Avoiding Backtesting Overfitting by Covariance-Penalties: an empirical investigation of the ordinary and total least squares cases
Adriano Koshiyama and
Nikan Firoozye
Papers from arXiv.org
Abstract:
Systematic trading strategies are rule-based procedures which choose portfolios and allocate assets. In order to attain certain desired return profiles, quantitative strategists must determine a large array of trading parameters. Backtesting, the attempt to identify the appropriate parameters using historical data available, has been highly criticized due to the abundance of misleading results. Hence, there is an increasing interest in devising procedures for the assessment and comparison of strategies, that is, devising schemes for preventing what is known as backtesting overfitting. So far, many financial researchers have proposed different ways to tackle this problem that can be broadly categorised in three types: Data Snooping, Overestimated Performance, and Cross-Validation Evaluation. In this paper, we propose a new approach to dealing with financial overfitting, a Covariance-Penalty Correction, in which a risk metric is lowered given the number of parameters and data used to underpins a trading strategy. We outlined the foundation and main results behind the Covariance-Penalty correction for trading strategies. After that, we pursue an empirical investigation, comparing its performance with some other approaches in the realm of Covariance-Penalties across more than 1300 assets, using Ordinary and Total Least Squares. Our results suggest that Covariance-Penalties are a suitable procedure to avoid Backtesting Overfitting, and Total Least Squares provides superior performance when compared to Ordinary Least Squares.
Date: 2019-05
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-bec
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)
Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.05023 Latest version (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:1905.05023
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().