Current location | Thread information | |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Last Activity 2/20/2018 9:38 AM 25 replies, 2944 viewings |
|
Printer friendly version |
^ Top | |||
Ed Downs![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 645 Joined: 2/7/2007 Location: Austin, Texas ![]() |
Greetings! I am pleased to announce that we have deployed the new Portfolio Builder to the OmniVest site. We also recently published a Newsletter and video explaining the improvements. Click Here to download the December issue of OmniVest News. Click Here to watch a video that describes the new features. Click Here to download the presentation that goes with the video. My sincere thanks go to the team that assisted in the development of ideas that went into Portfolio Builder. Looking forward to vigorous discussion in the Forum! | ||
^ Top | |||
ET![]() New User Posts: 3 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Whitesboro, Texas ![]() |
Ed, where can we get access to the ETF2 list used in the presentation? Thanks, and Best ET | ||
^ Top | |||
Barry Cohen![]() Icon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1844 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
Here is the ETF2 list he used: BIB BIS ITB XBI XLB XLI | ||
^ Top | |||
Randy McBeath![]() Member Posts: 13 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Mountain View, CA ![]() |
Ed and OmniVest Support, I tried last night for almost 2 hours to set up a portfolio following Ed's instructions in the new video and Portfolio Builder newsletter. I was using Ed's simple settings, with only 1 custom list (ETF0) enabled. I'm not sure if the server was overwhelmed with other users trying the system out or what, but everytime I hit Build, it would run for about 5-10 minutes and then I would get a timeout message. I know this list has more entries than Ed's example, but I fully expected it to complete at least once. Can someone check if the server is working properly or let me know what else I should try. | ||
^ Top | |||
John W![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 654 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia ![]() |
Randy, I get this error too, it appears to be related to the number of symbols you choose to run. I've found choosing (say) 50 symbols with RTM works but 100 symbols is too much. I'm hoping that the run time allowed for processing can be significantly extended because I still have to crunch the same symbol list, I just end up having to break it down into many smaller runs! John | ||
^ Top | |||
Randy McBeath![]() Member Posts: 13 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Mountain View, CA ![]() |
John, Thanks for your comments. I will try to break the list up and rerun it, but I think most users will simply click a list and try and let it run. My concern is that many of the lists that people can select in any of the 4 categories (Sector, Groups, Subgroups, and Custom Lists)contain a similar number of stocks or ETFs as the ETF0 custom list. | ||
^ Top | |||
Jim Dean![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1059 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: L'ville, GA ![]() |
Ed mentioned this limitation (number of symbols) in the webinar as I recall. Possible solution for bigger lists ... Create a Custom list that starts with the too-long list you want, then ranks it by some formula, and peels off just the top 10 or 20 (or whatever number works) of symbols. | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve Mayo![]() Legend ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 414 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Austin, TX ![]() |
Currently, the PB tool is running on the web server and is thus limited in how many symbols it will process before timing out. Once the programmer is back from vacation, it should get moved to a production server. In our testing, we were limiting ourselves to no more than about 30 symbols, at least when the single-symbol strategies box is checked. Think about it, most of the categories have more than 25 systems. Multiply that 25 by the number of symbols and you get big numbers of system-symbol pairings that have be created and analyzed. That's more than a non-production server can handle. But, that's why this is such a great new tool! Running 30 symbols one-by-one in Strategy Wizard might take you several days of work, not counting the time to filter through all that. Then to find a good combination of those system-symbol pairs could take another few days of work. PB does that in just a few minutes! Steve Mayo | ||
^ Top | |||
Eric Severance![]() Member Posts: 23 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Incline Viallge, NV ![]() |
Randy (John) Ran into this last night too...(timing out), on pretty short lists (~50), with just RTM selected. Ed said they're working on it. FYI - Have also asked (Ed) if Port Bldr will be able to handle Historical and Dynamic lists... Obviously could be much more resource intensive. | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve Mayo![]() Legend ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 414 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Austin, TX ![]() |
