Community hub
0 subscribers7 pages, 0 posts
Recent from talks
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Welcome to the community hub built to collect knowledge and have discussions related to Backtesting.
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Backtesting
View on Wikipediafrom Wikipedia
Backtesting is a term used in modeling to refer to testing a predictive model on historical data. Backtesting is a type of retrodiction, and a special type of cross-validation applied to previous time period(s). In quantitative finance, backtesting is an important step before deploying algorithmic strategies in live markets.
Financial analysis
[edit]In the economic and financial field, backtesting seeks to estimate the performance of a strategy or model if it had been employed during a past period. This requires simulating past conditions with sufficient detail, making one limitation of backtesting the need for detailed historical data. A second limitation is the inability to model strategies that would affect historic prices. Finally, backtesting, like other modeling, is limited by potential overfitting. That is, it is often possible to find a strategy that would have worked well in the past, but will not work well in the future.[1] Despite these limitations, backtesting provides information not available when models and strategies are tested on synthetic data.
Historically, backtesting was only performed by large institutions and professional money managers due to the expense of obtaining and using detailed datasets. However, backtesting is increasingly used on a wider basis, and independent web-based backtesting platforms have emerged. Although the technique is widely used, it is prone to weaknesses.[2] Basel financial regulations require large financial institutions to backtest certain risk models.
For a Value at Risk 1-day at 99% backtested 250 days in a row, the test is considered green (0-95%), orange (95-99.99%) or red (99.99-100%) depending on the following table:[3]
| Zone | Number exceptions | Probability | Cumul |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green | 0 | 8.11% | 8.11% |
| 1 | 20.47% | 28.58% | |
| 2 | 25.74% | 54.32% | |
| 3 | 21.49% | 75.81% | |
| 4 | 13.41% | 89.22% | |
| Orange | 5 | 6.66% | 95.88% |
| 6 | 2.75% | 98.63% | |
| 7 | 0.97% | 99.60% | |
| 8 | 0.30% | 99.89% | |
| 9 | 0.08% | 99.97% | |
| Red | 10 | 0.02% | 99.99% |
| 11 | 0.00% | 100.00% | |
| ... | ... | ... |
For a Value at Risk 10-day at 99% backtested 250 days in a row, the test is considered green (0-95%), orange (95-99.99%) or red (99.99-100%) depending on the following table:
| Zone | Number exceptions | Probability | Cumul |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green | 0 | 36.02% | 36.02% |
| 1 | 15.99% | 52.01% | |
| 2 | 11.58% | 63.59% | |
| 3 | 8.90% | 72.49% | |
| 4 | 6.96% | 79.44% | |
| 5 | 5.33% | 84.78% | |
| 6 | 4.07% | 88.85% | |
| 7 | 3.05% | 79.44% | |
| 8 | 2.28% | 94.17% | |
| Orange | 9 | 1.74% | 95.91% |
| ... | ... | ... | |
| 24 | 0.01% | 99.99% | |
| Red | 25 | 0.00% | 99.99% |
| ... | ... | ... |
Hindcast
[edit]
In oceanography[5] and meteorology,[6] backtesting is also known as hindcasting: a hindcast is a way of testing a mathematical model; researchers enter known or closely estimated inputs for past events into the model to see how well the output matches the known results.
Hindcasting usually refers to a numerical-model integration of a historical period where no observations have been assimilated. This distinguishes a hindcast run from a reanalysis. Oceanographic observations of salinity and temperature as well as observations of surface-wave parameters such as the significant wave height are much scarcer than meteorological observations, making hindcasting more common in oceanography than in meteorology. Also, since surface waves represent a forced system where the wind is the only generating force, wave hindcasting is often considered adequate for generating a reasonable representation of the wave climate with little need for a full reanalysis. Hydrologists use hindcasting for model stream flows.[7]
An example of hindcasting would be entering climate forcings (events that force change) into a climate model. If the hindcast showed reasonably-accurate climate response, the model would be considered successful.
The ECMWF re-analysis is an example of a combined atmospheric reanalysis coupled with a wave-model integration where no wave parameters were assimilated, making the wave part a hindcast run.
