrying about WFA.

Reply With Quote
 
  #2 (permalink)
Quick Summary
Quick Summary Post

Quick Summary is created and edited by users like you... Add FAQ's, Links and other Relevant Information by clicking the edit button in the lower right hand corner of this message.

 
  #3 (permalink)
Elite Member
Frankfurt Germany
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: MetaTrader, MultiCharts
Favorite Futures: Forex, ES, GC, strange synthetic creatures
 
Posts: 16 since Nov 2014
Thanks: 19 given, 14 received


My guess is you mis-understood the purpose of walk-forward. You must not test thousands of WF combinations to find a profitable one. WF is there to proove the stability of an already working system, not to create one. So, with WF you want to confirm that your system is not overfitted in the first place. If you need thousands of tests it's a sign to me your system is overfitted. By the way, if you really mean what you say: Looking for profitability is not a good otimization criteria. Look for a good sharp ratio, better sortino ratio. Or at least a good ReturnOnRequiredAccount. Thats a better precondition for WF, absolute returns can be created by leverage.

As Kevin Davey explains in his first webinar: If you walk-forward more than a few (a handful) times your OOS data very quickly becomes IS data, and effectively renders your WF useless.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to MT4Survivor for this post:
 
  #4 (permalink)
Elite Member
seoul, Korea
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Multicharts
Broker/Data: CQG, DTN IQfeed
Favorite Futures: YM 6E
 
treydog999's Avatar
 
Posts: 894 since Jul 2012
Thanks: 291 given, 1,006 received

Not only does running WFA many times contaminate the data and eventually render it In Sample. The more iterations or tests you do in order to find a working strategy increases the likelihood that its a fluke result with no future predictive value. For example say we want something with a Sharpe Ratio > 1 with a 95% confidence interval. Well 1 out of 20 you will receive such a system result, due to sheer luck. This type of confidence interval testing / t-testing only works when you did the test ONCE. After you have attempted more than once you have to start to factor that in, or account for your "data mining" bias. From your post it sounds like you did a lot of data mining but ended up not accounting for either the contamination or the high performance results with no future predictive power.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to treydog999 for this post:
 
  #5 (permalink)
Elite Member
Seville, Spain
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: NinjaTrader + Dendric
Broker/Data: IB/Kinetick
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
pintope's Avatar
 
Posts: 17 since May 2014
Thanks: 5 given, 9 received

Thank you both.

MT4Survivor View Post
My guess is you mis-understood the purpose of walk-forward. You must not test thousands of WF combinations to find a profitable one. WF is there to proove the stability of an already working system, not to create one.

For a long time I have been discussing on this subject with a friend of mine. My view coincides with what you say, WFA only makes sense over a well-designed and by other means tested strategies, per se does not say much. If I have understood you right. Otherwise trading would be reduce to computer power.

treydog999 View Post
This type of confidence interval testing / t-testing only works when you did the test ONCE. After you have attempted more than once you have to start to factor that in, or account for your "data mining" bias. From your post it sounds like you did a lot of data mining but ended up not accounting for either the contamination or the high performance results with no future predictive power.

I understand. That’s in line with my intuition too. I gather that if it would suffice to test a WF once, the size of the optimization and test windows are not very important. Otherwise I could “optimize” the size, I mean, to walk-forward with a range of different OOS/IS windows and select that with highest performance. In fact there’s a software, StrategyQuant, which makes such optimization (they call it Walk-Forward Matrix). Do you agree?

Reply With Quote
 
  #6 (permalink)
Elite Member
seoul, Korea
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Multicharts
Broker/Data: CQG, DTN IQfeed
Favorite Futures: YM 6E
 
treydog999's Avatar
 
Posts: 894 since Jul 2012
Thanks: 291 given, 1,006 received


pintope View Post
Thank you both.


For a long time I have been discussing on this subject with a friend of mine. My view coincides with what you say, WFA only makes sense over a well-designed and by other means tested strategies, per se does not say much. If I have understood you right. Otherwise trading would be reduce to computer power.


