Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Last post I showed my Monthly Summary sheet to reveal my current performance. It gets data from the individual strategy sheets. I have one page of my spreadsheet for each of the strategies I am currently trading or incubating.
The screenshot at the bottom shows the individual strategy summary sheet. It is pretty simple, but pretty effective. I can see at a quick glance how a strategy is performing, compared to my expectations (which of course are based on historical performance). When you have 30-50 strategies to keep track of, a quick summary like this is really invaluable.
In the sample I show below, you can see that the NGEC system (2 strategies) are currently underperforming my expectation by a bit (return efficiency is 92%), but the trend in general is pretty good. For many strategies I trade, that is all the information I need - a quick view at performance. If something catches my eye, I can always dig deeper.
On a monthly basis, the only number I have to update is in the "actual" column. This repsresents the actual profit or loss for the strategy for that particular month. It can be taken from trading statements, after adjusting for the number of contracts, or it can be taken from the strategy performance report. I typically do the latter.
The expected numbers can all be obtained from your historical testing. In the sample I show below, the annual profit trading one contract of the NGEC system is $12,264. I obtained this value from the Monte Carlo simulations I run prior to going live. This $12,264 equated to $1,022 monthly return.
The max drawdown is obtained from the strategy report. Note that this is an intraday value, where the drawdown the spreadsheet calculates is on a monthly basis. This obviously is not totally correct, as ideally you would want to compare drawdowns over the same length of time. But for my purposes it is adequate.
With these individual sheets for each strategy, once I fill the data in, it takes me 15 minutes or so to quickly run through each sheet, and assess its performance. It is a great way to quickly see "How I'm Doin."
Sorry for being nosy, but are those expected returns also based on a position size of one contract? (Just to get an idea of what is possible in the light of the 'how much capital is enough to get started with automated trading'-thread).
All the values I show are based on one contract being traded. Where it gets a bit confusing is in the percentage returns. I use "notional capital" for those calculations. I use a notional capital number that is as if I was trading the strategy by itself. It is based on a drawdown probability I feel comfortable with having to endure.
So, I would not put any faith in those percentage returns, since they really are based on my personal likes/dislikes.
Completely agree. In the early days I wrote strategies that had so many options you had to scroll the page to see them all.
Now I try to stick with very simplistic strategies that adjust based on market behavior, internally. Think of it like being ATR or volatility based, that type of stuff. I've found it to be a good compromise.
Completely agree again. Still, I have a special place in my heart reserved for you and your machine learning project, I guess I hold out hope that there is a "better way"
Do you pay attention to things like MAE or MFE, average time in trade, win percentage, number of trades per day, etc when comparing results? Naturally, if these things are awry then it is likely to effect the drawdown and net profit that you mentioned.
Not at this point in the process - the monitoring phase. So, I already assume that I am comfortable to trade the system with whatever those metrics you mentioned and others come out to be.
I have never looked at using other metrics as an "early warning" system, and I believe that is what you are getting at. Maybe for example, if the number of trades per day goes up or down significantly from history, that could be a warning that the market has changed.
When I get some time, I may just go back and look at some failed systems of mine - were there warning signs that could have saved me some cash?
You and me both! I have to say I am getting closer, just need more time to focus upon my task. Some of us 9-to-5ers only have nights and weekends to work on special projects. This would be so much easier if I was retired, but if I was retired, I probably wouldn't need this system.... Another paradox....
Exactly - I mean if a system is operating outside the norm, whether it is number of trades, average per trade profit, or whatever - I want to know it because, well, that means it's not normal! And while sometimes "not normal" can be a good thing (more profit), it usually isn't free -- meaning it carries increased risk, so again, I want to know it...
Here is a great example of what you said - performance that is too good being a bad thing.
I started incubating this strategy a while back, and it took off...
It was "too good to be true" - way above its historical norm. For that reason I decided to keep incubating it. Here are the next few months...
Now the strat is in line with historical norms, but the standard deviation of monthly performance is a KILLER (look at the down month size). I looked into it further, and saw that the system was not acting normal. So I decided to keep incubating. Here is what happened...
So, this is a good example of 1) performance that is too good being a bad thing, and 2) standard deviation of results being an early warning sign that things were not quite right.
Epilogue: I am still incubating it, but did not trade it with real money.
Market conditions are changing over time. I have a feeling that requirement of having system that consistently shows profit over the period of 3 years is not valid. What we all looking for is for some hints when to stop trading certain system, and switch to another one.
Incubation does not serve any purpose, just confirmation that market conditions are the same, but it is not a guarantee that conditions could not change at the moment we start trading real money.