See also
[edit]- Applied research (customer foresight) – Anticipating consumer preferences/wishes with future products and services
- Backcasting – Influencing current reality from desired future state scenario
- Black box model – System where only the inputs and outputs can be viewed, and not its implementation
- Climate – Long-term weather pattern of a region
- Computer simulation – Process of mathematical modelling, performed on a computer
- ECMWF re-analysis – Data set for retrospective weather analysis
- Economic forecast – Process of making predictions about the economy
- Forecasting – Making predictions based on available data
- NCEP re-analysis – Open data set of the Earth's atmosphere
- Numerical weather prediction – Weather prediction using mathematical models of the atmosphere and oceans
- Predictive modelling – Form of modelling that uses statistics to predict outcomes
- Retrodiction – Making a "prediction" about the past
- Statistical arbitrage – Short-term financial trading strategy
- Thought Experiment – Hypothetical situation
- Value at risk – Estimated potential loss for an investment under a given set of conditions
References
[edit]- ^ Bailey, Borwein, Lopez de Prado, Zhu (2014). "Pseudo-mathematics and financial charlatanism. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, Volume 61, Number 5, pp. 458-471" (PDF).
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) - ^ FinancialTrading (2013-04-27). "Issues related to back testing".
- ^ "Supervisory framework for the use of "backtesting" in conjunction with the internal models approach to market risk capital requirements" (PDF). Basle Committee on Banking Supervision. January 1996. p. 14.
- ^ Taken from p.145 of Yeates, L.B., Thought Experimentation: A Cognitive Approach, Graduate Diploma in Arts (By Research) dissertation, University of New South Wales, 2004.
- ^ "Hindcast approach". OceanWeather Inc. Retrieved 22 January 2013.
- ^ Huijnen, V.; J. Flemming; J. W. Kaiser; A. Inness; J. Leitão; A. Heil; H. J. Eskes; M. G. Schultz; A. Benedetti; J. Hadji-Lazaro; G. Dufour; M. Eremenko (2012). "Hindcast experiments of tropospheric composition during the summer 2010 fires over western Russia". Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12 (9): 4341–4364. Bibcode:2012ACP....12.4341H. doi:10.5194/acp-12-4341-2012. Retrieved 22 January 2013.
- ^ "Guidance on Conducting Streamflow Hindcasting in CHPS" (PDF). NOAA. Retrieved 22 January 2013.
Backtesting
View on Grokipediafrom Grokipedia
Backtesting is the process of testing a predictive model by applying it retrospectively to historical data in order to evaluate its performance.[1] In finance, it is commonly used to assess trading strategies or financial models on past market data to evaluate profitability, risk, and other characteristics without committing real capital.[1] This simulation technique allows analysts to generate hypothetical outcomes, such as net profit and Sharpe ratio, based on historical price movements, volume, and other indicators.[2] Backtesting has become a foundational tool in various fields, including algorithmic trading in finance and model validation in scientific and engineering applications.[1]
The mechanics of backtesting typically involve selecting a dataset spanning multiple years—ideally including various economic cycles—to ensure robustness, coding the model's rules (e.g., entry and exit signals based on technical indicators like moving averages), and accounting for real-world factors such as transaction costs, slippage, and bid-ask spreads.[3] Key performance metrics derived from backtests include return, risk-adjusted returns, and volatility, which help identify whether a strategy outperforms benchmarks like the S&P 500.[2]
Despite its value, backtesting is not without limitations, as historical data may not predict future results due to structural changes, such as shifts in liquidity or regulatory environments.[1] Common pitfalls include overfitting, where a model is excessively tuned to past data, leading to illusory success that fails in live applications; look-ahead bias, from inadvertently using future information; and data-snooping bias, where multiple unadjusted tests inflate apparent Sharpe ratios by up to 50% or more.[3] To mitigate these, practitioners employ out-of-sample testing—validating on unseen data—and forward-testing via paper trading, alongside statistical adjustments like the Holm-Bonferroni method for multiple comparisons.[3]
In practice, backtesting supports a wide range of applications, from retail trading platforms to institutional quantitative funds managing billions in assets, and is integral to the rise of high-frequency strategies.[1] High-quality historical data sources, such as those from exchanges like CME Group, are essential for accurate simulations, particularly for tick-level analysis in derivatives markets.[3] Ultimately, while backtesting provides critical insights into model viability, it must be complemented by forward-looking risk management to navigate inherent uncertainties.[2]
