Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

Traders37

Members
  • Content Count

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • First Name
    TradersLaboratory.com
  • Last Name
    User
  • City
    Bremen
  • Country
    Germany
  • Gender
    Female

Trading Information

  • Vendor
    No
  1. And from the amibroker user group: ----------------------------------------- Hello All, I have just completed a few days of testing several modeling/backtesting programs. I thought, perhaps, the other members of the list might find the results useful; as I am new here, hopefully this can serve as my first productive contribution. I do a lot of testing & modeling on (a) daily bars (looking to execute intraday trades) and (b) tick data (for short-term trades). In the case of the first, I need to create signals on a daily series but execute orders against a 1M intraday series. So, in order to test an idea over five years of data, I have to do it over 5Y of 1M data. This gets into performance issues when you start wanting to run a test on several issues and want to run multiple revisions of the test. As for testing on tick data, I am sure you are familiar (at least conceptually) with the performance issues there. I took a look at NinjaTrader, TradeStation, OpenQuant & AmiBroker. I created an ASCII file of 5Y of EURUSD, USDJPY, GBPUSD, AUDUSD & USDCAD 1M data. In each program, I ran a simple EMA crossover test (10/50). It was an obnoxious test, resulting in +300,000 trades, but it was easy to implement and was a good stress test. What I wanted to do was see if I could get: a) reliable (e.g. reproducible) results from a single-security test and b) a test of the five FX pairs as a portfolio (again, in a reliable/reproducible manner). 1. Ninja: I use Ninja daily to scalp with and execute some short-term system code. I had dim hopes for the backtesting since I am familiar with the program - Ninja really is an execution platform first and an analytical platform second. The results were more or less what I expected: I could get it to test one issue with reproducible results at an okay speed (about 3:00M) but it would start to go into fits when I ran it against all five at once. The results of the five issue test would vary from instance to instance - it would usually show the results for the first 3 issues correctly, but on the last 2 it would suffer some kind of memory issue and give me numbers that were totally off. In one pass, it even managed to corrupt itself and I had to reload all the data. 2. TradeStation: I have a lot of time invested in TradeStation and I was already familar with it's problems - mainly, that over a large test set, TS will return different test results. I have talked with TS support and posted on the message board about this, but I never got anyone interested in what I found to be a critical issue. The results of this test were as expected: I could not get two results to match. Any time I would refresh data from the TS data servers and run the test again, I would get a different result. Sometimes it was as much as test 1 being -$190K and test 2 being +$74K. I do not understand how anyone can use this tool for successful modeling if they are testing over a large dataset; just making up a number would have been as useful. I even exported and imported the data to ensure that it wasn't an issue with the TS data servers. Same inconsistency. I couldn't test all five pairs together since TS does not do portfolio backtesting. As for time of a single test, it is hard to tell with TS as to what, exactly, it is waiting for/trying to do at any given moment, but I would say it would usually take about 2/4M per test (although, I have no idea what it was doing in that 2/4M since the results it returned seemed random at times). 3. OpenQuant: This platform looked interesting. I set it up, imported the data and ran a test. After 20M I noticed that the first EURUSD 1M test was at 10%. I closed it down and uninstalled it. The performance was just not going to work for me. 4. AmiBroker: You can likely guess the results as I am here as a new member. AB was able to test EURUSD in about 30 seconds and was able to do the portfolio of all 5 pairs in about 2M. No matter how many times I ran the test, the numbers it would return were the same. This fact is pretty crucial to my work. I understand that data will have errors in it, but I at least need my modeling software to consistently return results (which AB did). I even created new databases and populated them with the same data - all test results returned were the same. As you all know, AB was, by far, the cheapest option out of all of the above. ----------------------------------------------------------- So, nothing to add, just stick to your software and leave the edge to me. Regards Traders37
  2. It`s good nobody knows the backtesting speed and strength of AMIBROKER. Gives me an edge. Try to backtest a portfolio of 10 symbols (1min-1 year), repeat it for 10 runs, compare results...... With AMibroker it wil take a couple of minutes and results will always be identical. Same with optimisation runs. How long did it take your software ? So stick to your software, leave the edge to me. Regards Traders37
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.