PB will take both historic and dynamic lists. In testing we never got one to run successfully due to the timeout issue, but we think they should work. | ||
^ Top | |||
Eric Severance![]() Member Posts: 23 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Incline Viallge, NV ![]() |
Steve, Thanks, that's good news. BTW - do you know how PB is handling leverage; i.e. Margin, or lack of? I'm either not seeing that (a setting for margin) or it's being driven off of the Account settings of the (background) account I have selected - just not clear. [Edited by Eric Severance on 1/8/2016 2:09 PM] | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve Mayo![]() Legend ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 414 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Austin, TX ![]() |
It's using your account settings as its building strats/ports on the fly. To my understanding, the new "test settings" stuff is just used (overnight) to pre-calculate lists like the portfolio and strategy lists...so that you don't now have to wait for those. :-) | ||
^ Top | |||
ricastein![]() Member Posts: 12 Joined: 3/13/2014 Location: Aurora, Colorado ![]() |
For each strategy Portfolio Builder assigns to a symbol, does each one of these strategies have it's own exit plan/stop loss? Also, I'm using about 30 symbols per portfolio, but Portfolio Builder is assigning like 150 to 180 strategies per portfolio. Will Omnivest be able to trade all these strategies when I start trading them in an actual account? Finally, how long should I paper trade these portfolio's before using them in an actual live account, to be sure they withstand actual trading? | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve Mayo![]() Legend ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 414 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Austin, TX ![]() |
Entry/Exit is controlled by the strategy, so, for example, all system+symbol pairs that use VBX-1 as the system will have the same exit programming, whatever it may be. Yes, we've been running hundreds of one-symbol strategies in a single account with no problem. Paper-trading is a personal decision. I usually don't do any! But, I do lots of simulations beforehand and watch the account closely for the first several months. Steve | ||
^ Top | |||
Barry Cohen![]() Icon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1844 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
A fix was added today that checks for how many symbols are being run when a Custom List is selected. So if you run a Custom List that has more than 10 symbols & use the Single-Symbol Strategies together, it will now prevent it from running & tell you why. | ||
^ Top | |||
BrianD![]() Legend ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 302 Joined: 2/23/2013 Location: Grand Rapids, MI ![]() |
Cannot reasonably address your 'how long' question. Just wanted to point out issues in paper trading (BTW might want to consider www.omnivestors.com tools for some other performance review metrics for future performance...). Regarding paper trading, my experience with a brokerage account (in my case IB), may not be representative of actual, live (your money) trades. Two major issues I've found: - Paper trades have a lot of slippage. However, I found "live", real (my) money trading compared to OV 'Simulation' trade values were very close. I once spoke to IB on this, but did not get any solace from IB support. Just be careful with broker's paper accounts - possibly not a valid representation of actual performance. Maybe someone else on the Forum has a more educated viewpoint. I also doubt other brokerages paper accounts are better than IB BTW, you can see some discussions on slippage experiences between live and "OV Simulated" tracking in the forum. - Dependent on what you are trading, (i.e. low volume/liquidity, shorting, different Brokers, etc.) real (your money) results will be different from simulation and/or paper results. For instance, if there is an obscure Symbol in your list/results, it may not be short-able, at all, or by your broker. Bid-Ask spread can be big on obscure and/or low volume symbols too. Most likely, you will not 'experience' this in 'paper trade' mode (I tend to favor high, min volume values in the Account settings because of this). Now, with 'Eeyore' comments out of the way, if you are speaking of OV paper trading, I do believe if you set an Account (being cognizant of potential pitfalls in real money trading) to "Trade=Yes" and watch the results from the "View Trades" web page, you will get a VERY reasonable composite of your Account performance - probably better than a paper trading with a broker. | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark Holstius![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 744 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Sleepy Hollow, IL ![]() |