Definition and Principles
Overview
Backtesting is the process of applying a predictive model or strategy to historical data to evaluate its performance retrospectively, simulating how it would have fared under past conditions without risking actual capital.[1][2] This approach enables analysts to assess profitability, risk, and viability by generating trading signals, calculating outcomes like net profit or loss, and analyzing results across diverse market scenarios.[4] The practice of using historical data for retrospective evaluation has roots in early 20th-century fields like meteorology and finance. In meteorology, Lewis Fry Richardson's 1922 work "Weather Prediction by Numerical Process" involved a hindcast, applying numerical methods to reconstruct weather events from 1910 observations to validate forecasting equations.[5] In finance, early empirical studies, such as Alfred Cowles' 1933 analysis "Can Stock Market Forecasters Forecast?", tested the performance of market predictions against historical data from 1928 to 1932.[6] These efforts laid groundwork for backtesting, though limited by computational constraints. Backtesting was formalized in quantitative finance during the 1980s, coinciding with advances in computing and econometric models that systematically incorporated historical data. Models like Robert Engle's ARCH (1982) and Tim Bollerslev's GARCH (1986) used past returns to estimate volatility, supporting more sophisticated quantitative analysis.[7] This period marked a shift toward standardized backtesting as a core tool in algorithmic trading and risk management. Distinct from forward testing—which applies strategies to live market data in real time without execution—or live trading with actual funds, backtesting emphasizes retrodiction as a cross-validation technique for time series, providing an initial gauge of robustness before real-world deployment.[1][4] The basic workflow begins with strategy development, followed by application to historical datasets to simulate trades, and concludes with performance metric calculations, such as the Sharpe ratio, which quantifies excess returns per unit of risk to assess efficiency.[4][8]Key Concepts
In backtesting, historical data is typically divided into in-sample and out-of-sample periods to ensure robust model evaluation. The in-sample period consists of data used to develop and optimize the model or strategy, allowing parameters to be fitted based on observed patterns within that dataset.[9] In contrast, the out-of-sample period involves unseen data reserved for validation, simulating real-world performance by testing how well the model generalizes beyond the training set and providing an unbiased assessment of its predictive power.[3] This split mitigates the risk of overfitting, where a strategy appears effective due to excessive tuning to historical noise rather than true signals.[9] Backtesting fundamentally differs from forward prediction as it constitutes a form of retrodiction, wherein models generate hypotheses about past events using only information available at the time, then compare outcomes against known historical results to infer potential future efficacy.[10] Unlike pure prediction, which applies models prospectively to unknown futures, retrodiction in backtesting leverages complete historical sequences to validate assumptions retrospectively, bridging the gap between theoretical strategy design and empirical simulation of live deployment.[11] This approach assumes stationarity in underlying processes but highlights the challenge of ensuring past patterns reliably proxy future behavior without introducing hindsight contamination.[12] Key performance metrics in backtesting quantify strategy effectiveness, including the compound annual growth rate (CAGR), which measures the mean annual growth rate of an investment over a specified time period longer than one year, providing a standardized view of long-term profitability;[13] the Sharpe ratio, which evaluates risk-adjusted returns by dividing the excess return over the risk-free rate by the standard deviation of returns;[14] win rate, defined as the percentage of profitable trades out of total trades, indicating the consistency of successful outcomes;[13] cumulative return, measuring overall growth from periodic returns; and maximum drawdown, defined as the largest peak-to-trough decline in portfolio value during the backtest horizon. The cumulative return over periods to is calculated as where denotes the return in period , providing a compounded view of profitability that accounts for reinvestment effects.[15] The maximum drawdown is expressed as where is the portfolio value at time , capturing downside risk and investor tolerance for losses.[16] These metrics emphasize both upside potential and risk exposure, forming the basis for comparative analysis across strategies.[14] In the context of time-series data inherent to backtesting, standard k-fold cross-validation is adapted to prevent lookahead bias, where future information inadvertently influences past evaluations. Purged k-fold variants, such as those incorporating purging and embargo periods, divide data into folds while removing overlapping observations between training and testing sets to eliminate temporal leakage.[17] For instance, after each fold's training, a purge removes samples correlated with the test set, followed by an embargo to exclude immediately adjacent periods, ensuring chronological integrity and realistic out-of-sample simulation.[18] This method, particularly useful for financial applications, enhances reliability by mimicking the sequential nature of market data without assuming independence across folds.[19]Applications
