OmniVest Forum OmniVest Forum
forums calendars search
today this week
 
register logon control panel Forum Rules
You are currently browsing as a guest.
You should logon to access more features
A Self-Moderated Community - ALL MEMBERS, PLEASE READ!
Vote for Members who contribute the most to your trading, and help us moderate content within the Forums.


[Random Quote] -


This message cannot be deleted. It is the first message of the thread.
Administrators or moderators may choose to delete the entire thread


 
kmcintyre

Elite
500100100100252525
Posts: 890

Joined: 10/11/2012
Location: Portland, OR

User Profile
 
Subject : 28 days of October - Part 3
Posted : 1/2/2015 8:40 PM
Post #34731

Previously I posted about some experiments I performed capturing performance stats on the 21 default EFs against a universe of stock RTM strategies. The takeaway for me was that PW generated wildly varying results which (to me) defied logic. Even over a simulation range of 7,75 years... (see my other posts if interested.)

I had this idea that I might be able reduce the performance randomness by running multiple parallel dynamic portfolios. To that end I assemble 16 DPs. I used 4 EFs which exhibited the lowest Coefficient of Variation from my 7.75 year runs. I selected 4 different rebalance dates. (3, 11, 17,and 23 cuz they were nice prime numbers...)

I built an account with the 16 DPs enabled, which resulted in 564 strategies being used over the 7.75 year simulation range. I then tested the account over the same 28 starting dates used in my previous experiments.

The result was a much more predictable account that didn't care very much what day in January, 2007 I pulled the lever. The CV was reduced to 0.0551, I'm attaching a spreadsheet for anyone who cares.

But before everyone gets all excited and starts building accounts of parallel dynamic portfolios (which will probably drive OV into the ground)...

I then tried the same kind of experiment using the 17 strategies native to ARM4 Margin. I saw even more consistency using just those 17 strategies. CV was down to 0.0288. The return, as measured by EE, was less, but the % invested was also much lower. And this solution only required 144 strategies to be used over the 7.75 year simulation.

I'm including a spreadsheet with those results as well.

But before you run off and try to implement parallel dynamic portfolios (which might ruin OV for everyone)...

I took plain old ARM4 Margin and ran 28 simulations over the same date ranges. I collected performance data so I could compare it to all the machinations of PDP. Using a static portfolio (17 strategies) generated much better returns with a fairly comparable CV (0.0422) without using all the computational load and wiz bang algorithms of PDP.

I believe PDP has merit. IF I could find EFs that remotely approximated the performance I see with AISS (automated iterative strategy selection), PW might be a profit reaping machine.

But as it is, I've not been able to find any dynamic portfolio (or group of parallel dynamic portfolios) that can beat ARN4 Margin, a simple static portfolio of 17 strategies which don't even use dynamic lists.

Why am I sharing all this? I'm hoping either Nirvana or one of you Elite Traders will benefit from my research and come up with a product that will consistently make me money. (The markets had another banner year. I lost my ass[ets], again.)

Happy New Years

Keith

Attached file : PDP - 7 year - Stock RTMs.xlsx (12KB - 333 downloads)
Attached file : PDP - 7 year - ARM4 Margin RTMs.xlsx (14KB - 362 downloads)

Deleting message 34731 : 28 days of October - Part 3


Nirvana Systems
For any problems or issues please contact our Webmaster at webmaster@nirvsys.com.