Hi Barry... I understand that limit of 10 is just until the Portfolio Builder moves over to the production server. Can you confirm that's just a temporary limit? Thanks, Mark | ||
^ Top | |||
John W![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 654 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia ![]() |
Barry, 10 symbols is fine with me for test server but would make the task laborious in production. Hopefully there won't be a limit (or at least a large number of symbols per run) for the production server. John | ||
^ Top | |||
ricastein![]() Member Posts: 12 Joined: 3/13/2014 Location: Aurora, Colorado ![]() |
Mr. Barry Cohen. That is not a "fix". I was running about 30 stocks yesterday to a list, and PB was working fine. Today I keep getting an error message that I'm trying to run too many stocks. How is this a "fix"? | ||
^ Top | |||
ricastein![]() Member Posts: 12 Joined: 3/13/2014 Location: Aurora, Colorado ![]() |
Would you please ask your guys to unfix the "fix". I don't mind waiting a couple of minutes to run a group of 30 or so symbols, rather than break my project in to much smaller groups. Thank you. | ||
^ Top | |||
Jim Dean![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1059 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: L'ville, GA ![]() |
Hi, Ric Something to consider ... If you will review some of the earlier posts on this thread, you will see that the impact of "unfixing the fix" is not that it takes more time, but rather that it fails to complete ... ie, wait then no cigar. Also, you'll notice that the *reason* for this is that it is on their "test" server which doesn't have the horsepower to accomodate massive CPU pileups ... but please also note that once the "beta" phase of this is complete, they will be moving it to their "production" servers which will have the horsepower to open things up. So, my (unasked) advice would be to be patient and to consider the current release to be what many would refer to as a "beta" platform. I hope this helps. | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve Mayo![]() Legend ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 414 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Austin, TX ![]() |
This new code Barry mentioned was an attempt to avoid the wait-for-disappointment that the current server limitation creates. Ed said in our meeting last night that the limit is going to be increased today to 600 system-symbol pairs (it's not based on symbols alone). In other words, if you turn on the RTMs (about 25 systems), then the app can easily multiply that by the number of custom symbols (say you have 20 symbols with "create single" checked) and know, before it tries to do all those calculations, that it will be creating 20 x 25 = 500 new system-strategy pairs. The system can reasonably create about 600 pairs without timing out. I don't know if that will increase once it moves to a background process; the main advantage of that move will be that it will run, like PB/PW, even if you get logged out. Currently, when you use the Nirvana symbol lists, the system first filters based on volume to the top-x, thereby avoiding the time-out issue on those. It's only the custom lists (which can't be easily pre-filtered in this manner) that cause the timeout. BTW, there are already plans to allow selecting specific systems (rather than, say, all RTMs) in the programming queue. | ||
^ Top | |||
gbarber![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 282 Joined: 12/30/2012 Location: Pearland, TX ![]() |
Can the user be allowed to filter our own custom lists? That would help this problem considerably. Let's say I have a custom dynamic list that finds symbols of high relative strength. Can the production of that list be constrained to pick only the top x (say 10) from the entire list that satisfies the formula? Could that capability be added to the list manager. I would like that even if there was no constraint on PB to put a focus on the best in a given list. | ||
^ Top | |||
Jim Dean![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1059 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: L'ville, GA ![]() |
If I understand you correctly, the answer is yes. Your DL has a Condition filter to find the symbols, like: C*V > 10000000 … ie a true false formula Copy that formula to the Ranking Condition and remove the relational operator and the threshold: C*V … a formula yielding a number Now fill in the number of symbols you want in the DL in the Maximum number of Symbols field (like 20) [Edited by Jim Dean on 1/14/2016 5:23 AM] | ||
^ Top | |||
ricastein![]() Member Posts: 12 Joined: 3/13/2014 Location: Aurora, Colorado ![]() |
When [Edited by ricastein on 1/18/2016 2:58 PM] |
|
Legend | Action | Notification | |||
Administrator
Forum Moderator |
Registered User
Unregistered User |
![]() |
Toggle e-mail notification |