In Finance
In finance, backtesting serves as a cornerstone for evaluating algorithmic trading strategies, where predefined buy and sell rules are applied to historical market data to simulate performance and gauge potential profitability alongside associated risks such as drawdowns and volatility.[1] This process allows traders and institutions to refine strategies by quantifying metrics like Sharpe ratio or maximum drawdown without deploying real capital, often using tick-level data for high-frequency approaches or daily closes for longer-term models.[4] The practice of backtesting in finance evolved alongside the institutional adoption of Value at Risk (VaR) models by large banks in the 1990s for internal risk management. The rise of algorithmic trading in the late 1980s and early 1990s coincided with early institutional uses in proprietary systems for trading desks. By the post-2000 era, tools like TradeStation and MetaStock democratized backtesting for individual investors, enabling simulations on personal computers with internet-accessible historical datasets.[20] A pivotal regulatory milestone came with the 1996 Basel Capital Accord amendment, which introduced backtesting as a mandatory validation for banks' internal models in calculating market risk capital requirements, ensuring models accurately captured potential losses.[21] Specifically, for 1-day 99% VaR over a 250-business-day window, the Basel Committee defined backtesting zones based on exception counts—the number of days where actual losses exceed the VaR estimate—categorized as green (0–4 exceptions, no multiplier adjustment), yellow (5–9 exceptions, multiplier increase from 3 to 3.4–3.85), or red (10 or more exceptions, multiplier of 4). The exception count is formally defined as , where is the indicator function, is the profit and loss on day , and is the VaR threshold.[22] Subsequent refinements in the Basel III framework, particularly through 2014 implementation phases, integrated backtesting with stress testing to enhance resilience against extreme scenarios, requiring banks to incorporate stressed VaR backtests and report results to supervisory authorities for capital adequacy assessments. This evolution addressed gaps exposed by the 2008 financial crisis, mandating routine stress tests that complement daily VaR backtesting to cover tail risks beyond historical norms. Backtesting is also applied to leveraged exchange-traded funds (ETFs), such as ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD), which aims to deliver twice the daily performance of the Nasdaq-100 Index. Since QLD was launched in 2006, longer-term historical backtests often utilize proxies like the ProFunds UltraNASDAQ-100 Fund (UOPIX), available since 1999, due to their high correlation of 0.99. Tools such as Portfolio Visualizer enable these simulations by allowing users to input UOPIX data for periods prior to QLD's inception, facilitating the evaluation of strategy performance over extended histories. These backtests must account for phenomena like volatility decay, where daily rebalancing in volatile markets can cause the ETF to underperform its target multiple over longer periods.[23][24][25]In Scientific and Engineering Fields
In scientific and engineering fields, backtesting, often termed hindcasting, serves as a critical validation method for predictive models in time-dependent systems, where historical data is used to simulate past events and assess model performance without incorporating contemporaneous observations into the simulation process. This approach is particularly prevalent in meteorology and oceanography, where models for weather patterns, ocean waves, and climate dynamics are tested against known historical outcomes to evaluate their fidelity in reproducing events such as storms or seasonal variations. For instance, hindcasting employs reanalysis datasets like the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ERA5, which provides consistent historical atmospheric forcings from 1940 onward, to drive wave models such as WAVEWATCH III for simulating past ocean conditions without data assimilation.[26] This distinguishes hindcasting from reanalysis, as the latter integrates observations via data assimilation to refine estimates, whereas hindcasting relies solely on independent historical inputs to test model robustness independently.