kmcintyre Elite    Posts: 890 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Portland, OR  User Profile | Nice thread! My observation and suggestion, now that we know portfolio switching can greatly improve returns, is to bake that knowledge into OV so all users get the benefit. Simple, on/off switch. Maybe a drop down to select between 3 - 5 proven algorithms. Nothing more. The Pro version sounds awesome. I will probably sign up, even if I never use it, just to support Ed's team. But I strongly believe it's in everyone's interest to bake proven concepts into the base product. AND EXCLUDE unproven stuff that adds to the probability of user failure (as well as complexity) for non-Pro users. I feel the interative strategy selection (ISS) method of portfolio creation falls into this camp. Many hours of manual testing have proven the concept (IMO). The base user could get a simple interface to turn the feature on/off, specify the depth (number of strategies), and the metric to solve for (like max return vs min risk). Very simple. Pro user could code up more complex metrics and strategy selection criteria. Both portfolio switching and ISS could be accused of "curve fitting". I would argue all technical analysis is curve fitting. But using broad concepts that "make sense" and have held up to back and forward testing with "out of sample" data offer far more promise than throwing darts or randomly tweaking a large multitude of parameters which aren't really understood by the typical user. How about using ARM to decide which indicators or fundamentals best determine portfolio selection? How about coding up the process that Steve and Mark have been laboring over such that the computer works hard and we all reap the rewards? Cheers Keith | |