I understand. That’s in line with my intuition too. I gather that if it would suffice to test a WF once, the size of the optimization and test windows are not very important. Otherwise I could “optimize” the size, I mean, to walk-forward with a range of different OOS/IS windows and select that with highest performance. In fact there’s a software, StrategyQuant, which makes such optimization (they call it Walk-Forward Matrix). Do you agree?

What that WFA matrix is doing is basically turning your walk forward into an in sample brute force optimization. Yes you can find stable regions and configure your robustness characteristics. However you have increased your attempts by # of parameters ^ window parameters. Making finding basically any finding in you there actually the opposite of robust and basically just totally optimized. Not to mention completely contaminating your entire data set.

This paper might be of interest to you.


Pseudo-Mathematics and Financial Charlatanism: The Effects of Backtest Overfitting on Out-of-Sample Performance
David H. Bailey, Jonathan M. Borwein, Marcos López de Prado, and Qiji Jim Zhu

Reply With Quote
 
  #7 (permalink)
Elite Member
Seville, Spain
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: NinjaTrader + Dendric
Broker/Data: IB/Kinetick
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
pintope's Avatar
 
Posts: 17 since May 2014
Thanks: 5 given, 9 received


treydog999 View Post
This paper might be of interest to you.


Pseudo-Mathematics and Financial Charlatanism: The Effects of Backtest Overfitting on Out-of-Sample Performance
David H. Bailey, Jonathan M. Borwein, Marcos López de Prado, and Qiji Jim Zhu

The paper is very interesting indeed. Thank you.

Reply With Quote
 
  #8 (permalink)
Market Wizard
Cleveland Ohio/United States
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: Tradestation
Broker/Data: various
Favorite Futures: futures
 
Posts: 2,388 since Jul 2012
Thanks: 1,139 given, 4,387 received
Forum Reputation: Legendary


pintope View Post
The paper is very interesting indeed. Thank you.

The big thing, in my opinion, is that no matter what kind of backtesting you do, you should "incubate" the strategy for a while before trading. Watch how it performs in real time for 3-6 months. The curve fitted, over-optimized systems will usually reveal themselves during this phase.

This approach has literally saved me untold thousands.

The trick is making sure what you test can be replicated in real world - your strategy fills need to reflect reality. For example, if your strategy only uses market orders, and you add in appropriate slippage, there should be a good match between strategy backtest engine and real trading.

If you have any questions please send me a Private Message or use the futures.io "Ask Me Anything" thread
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to kevinkdog for this post:

Reply



futures io > > > losing faith in walk-forward analysis

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Upcoming Webinars and Events (4:30PM ET unless noted)

Jigsaw Trading: TBA

Elite only

FuturesTrader71: TBA

Elite only

NinjaTrader: TBA

Jan 18

RandBots: TBA

Jan 23

GFF Brokers & CME Group: Futures & Bitcoin

Elite only

Adam Grimes: TBA

Elite only

Ran Aroussi: TBA

Elite only
     

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WFA (walk forward analysis) Result using quantstrat R treydog999 Matlab, R project and Python 3 October 21st, 2014 11:22 AM
Continuous Walk Forward Analysis (CWFA) quantarb MultiCharts 5 September 27th, 2014 05:43 PM
walk forward analysis with SC crazybears Sierra Chart 3 August 5th, 2014 01:47 PM
Strategy Backtesting Using Walk Forward Analysis aventeren Elite Automated NinjaTrader Trading 1 February 5th, 2014 11:57 PM
Include ATM parameters in optimization / walk forward analysis? Krislassen NinjaTrader Programming 3 April 14th, 2012 01:12 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:52 PM.

Copyright © 2017 by futures io, s.a., Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, +507 833-9432, info@futures.io
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
no new posts
Page generated 2017-12-15 in 0.12 seconds with 19 queries on phoenix via your IP 54.91.171.137