[27] In hydrology, backtesting validates streamflow prediction models by applying them to historical precipitation and discharge records, enabling assessment of predictive accuracy for water resource management and flood risk. Models like the Hillslope Link Model (HLM) or National Water Model (NWM) are evaluated using gauged data to quantify errors in simulating river flows, often revealing sensitivities to factors such as dam operations or land-use changes. Similarly, in engineering, particularly for structural reliability, hindcasting uses past sensor data from accelerometers or strain gauges to test models of infrastructure response to environmental loads, such as wind or seismic events on bridges or offshore platforms. For offshore structures, hindcast databases of wave and wind fields from the 1990s and 2000s inform probabilistic reliability analyses, estimating failure probabilities under historical extremes without assimilating real-time measurements. A notable example of hindcasting in atmospheric science is the 2012 Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate (MACC) project, which conducted reanalysis and hindcast experiments for tropospheric composition, including reactive gases like ozone and aerosols, over the period 2003–2010 using ECMWF-integrated models driven by historical meteorology. These simulations validated the system's ability to reproduce events such as the 2010 Russian wildfires' impact on air quality, providing benchmarks for forecasting improvements.[28] In renewable energy, backtesting wind turbine output models against data from the 2000s—such as hourly power curves correlated with historical wind speeds—assesses forecasting reliability for grid integration. This application underscores hindcasting's role in optimizing energy yield estimates amid variable environmental conditions. As of 2025, advancements in reanalysis datasets like ERA5 extensions continue to support more accurate hindcasting in climate and renewable energy modeling.[26]Methodology
Data Preparation and Requirements
Backtesting relies on meticulously prepared historical data to simulate strategies under realistic conditions, ensuring that results reflect genuine performance rather than artifacts of poor input quality. In financial applications, primary data sources include tick-level records from major stock exchanges, such as the New York Stock Exchange or NASDAQ, often accessed through specialized providers like Tick Data or Intrinio, which deliver intraday trade and quote information captured directly at the exchange.[29][30] These datasets must be high-frequency—capturing every transaction for granular analysis—and span decades to encompass multiple market cycles, including bull, bear, and volatile periods, to test strategy robustness across varying economic regimes. In scientific and engineering fields, such as climate modeling, analogous requirements apply: clean, high-resolution datasets from archives like NOAA's Climate Data Records provide long-term observations of variables like temperature and precipitation, enabling backtests of predictive models over extended historical spans.[31] Data cleaning forms the core of preparation, addressing imperfections that could skew outcomes. Common processes include imputing or removing missing values—via methods like linear interpolation for short gaps or forward-filling for persistent absences—to preserve dataset continuity without introducing undue assumptions.[32] In finance, specific adjustments are essential for corporate events: stock splits require scaling historical prices and volumes proportionally to maintain continuity, while dividends necessitate adding cash flows to total returns or adjusting prices ex-dividend to avoid artificial discontinuities in performance metrics.[33] For scientific data, cleaning involves calibrating for instrument errors, such as sensor drifts in environmental measurements, through techniques like anomaly detection and normalization against reference standards, ensuring temporal consistency across observations.[31] Time-series data demands particular attention to structure, as backtesting simulates sequential decision-making. Ensuring strict chronological ordering—processing observations only as they would become available in real time—is critical to prevent lookahead bias, where future events erroneously inform past calculations, leading to overstated strategy efficacy.[34] This is typically enforced by implementing event-driven simulations that advance through the dataset step-by-step, mimicking live data feeds. Furthermore, datasets should meet minimum length thresholds for statistical reliability: in financial backtesting, at least 10 years of daily or higher-frequency data (providing approximately 2,500 or more observations) is typically recommended to capture multiple regime shifts and reduce overfitting risks.Testing Procedures and Techniques
