Thank you for your reply, raVar.
Well, I'd use it to both track performance/build a track record and also the possibillity of raising capital at some point in time.
Why 3 years? Is that some kind of industry standard? It seems a bit arbitrary to me. Trading style and frequency should also be part of the evaluation, IMO.
Let's say some trader were trading a low frequency long only strategy during 2011-2014 with 10 trades per year while another high frequency long/short day trader were executing 1200 trades per year through both market rises and falls and successfully so.
I'd be far more interested in the latter trader and say it's a lot less likely he were lucky compared to the guy who simply went long stocks during a very bullish market period.
I'd in fact be very skeptical in investing my money on the first guy, while I'd be very interested in the latter guy and might not even need to see 3 years of data if he had a diversified strategy that's profitable over a wide range of market conditions.
3 years is sort of a 'fall-back' "base" metric.
But it's not an "either" "or" scenario.
To your point, all of those factors would be considered.
This is why I say "base minimum" 3 years, or things like "Bare minimum ... 3 years"
Which incidentally, is why it is so important for any profitable trader, to work, like NOW ... to start building that track record. Every day is important, because it takes a bit of time to build a track record.
But all of the above factors are considered. 3 years, I mention, as a bare minimum because often, newer or aspiring traders do not want to discuss the
time it takes to
grind a track record. Mentioning "3 years" over and over again, is a way to get ones to think:
"
Ok, if you are profitable? Then you best get to it, and get to it right away, because you're going to have to develop a track record, and time is a tickin' away"
Myself? I prefer to see A) 5 Years, and B) What it looks like in a Regime Change, in addition to all of the metrics like Max DD, Sharpe Ratio, Sortino Ratio (
what my firm prefers to use), what was going on with the MAE under the hood, etc., number of traders in a period ... all of it. And I want to see C) It backtested, knowing that e-ratio is figured out, the noise ratio, it isn't curve-fit, back to 1998
So to your point all of the above is going to count and what is going to probably happen?
Is neither trader would get that much notice, because one doesn't have 3 years of history, and the other only traded during one regime of the market (
that's assuming it was tied to Equities, and wasn't trading something like ... say ... Cotton and Corn)