Backtesting procedures begin with the chronological simulation of trades or predictions using prepared historical data, where signals generated by the strategy—such as buy or sell decisions—are applied sequentially to mimic real-time execution.[2] This involves iterating through time periods, updating positions based on strategy rules, and accounting for elements like slippage and liquidity constraints to reflect practical trading conditions.[35] At regular intervals, such as daily or monthly, performance metrics like returns, drawdowns, and risk-adjusted ratios are computed to evaluate the strategy's efficacy over the test period.[2] A fundamental aspect of this simulation is the iterative update of portfolio value, particularly in buy-and-hold strategies where positions are maintained without frequent rebalancing. The portfolio value is updated by applying the asset returns to held positions and deducting transaction costs proportional to the traded amounts when trades occur, such as commissions or bid-ask spreads applied to the trade volume. This ensures that costs are accounted for realistically to provide an accurate assessment of net performance. In quantitative trading backtests, especially for high-turnover strategies, it is essential to fully model not only slippage (e.g., 0.05-0.1%) but also comprehensive transaction costs and market impact, such as brokerage fees (e.g., 0.1%) and other transaction taxes where applicable, as unmodeled costs can cause significant performance degradation in live trading. For instance, backtested Sharpe ratios of 1.3 may drop to 0.5 or below in 90% of cases due to overlooked costs, while high-turnover approaches can lead to cost explosions and capacity limits, such as restricting assets under management to 10-50 million USD.[36][37][38][39][40] For leveraged exchange-traded funds (ETFs), such as ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD), which seek daily 2x exposure to the Nasdaq-100 Index, backtesting procedures often require historical proxies or custom simulations due to the funds' relatively recent launches. The ProFunds UltraNASDAQ-100 Fund (UOPIX), established in 1999, serves as a common proxy for extending backtests of 2x Nasdaq-100 strategies prior to QLD's 2006 inception, given their high correlation of 0.99.[23][41] Backtesting software like Portfolio Visualizer enables users to incorporate such proxies or simulate custom leveraged returns, accounting for daily rebalancing and potential volatility decay effects inherent to these instruments.[24] To assess variability and robustness beyond a single historical path, Monte Carlo simulations are employed by resampling historical return paths or generating synthetic scenarios from fitted distributions, allowing for the estimation of outcome distributions under uncertainty.[42] For instance, thousands of randomized paths can be simulated to quantify the probability of extreme drawdowns or to stress-test strategy stability across market regimes.[42] Walk-forward optimization enhances validation by dividing the dataset into rolling in-sample windows for parameter tuning and out-of-sample windows for testing, simulating adaptive strategy development in live trading. This technique, popularized in 1990s trading literature, is a standard method to periodically re-optimize parameters using recent data while evaluating performance on unseen future periods to mitigate overfitting risks.Backtesting AI Trading Strategies
Backtesting artificial intelligence (AI) trading strategies follows a structured process to ensure reliability and avoid biases. The key steps include:- Define the Strategy Clearly: Specify the AI model's inputs, such as features like price, volume, and technical indicators; outputs, such as predicted returns or buy/sell/hold signals; and trading rules, for example, buying if the predicted upside exceeds 1% with a stop-loss at 2%. This step establishes the foundational rules for the strategy.[43]
- Collect High-Quality Historical Data: Obtain reliable sources for OHLCV (open, high, low, close, volume) data, along with alternative features like news sentiment or fundamentals. Free options include Yahoo Finance via the yfinance library or Polygon.io, while paid services provide cleaner data for more accurate simulations.[13]
- Prepare Data and Train the Model: Engineer features, handle missing values, and split data chronologically—training on older data and testing on newer to prevent look-ahead bias. Employ time-series cross-validation instead of random splits to maintain temporal integrity.[43]
- Generate Signals and Simulate Trades: Apply the model to out-of-sample data to produce signals, then simulate the portfolio by tracking positions, calculating returns, and incorporating realistic costs such as commissions, slippage, and spreads.[44]
- Evaluate Performance: Calculate metrics including total return, annualized return, Sharpe ratio for risk-adjusted performance, maximum drawdown, win rate, and profit factor. Compare results against benchmarks like buy-and-hold on the S&P 500 to assess relative efficacy.[13]
- Refine and Validate: Implement walk-forward optimization by retraining on rolling windows and testing across multiple assets and periods to ensure robustness and mitigate overfitting.[43]